Official Report 6 September 2007
Scottish Parliament
Thursday 6
September 2007
[THE PRESIDING OFFICER opened the meeting at 09:15]
[…]
14:57
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson): The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-416, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, on a sustainable future for the Crichton university campus. I invite all members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
14:58
The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning (Fiona Hyslop): It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to ask the Parliament to join me in welcoming the successful outcome that has been achieved to secure the future of the Crichton university campus. The outcome not only protects, but significantly expands, existing provision. It was achieved through the concerted efforts of a wide range of parties and it is being supported by the Scottish Government through additional funding.
The outcome actually exceeds the original objectives of the
local campaigners. We have secured existing provision from all existing
partners, including the
The Government has achieved this outcome by addressing the issue with drive, determination and creativity. We dealt with the problem in the early days of the new Government because we heard the people of the south-west when they expressed their needs, aspirations and expectations. We see Crichton as a thriving and diverse centre of higher education that will contribute to the economy, culture and life of the region. We have equipped the academic partners to deliver that in the long term. [Interruption.]
The Presiding Officer: Order. The member should not cross the floor. I beg your pardon, minister.
Fiona Hyslop: I commend the way in which the academic partners at Crichton and local stakeholders have worked together with the Scottish Funding Council to produce a shared vision for the future of the campus. The development of the academic strategy for the region is a key milestone.
The Scottish Government has committed £1.5 million a year, at full roll-out, to cover the additional costs of new provision and to secure existing provision. Additional funding will secure undergraduate liberal arts provision, with student
intake to recommence from 2008-09; the development and delivery of broad-ranging four-year primary teacher training degrees; and postgraduate provision in climate change and environmental studies as part of the development of the new carbon centre. It will also cover unique infrastructure costs, which currently fall to the partners that operate at the campus.
I am particularly pleased that we will be able to deliver
new provision of initial teacher training at Crichton. That will build on our
aspiration to give students the opportunity to combine specialist primary
teaching studies with a more broadly based degree. The fact that 20 per cent of
probationer teachers withdrew from Dumfries and
The solution has made long-term participation at Crichton
financially sustainable for the
I turn to the comments in Hugh Henry's amendment. I say to him that the funding will be maintained and is guaranteed and that funding for other institutions will not be cut to deliver it. On asking for guarantees, he, as a former minister, should surely know that ministers cannot direct or provide guarantees in relation to independent institutions. Indeed, Labour ministers regularly told us that on this very issue. What we can do, which the Government of which Hugh Henry was a member failed to do, is work with independent institutions to seek creative solutions. We have done that in this case. We have no powers to direct, which demonstrates just how remarkable the consensus solution is. The present Government seeks consensus; Hugh Henry's sought conflict.
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale)
(LD): The cabinet secretary said that, at full
roll-out, the
"unless there is sufficient demand from students, most
importantly in Dumfries and
What discussions have there been on that issue? What
guarantee is there that if full roll-out of the
Fiona Hyslop: It
is important to remember that the funded places are for Crichton campus. We are
keen to ensure that the
maintains its position. It is essential that we encourage
people to take part in the proposals for initial teacher training. One exciting
measure that we can take in the south-west is to have the
George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab): Will the minister give way?
Fiona Hyslop: I want to continue, because I have an important message to put across to the partners at Crichton.
I expect the academic partners to make their commitment
clear to their students, staff and the people of the south-west. I want to see
evidence of collective, shared and collaborative leadership that respects
individual institutions but gives the Crichton campus a united sense of
purpose. I will monitor the success of the partners in attracting students, not
only from
The high regard and enthusiasm for and the loyalty to the
unique and innovative campus were highlighted throughout the campaign to secure
its future and shone through once again during my visit to the campus last
week. The visit was an excellent opportunity for me to meet representatives
from the academic partners, local stakeholders, staff and students and to hear
at first hand their views on the future for the campus. I also had the
opportunity to meet founding members of the carbon centre and was impressed
with their aims and ambitions for it. In particular, I was pleased to learn
that the first postgraduate students at the centre will enrol this autumn on a
course that is unique in the
George Foulkes: Before
Jeremy Purvis's intervention, the minister said that this Government is seeking
consensus whereas the previous Government sought conflict. I agree that this
Government is seeking consensus, and I support that. I know what is happening:
my wife is on the court of the
Fiona Hyslop: I am very pleased that Elaine Murray, Alex Fergusson, Alasdair Morgan and others congratulated the Government on providing a solution, but if Mr Foulkes wants to consider what is ungracious, perhaps he should consider the Labour Party's amendment to our motion.
