Chamber
Plenary, 01 Nov 2001
01 Nov 2001 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Teaching and Research Funding (Scottish Higher Education Funding Council Review)
This is an important debate, focusing not only on the SHEFC report, but on many of the general issues surrounding it. Our new universities have been making their mark over the past few years and the Scottish economy is at a crossroads. It is very important that we get the funding, role and priorities for our universities right.
Higher education has three roles. First, it must equip Scotland for the 21st century. Secondly, it has to maintain Scotland's reputation in those areas in which we excel. Thirdly, it has to provide all people with the opportunity for self-development. We cannot consider higher education in isolation; we must also consider further education and the role of our schools. We must ensure that they all have a clear role and that there is a link between all the institutions, taking a holistic view of education at this important time.
I am concerned by the blurring at the edges that has been taking place in recent years. Schools are competing with colleges for the same students; colleges are competing with universities for the same students; and universities are now offering access courses, which it has traditionally been the role of colleges to do. Universities sometimes seem to offer those courses as an incentive to get people in to fill the seats. There is a sense that it is dog eat dog out there and that too many of our institutions have adopted a bums-on-seats strategy. I am concerned that many of our young people do not find themselves in the right lecture theatres. We must ensure that what is done is done for the benefit of the young people in Scotland, not for the institutions.
There has been an upward trend in the presence of accountants and financial executives in the higher education sector over the past few years. Many of our higher education institutions are now indulging in a lot of advertising. Bernard King, the principal of the University of Abertay Dundee, who is sitting in the public gallery, has received a lot of praise today, and I join in that praise. I visited the university recently and was highly impressed by initiatives such as the international centre for computer games and virtual entertainment. It is an outstanding university. Nevertheless, when I was watching television last night, I saw an advert for the university on the ITV network that said simply:
"University of Abertay Dundee: It's a real education!"
and gave a telephone number. Why are universities spending so much money on advertising and public relations? Why is that money not being put to better use? Is it because something somewhere is out of sync and the universities have too many places to fill? That problem must be addressed by the minister.
I hope that all higher and further education institutions find their own niche and role in Scottish education, and I would like there to be more collaboration. At the moment, an initiative is being undertaken by the University of Aberdeen and the Robert Gordon University to ensure that they do not compete for the same students. They are speaking to each other to ensure that they have individual and distinctive roles.
I shall address a couple of the recommendations in the report. The first concerns the role of the new universities. Many members have referred to the need for level 3 research funding. That funding is extremely important. There is no point in creating new universities and then discriminating against them; they must receive their fair share of research funding. The philosophy and theology department of the University of Edinburgh receives the same amount of research funding through the funding councils as most of Scotland's new universities receive in total. For example, that department receives the same amount of research funding as the whole of RGU. Is that right at this crossroads for the Scottish economy? We must address that.
Level 3 research bids must be addressed, as we must give the new universities seedcorn funding. Europe's oil and gas industry is based in the north-east of Scotland, yet BP is spending tens of millions of pounds on research and development in universities south of the border. Surely, we should encourage the funding for such research to be allocated to areas of expertise, where it makes sense, such as the north-east of Scotland. Our universities want to bid for that research funding but have not received the seedcorn funding that would enable them to build up a track record and attract private sector funding.
Higher education has three roles. First, it must equip Scotland for the 21st century. Secondly, it has to maintain Scotland's reputation in those areas in which we excel. Thirdly, it has to provide all people with the opportunity for self-development. We cannot consider higher education in isolation; we must also consider further education and the role of our schools. We must ensure that they all have a clear role and that there is a link between all the institutions, taking a holistic view of education at this important time.
I am concerned by the blurring at the edges that has been taking place in recent years. Schools are competing with colleges for the same students; colleges are competing with universities for the same students; and universities are now offering access courses, which it has traditionally been the role of colleges to do. Universities sometimes seem to offer those courses as an incentive to get people in to fill the seats. There is a sense that it is dog eat dog out there and that too many of our institutions have adopted a bums-on-seats strategy. I am concerned that many of our young people do not find themselves in the right lecture theatres. We must ensure that what is done is done for the benefit of the young people in Scotland, not for the institutions.
There has been an upward trend in the presence of accountants and financial executives in the higher education sector over the past few years. Many of our higher education institutions are now indulging in a lot of advertising. Bernard King, the principal of the University of Abertay Dundee, who is sitting in the public gallery, has received a lot of praise today, and I join in that praise. I visited the university recently and was highly impressed by initiatives such as the international centre for computer games and virtual entertainment. It is an outstanding university. Nevertheless, when I was watching television last night, I saw an advert for the university on the ITV network that said simply:
"University of Abertay Dundee: It's a real education!"
and gave a telephone number. Why are universities spending so much money on advertising and public relations? Why is that money not being put to better use? Is it because something somewhere is out of sync and the universities have too many places to fill? That problem must be addressed by the minister.
