7. To ask the Scottish Government what impact the withdrawal of £46 million of funding for colleges and universities has had on their ability to deliver courses. (S6O-02250)

The removal of the £46 million does not impact the core teaching fund that was allocated to colleges and universities for academic year 2023-24, which has been maintained at the same level as it was for academic year 2022-23, despite the very challenging financial environment. [

Interruption

.]

I hear Stephen Kerr chuntering from a sedentary position but, as he heard at yesterday’s meeting of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, the money was for transition purposes, some of which I identified at the committee.

Despite the minister’s answer, the principal and chief executive officer of City of Glasgow College, Paul Little, has said that the loss of the £26 million from the college sector’s budget has further compounded significant financial pressures and forced colleges to make compulsory redundancies.

Having visited the college, I have been impressed with it, but I am deeply troubled by the fact that budget cuts are leading to more than 100 staff losing their jobs. I have been flooded with letters, with one constituent saying:

“I urge you to intervene in this matter and to investigate why funding has not been made available to avoid this redundancy situation ... My colleagues deserve ... better treatment than this.”

Will the minister offer some support and tell us what support the Scottish Government will provide to colleges that are being forced to consider redundancies?

I marvel at the brass neck of the Tories. Never mind imposing a damaging Brexit on the United Kingdom that will particularly harm the university sector or the impact of Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng trashing the UK economy—[

Interruption

.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

Minister, I ask you to resume your seat.

We have got through portfolio question time so far with the questions being asked and responded to without heckling. If members resist heckling, we will get through all the supplementary questions, too.

You may resume, minister.

Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I was going to make the point that, just this lunch time, my friend Liz Smith was sitting on the Conservative benches calling on the Government to take a lower-tax approach, which would have meant the money available for our public services being reduced. We cannot have it both ways.

This is a serious matter. We are actively engaged with colleges, and we are working on flexibilities and other measures that would help to alleviate the challenges—there are challenges that they face—and improve the situation for them.

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

A number of members have requested to ask a supplementary question. I suspect that I will not get through them all, but I will do my best. Willie Rennie should be brief.

The minister knows that there is incredulity and frustration in the college and university sectors that the first step that he took was to cut £46 million from their funding. That will not help colleges and universities to transition to the new future that the minister wants to see. If new funds become available, can he confirm that that will be his first and top priority for investment?

As I said at the Education, Children and Young People Committee meeting yesterday, from my perspective—we have already indicated that we will look to address this—if there was an improvement in the funding situation, by working with colleges and universities, that would, of course, be a priority for the education portfolio.

The minister confirmed this week that the funding had been reallocated to account for the pay deal that was reached with school teachers. Does he accept that the reversal of promised funding, combined with more than 10 years of real-terms cuts to the sector, is limiting the ability to offer a fair pay deal to staff? Does he accept that teaching staff in all phases of education should be properly remunerated for their work?

I do believe that education staff should be properly remunerated for their work.

But here we go again. I have said this to the Conservatives and even more often to the Labour Party: the same money cannot be spent twice. If Labour wants to spend money on something else, that is fine, but it needs to tell us where the money is coming from.

I want to correct one small point. It is a point of fact that, since 2012-13, college resource budgets have increased by £168 million in cash terms.

The Deputy Presiding Officer:

Liam Kerr should be very brief.

In North East Scotland College’s latest accounts, the principal of the college warned that,

“if the College is required to reduce costs further then student experiences and outcomes will suffer, significantly.”

Did the minister consider the impact on NESCol of withdrawing the £46 million? What does he predict the impact will be on its ability to deliver?

We were, of course, aware that there would be an adverse impact from the withdrawal of the funding because of the transition measures that it was going to fund. However, the decision was not taken lightly. In many ways, there was no decision—the money had to be found. I find that regrettable, and I am disappointed that we had to do that, but if Mr Kerr was aware of the conversations starting to happen with all colleges—including North East Scotland College—he would know that we are looking actively at what we can do to give them the sustainable future that they require.