I visited Dumfries and
We must focus on the needs and expectations of people in
our rural and island communities, and we must work with delivery partners to
respond effectively. The Crichton model will not necessarily work in other
parts of
I believe that we also have other examples in other areas
of what can be achieved when people work collaboratively. The UHI Millennium
Institute is a very different model from Crichton, but I would argue that it
can be made to work for the diverse and diffuse communities it serves. I
recently met senior representatives of UHI and
Let me reiterate the importance of Crichton to the
south-west of
In social terms, it is critical that everyone can access
and benefit from the opportunities available in modern
In cultural terms, it is important that the south-west
develops as a vibrant part of
making its unique contribution to the cultural development of the country, and drawing the benefits of that development back in. The campus sits at the centre of that vision for the region.
For economic, social and cultural reasons, it is crucial that all partners can move forwards with a long-term vision and on a firm financial footing. The development of the academic strategy and the additional support from the Government that I announced will ensure that those conditions are met.
There is a fresh wind blowing in
I move,
That the Parliament congratulates local campaigners, including MSPs from all parties, on effectively highlighting the issues surrounding the future of Crichton University Campus in Dumfries, leading to a successful outcome; commends the work of the local stakeholders, academic partners and the Scottish Funding Council in developing an academic strategy for the campus; welcomes the allocation of additional resources by the Scottish Government to protect existing provision, help deliver the strategy and widen the range of higher education opportunities delivered in the south west of Scotland on a long-term sustainable basis, and recognises the importance of the ability of students in rural and island communities to access higher and further education.
15:09
Hugh Henry (Paisley South) (Lab): I might point out to Fiona Hyslop that, far from being ungracious, we are actually accepting the motion. However, we are adding to it and, reasonably, asking for some assurances.
I will preface my remarks by reflecting on comments that Iain Smith made in yesterday's debate in the chamber. It is slightly bizarre that we had about one hour and 25 minutes to discuss the programme of government or governance—however the SNP wants to describe it—for Scotland, but have two hours and five minutes to discuss the investment of £1.5 million in one institution, albeit one that is important to the people of south-west Scotland. That is indicative of distorted and skewed priorities.
The Minister for Environment (Michael Russell): On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Will you confirm that the business motion that was presented to the chamber yesterday was endorsed by all members of the Parliamentary
Bureau, including the representative of the Labour Party?
The Presiding Officer: I can so confirm.
Hugh Henry: That was a bizarre comment by Mike Russell.
Margo MacDonald (Lothians) (
The Presiding Officer: I do not recall saying that it was not.
Hugh Henry: It is disappointing that, notwithstanding the significance of the Crichton campus to people in south-west Scotland, we can find two hours and five minutes for this debate but there has been nothing from the SNP on new teachers seeking employment, nothing from the SNP about a debate on discipline in our schools, nothing from the SNP about raising attainment levels in education and, frankly, nothing from the SNP about education generally.
Brian Adam (
Hugh Henry: No. The SNP is trying to exploit one issue for headlines, instead of addressing fundamental issues of concern in Scottish education.
There is no doubt that the matter before us this afternoon
is of great concern to people in south-west
I acknowledge the work that has been done by many partners to produce a solution, to which the motion refers, but if that solution is to be sustainable, certain issues must be addressed. Jeremy Purvis was absolutely right to raise the issue of future demand, because funding flows from demand and sustainability flows from funding. It is incumbent on the Parliament to ask whether funding will be maintained throughout the session and to seek assurances that this is not a one-off solution. It is right that we should ask for guarantees that funding is not being provided to the detriment of other institutions. I am glad that Fiona Hyslop has acknowledged that.
It is also right that we should reflect on whether some of
what has been done, especially in relation to rent, may not make it easy for
institutions to walk away from the campus, because they no longer have any
responsibility in that area. I recognise the effort that ministers and all the
local partners have put in and the anxiety and clear wishes that have been
expressed, but I hope that nothing has been done that will frustrate those wishes
over the next few years, that people have not been given false hope and that
they are getting a sustainable solution. I also hope that people in south-west
The minister will acknowledge that we seek not just a facility, but one that delivers quality—not just value for money, but an effective facility that adds value to the educational experience of the students who take up places in it.
I acknowledge the difficulties that the minister has had to
grapple with and the contribution that many people have made in arriving at a
solution. I hope that the solution will be sustainable and that it will work. I
also hope that the aspirations of the people of south-west
I move amendment S3M-416.1, to insert at end:
"and calls for an assurance that this funding will be maintained and guaranteed and that this is not being provided to the detriment of funding for other institutions, and further asks for a guarantee that none of the institutions will be able to walk away from any aspects of this arrangement."
15:15
Derek Brownlee (South of
It is right to recognise—as the Government's motion does—and pay tribute to the nature of the Crichton campaign. It was a cross-party campaign, and it was all the better and certainly more effective for that. I cannot think of many occasions when there has been solidarity between the Conservatives, the Labour Party, the Scottish National Party and the Liberal Democrats. I suspect that such occasions have been few and far between—if there have been others—but there was a genuinely consensual campaign to save the Crichton.
