Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
14
Parties on record
2,096,445
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,096,445 contributions in session S6, 13 May 2026 – 12 Jun 2026. Latest 30 days: 3,975. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 11 Jun 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 10 September 2019

10 Sep 2019 · S5 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Immigration Policy (Universities and Scientific Research)

That could be devastating for our universities and institutions, given that students from the EU and beyond may find Scotland and the wider UK much less attractive destinations to come to study, visit and potentially work in, because of the messages that they are receiving from the UK Government. Likewise, for investment and research funds, if we are locked out of the substantial European research funds—I will talk about this shortly—that will have a detrimental impact on the viability of courses and, indeed, the sustainability of our university and research sectors.

The Wellcome Trust, which is based in the UK, has a £25.9 billion global investment portfolio—the fourth highest in the world. Its director, Jeremy Farrar, has stated:

“We have invested in the UK for more than 80 years. It has provided an environment in which science and innovation can thrive, but if the conditions and the culture here are damaged, that will affect our support. It is not unconditional.”

He is referring to the hostile environment that the UK Government is creating and the future difficulties that institutions in the UK will face in attracting the talent that we have just mentioned, in collaborating and in winning research funding.

Horizon 2020 is the EU’s flagship research fund. To date, Scotland has competitively won almost €650 million from it. Access to the fund is of critical importance to researchers, just as is the ability to easily travel from project to project. Without easy access and a lack of obstacles, researchers are likely to look elsewhere. The situation is similar with students.

Scotland is regarded as a renowned study destination across Europe. This morning, I was speaking to students at the University of Dundee, who reiterated how warmly welcomed they feel in Scotland and the benefits that they have from their unique courses. Proportionally, more EU students come to study in Scotland than to study elsewhere in the UK. Our campuses are diverse, international and an incubator for different ideas and viewpoints, shaped by people’s international backgrounds and experience. All that has been underpinned by the ease with which EU students can come to our colleges and universities.

In a report conducted by the University of Stirling students’ union on the campus-wide impact of Brexit at the university—the report has been mentioned before in Parliament, but its findings are worth repeating—many EU students described a feeling of worry regarding their future status in the UK. I have spoken to students the length and breadth of Scotland and heard those concerns being echoed time and time again during my visits.

The possibility of restrictive or expensive visa conditions for future study were cited by some as a reason for looking elsewhere in the EU when considering postgraduate study. Of course, international students from outside the EU already face hostile conditions, which is to the detriment of our institutions and another factor to consider. Being made to apply for something like the current tier 4 student visa, which can cost more than £1,000 when studying in another EU country would typically cost nothing, would clearly be an enormous disincentive for EU students. However, that is the kind of situation that such students might find themselves in if we were to lose access to freedom of movement as the UK Conservative Government plans and takes pride in announcing.

The UK Government’s proposed no-deal contingency measure—a European temporary leave to remain scheme—would grant EU citizens up to three years leave in the UK before they had to apply and pay for another visa. However, as we all know, Scottish undergraduate degrees last for four years, not three years. Medicine degrees and others can last a lot longer than three years, and students who go on maternity leave, for example, will often study for more than three years. The scheme is discriminatory against Scottish institutions and against any person who does not fit into the three-year degree mould that has been shaped in Whitehall.

I have laboured that point with the UK Government time and time again—hopefully, I will shortly have a fourth UK counterpart to repeat the points to—but the policy does not change. It is bizarre for the UK Government to say that it has the needs of our institutions in its mind when it repeatedly presents plans that are in direct contradiction to the sector’s best interests.

We see that happen outside Brexit, too. More than 8,000 graduates took part in the fresh talent working in Scotland scheme between 2005 and 2008; I remember us all celebrating that here, all those years ago. That scheme allowed for international graduates of Scottish universities to stay in the UK to live and work for up to two years after the end of their studies, and was seen as a success by the Scottish Government, the sector and, I believe, all parties in this chamber. However, the UK Government got rid of the scheme, subsuming it into other policy and then abolishing it altogether in 2012. The Scottish Government and the sector have been adamant since then that its return is essential to help us to keep up with our international competitors. That view was shared by the Smith commission—and, what is more, by members across the chamber.