I hope that all higher and further education institutions find their own niche and role in Scottish education, and I would like there to be more collaboration. At the moment, an initiative is being undertaken by the University of Aberdeen and the Robert Gordon University to ensure that they do not compete for the same students. They are speaking to each other to ensure that they have individual and distinctive roles.
I shall address a couple of the recommendations in the report. The first concerns the role of the new universities. Many members have referred to the need for level 3 research funding. That funding is extremely important. There is no point in creating new universities and then discriminating against them; they must receive their fair share of research funding. The philosophy and theology department of the University of Edinburgh receives the same amount of research funding through the funding councils as most of Scotland's new universities receive in total. For example, that department receives the same amount of research funding as the whole of RGU. Is that right at this crossroads for the Scottish economy? We must address that.
Level 3 research bids must be addressed, as we must give the new universities seedcorn funding. Europe's oil and gas industry is based in the north-east of Scotland, yet BP is spending tens of millions of pounds on research and development in universities south of the border. Surely, we should encourage the funding for such research to be allocated to areas of expertise, where it makes sense, such as the north-east of Scotland. Our universities want to bid for that research funding but have not received the seedcorn funding that would enable them to build up a track record and attract private sector funding.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):
SNP
Good morning. The first item of business is an Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee debate on motion S1M-2380, in the name of Alex Neil, on the committ...
Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I begin by saying thank you to all those who participated in the preparation of the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee's report. My thanks go first t...
Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Does Alex Neil agree that it is unacceptable that all the tens of millions of pounds that are spent on research by a company such as BP are spent south of th...
Alex Neil:
SNP
There are two issues. One is about attracting companies of the calibre of BP to do more research in Scotland and the other—which we cannot dodge—is about the...
Marilyn Livingstone (Kirkcaldy) (Lab):
Lab
I thank the convener of the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee for his speech on behalf of the committee. He covered many points that are pertinent t...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
Kenny MacAskill will open for the Scottish National Party. He has 12 minutes.
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
I agree with everything that Alex Neil and Marilyn Livingstone said and I adopt their position. The report was produced by a cross-party committee. By defini...
David Mundell (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
Kenny MacAskill will be pleased to hear that I intend to make a fleeting reference to Finland in my contribution to the debate.For once, I am disappointed in...
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):
LD
It will come as a surprise to the members present that I am on my feet at all in the debate. What has happened is that Mr George Lyon has been closely involv...
Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
Will Mr Stone accept an intervention?
Mr Stone:
LD
Gladly. I have to use up some time.
Mr Monteith:
Con
I thought that he might appreciate an intervention. He said that he worked for Wimpey. Was that the burger firm or the builders?
Mr Stone:
LD
It is interesting that Mr Monteith should probe me on that one. It was the building firm, I can assure him. My point is that there is a suspicion of academia...
Mr Kenneth Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab):
Lab
As members know, the inquiry was launched following concerns expressed about the SHEFC review of teaching and research funding. The committee was already com...
Brian Adam (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
The report, naturally enough, concentrated on the outcome of the research assessment exercise, with money going to the departments that were rated appropriat...
Mr Macintosh:
Lab
I have not yet reached that part of my speech, but I am glad that Brian Adam has predicted what I was going to say. I agree with much of what he says and I s...
Mr Duncan Hamilton (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
It is a great pleasure to contribute to what has turned out to be a rather sleepy debate. I am sorry that Jamie Stone has left the chamber. I was about to de...
Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I applaud the committee for its report, which augurs well for its inquiry into lifelong learning. Alex Neil has an enquiring mind and he should not resist th...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
I ask members to keep speeches to a maximum of five minutes.
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab):
Lab
I hope that the Parliament will welcome the report of the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee on the inquiry into the SHEFC review of teaching and res...
Mr Andrew Welsh (Angus) (SNP):
SNP
I declare that my daughter is a student at the University of Abertay Dundee. I am not sure whether that is a declarable interest, but it certainly helps in r...
Miss Annabel Goldie (West of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I declare an interest, in that I am a member of the court of the University of Strathclyde—at least I am at the moment. I make this speech as deputy convener...
Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab):
Lab
SHEFC has come in for a bit of a battering in this debate. However, it is important to put on record two things that the funding council got right. First, it...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Patricia Ferguson):
Lab
Although we started this debate with extra time, we have managed to catch up with our schedule. I must therefore ask members from here on in to stick to a fi...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab):
Lab
Uniquely, my constituency has within its boundary three Scottish universities—one ancient, one modern and one new. As I also represent Glasgow School of Art ...
Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
This is an important debate, focusing not only on the SHEFC report, but on many of the general issues surrounding it. Our new universities have been making t...
Elaine Thomson (Aberdeen North) (Lab):
Lab
BP is a global company and operates on that basis. It seeks research that is of value at a global level and will invest its money in the best research wherev...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
The member has hit the nail on the head. The key is to encourage our institutions to become the best in the world, so that the academic research for the oil ...
Elaine Thomson (Aberdeen North) (Lab):
Lab
As many members have said, education and research are becoming ever more important to Scotland and its economy. It is vital that the organisation and funding...
Brian Adam:
SNP
Will the member give way?