The post-study work steering group, established in 2014 and composed of representatives from all the parties in the Scottish Parliament, concluded that there was clear support across businesses and the sector for the reintroduction of a post-study work route. In 2016, the Home Office released details of what it called a low-risk tier 4 pilot, which grants masters students an additional two months’ leave after their course has ended in order to seek work—two months, not two years. That does not amount to anything like the post-study route that the sector is calling for.

More recently, we have seen in the UK immigration white paper proposals to extend post-study leave for bachelors and masters graduates to six months and to up to a year for those who are awarded PhDs. That is a step in the right direction, but it still falls far short. If there are to be more announcements in the coming weeks, we need to see what we are calling for—the post-study work visa—delivered to the full, especially when we compare the proposal with what our international competitors are offering. Canada’s post-graduation work permit, for example, is valid for up to three years, while Australia’s post-study work visa allows for a right to remain for up to four years.

In its recent international education strategy, the UK Government expressed an ambition to

“increase ... education exports to £35 billion ... by 2030”.

We all know that the field of international student recruitment is competitive, and the proposals that are outlined in the immigration white paper are not exactly game changers. Given how fast things are changing in Westminster, we do not even know what the current UK Government policy is on the issue. Given the lack of detail and certainty, it is hard to see how that figure of £35 billion will ever be met.

All that relates to what I said earlier about chaos. There is chaos at the heart of the UK Government’s thinking. It does not seem to know what it wants or how to get there. It wants to make it harder for talented staff and students to come to this country, but at the same time it says that it wants to increase our share of student recruitment. It wants to end our access to freedom of movement but, at the same time, it expresses a desire to make the UK an inviting place to come for work and study.

Conversely, the Scottish Government has a clearly articulated policy, which is based on evidence and supported by stakeholders. We need a competitive post-study work offer, like the one that we had with the fresh talent scheme. We need a tailored migration policy that is flexible and tailored to Scotland’s distinct needs—a policy that is frictionless, that has no cost barriers and that does not present any burdens to our institutions, staff or students. The sector supports that, businesses support that and, as I heard today in Dundee, staff and students who want to come and contribute to Scotland support that. Therefore, we need to be able to get on and deliver it.

Against the backdrop of a no-deal Brexit, our colleges, universities and scientific research sectors face unprecedented challenges. They are one of Scotland’s greatest strengths and are a key component of our resilience and our ability to meet future social and economic challenges. If they suffer, Scotland suffers, and that is why it is important that any migration policy supports our institutions and allows them to thrive.

I invite the chamber to join me in calling on the UK Government to urgently rethink its policies on migration, to extend its no-deal leave to remain to a minimum of four years and, of course, to reintroduce a two-year post-study work visa for students in Scotland.

I commend the motion to Parliament, and I move,

That the Parliament notes that the UK Government’s proposed immigration policies will be deeply damaging to Scotland’s further education, higher education and research sectors; joins with Scottish institutions and the Russell Group in raising serious concerns about the impact of the three-year European Temporary Leave to Remain policy, which was announced in September 2019, if the UK leaves the EU without a deal, which discriminates against Scottish institutions and students in Scotland studying for four-year degrees; welcomes the huge contribution that international staff and students make to Scotland’s universities, colleges and research institutions, as well as the country’s economy and communities; notes the success of the Fresh Talent: Working in Scotland scheme, which benefited more than 8,000 graduates between 2005 and 2008; further notes the consensus across parties and with sector bodies such as Universities Scotland and Colleges Scotland on the benefits of a flexible post-study work route for Scotland, and calls on the UK Government to urgently amend its proposed policies to ensure that they respect Scotland’s unique education system and its population needs, including by extending leave to remain to a minimum of four years and reintroducing a two-year post-study work visa for students at universities and colleges in Scotland.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Christine Grahame) SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S5M-18767, in the name of Richard Lochhead, on the impact of the United Kingdom Government’s planned immigrat...
The Minister for Further Education, Higher Education and Science (Richard Lochhead) SNP
Presiding Officer, “A ‘no-deal’ exit from the EU is the worst option for science.” Those are not my words but those of the president of the UK Royal Societ...
Oliver Mundell (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Con
It is a bit rich for the minister to come to the chamber and say that my party is pushing for a no-deal Brexit when not a single Scottish National Party MP v...
Richard Lochhead SNP
Only the Scottish Conservative party could say that there is no chaos in Westminster; it is there for everyone to see within the member’s divided party. I d...
Gillian Martin (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) SNP
What impact will not having access to that experience from across the EU have on the ordinary undergraduate student in Scottish universities?
Richard Lochhead SNP
That could be devastating for our universities and institutions, given that students from the EU and beyond may find Scotland and the wider UK much less attr...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
I make two little housekeeping points to members. First, if you want to speak in a debate, it is handy if you press your request-to-speak button—I say that f...
Oliver Mundell (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Con
Members will note that our amendment is not that different in substance from the motion that the Government has lodged, with one notable difference at the en...
Richard Lyle (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) SNP
Oh, hip, hip, hooray!
Oliver Mundell Con
I hear a member say, “Hip, hip, hooray!” Does that not just say it all? We are interested in working constructively, because we recognise that attracting the...
Gillian Martin SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Oliver Mundell Con
I will not take an intervention from the member at this point. Members on the Conservative benches are committed to working constructively to find solutions...
Stuart McMillan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Richard Lochhead SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Oliver Mundell Con
I will take an intervention from the minister first.
Richard Lochhead SNP
In the light of the consensus that the member is fostering, will he say whether he agrees that no deal is the worst possible outcome for Scotland’s further a...
Oliver Mundell Con
I am delighted to hear the minister confirm that, after dragging its heels, the SNP will support a deal, because that is what the sector needs. We could have...
The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills (John Swinney) SNP
Let me try to steer Mr Mundell away from the politics of all this. I am interested in his line of argument: he is making a strong argument—with which I agree...
Oliver Mundell Con
I welcome John Swinney’s point. We have seen a reset in approach from the new Government under a new Prime Minister. The issue is about balancing different i...
Stuart McMillan SNP
On the issue of consensus, what deal that would have consensus across all the parties that are represented in the House of Commons does Mr Mundell want to se...
Oliver Mundell Con
We have already seen something that could have been that deal—the withdrawal agreement. I voted to leave, and I might have looked for more in that deal about...
Gillian Martin SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Oliver Mundell Con
I think that I am in my last minute.
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
Yes you are. It has been very good of Mr Mundell to take lots of interventions, but the member is now winding up.
Oliver Mundell Con
SNP members, despite all their protests, have had the opportunity to deliver a Brexit deal to protect our universities, businesses and farmers the length and...
Iain Gray (East Lothian) (Lab) Lab
I welcome the opportunity to speak in today’s debate on a key issue for our universities, research community and economy. It is unwelcome, and indeed ridicul...
Ross Greer (West Scotland) (Green) Green
It is timely that, as the only Parliament in the UK that is allowed to sit today, we hold the Westminster Government to account for its immigration policy an...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Linda Fabiani) SNP
I am very pleased to say that opening for the Liberal Democrats today, in her first contribution to a debate in our Parliament, is the member of the Scottish...
Beatrice Wishart (Shetland Islands) (LD) LD
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am delighted to be here to make my first speech in Parliament. First, though, I would like to pay tribute to my predecessor, ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
We now move to the open debate, with speeches of six minutes, please. We are a bit tight for time, so will members please take care with the length of their ...