What was happening earlier in the year was perhaps not the
end of the world—the minister at the time said that it was not a crisis. That
might have been true on the face of it, but symbolically and in respect of what
it meant for the future of the Crichton campus it was a crisis and it was a
significant issue in the south-west. Lessons can be learned in the rest of
The campaign to save the Crichton achieved cross-party
support in the Parliament, but it did more than that: it galvanised the local
community in Dumfries and Galloway and it raised interest throughout the
education community in
The campaign was not only a political campaign: the support of businesses, community representatives, current and former students, and the local media—including the Dumfries & Galloway Standard—played a vital part in keeping the issue at the forefront of the agenda before, during and after the elections in May. The outcome of the campaign was in no way certain. If we had asked the participants in the debate in February, or the many people from Dumfries and Galloway who turned up to watch our proceedings, what they expected to happen, I doubt whether many would have said that they genuinely expected a solution to be found. The complexities to which Hugh Henry referred were also referred to by the minister at the time. Undoubtedly the situation is very complex.
It is surprising that it seems that the beginnings of the fracturing of the political consensus came after the elections rather than before. There was almost more in-fighting between political parties after the election than there was beforehand, which must be rather rare.
The cabinet secretary referred to the potential that is
offered by Dumfries and
I am grateful to the cabinet secretary not only for
realising the importance of a successful outcome to the Crichton campaign for
Dumfries and
The Conservatives are happy to support the Government's
motion. We warmly welcome the progress that has been made: it is good news for
the Crichton and it is good news for Dumfries and
The assurances on the maintenance of funding, on the protection of other assurances—something that has now been dealt with—and on the protection of the terms of the agreement sound innocuous. I understand why they would be attractive to anyone with an interest in preserving the Crichton, but it is fair to ask whether the previous Executive, in the light of its actions, would have made such assurances—assuming it had been able to find a solution.
In the debate last February, the then Deputy Minister for
"ministers cannot—and neither should they—direct or allocate funding to a particular institution."—[Official Report, 15 February 2007; c 32261.]
It seems to me that the Labour amendment is taking us very close to such an approach—the party is taking a different path from the one it pursued when it was in government. If that is simply to tease out further information from the Government, that is one thing, but if it is a fundamental change in approach, members should know.
The cabinet secretary touched on the Crichton's importance
to Dumfries and
For many people, the question will be, "Where do we go from here?" It would be easy to say that the campaign has been a success, that the problem has been solved and that we should move on, but it would be wrong to say those things. The campaign might have been about saving the Crichton—if we want to use that phrase—but there is much more to do to ensure that its potential is fully exploited.
Welcome though the measures that have been announced are, I
do not think that anyone would say that they take the Crichton to its full
potential. If we can get back to the successful cross-party and cross-community
campaign, it should continue. We need to think innovatively about how the
campus can develop, how it can attract students to Dumfries and
concede that it is mainly down to them. It is down to all
of us—politicians, the Government and the wider community with an interest in
the Crichton—to allow the campus's potential to be fulfilled. If the Crichton
campus does not fulfil its potential, neither will Dumfries and
15:22
Hugh O'Donnell (
The Liberal Democrats are fully committed to the widening of access to sustainable higher education. We are committed to lifelong learning and we are determined to press the new Scottish Government on secure funding for the sector. I look forward to hearing the Government's position on the matter as I can find no specific reference to it in the recently published programme for government. In that regard, Hugh Henry's amendment is right to call for an assurance that the Government intends to continue support for the Crichton in a way that is not detrimental to any other institution that is involved in the campus.
I will move on to the future of the campus and the history of how we came to be where we are but, first, like previous speakers, I pay tribute to the cross-party consensus and the people who were involved in the campaign, including the students and academic staff at the campus. Their efforts contributed in no small way to the recent announcement.
We would do well to remember that, important as the
I acknowledge that, like us all, the
has wider social responsibilities. In the case of education
institutions, that is because we are the funders. It is the population of
If the university is as pleased with the saving of the campus as it claims to be and if it is sure in its commitment to it, I for one look forward to seeing its long-term strategy for recruitment and marketing as an integrated part of the university's development plans, not just as an adjunct to them. I also look forward to learning what it sees as the break-even point. Critically, we and—more important in my view—the staff on the campus need to know whether the adoption of responsibilities for infrastructure by the other institutions will result in any job losses on the campus, where they might occur and when that might happen.
If
We must also be clear about the value of the campus to the
economic development of the area—which the cabinet secretary referred to—not
only during the redevelopment phase but in the longer term. Even a cursory look
at the constituencies that are close to the campus clearly shows the need for
Crichton and the education opportunities it offers. According to the national
health service constituency profiles in 2004, 39 per cent of adults in the
I believe that the challenge for all involved is to confirm their long-tem commitment to the campus, and I ask the cabinet secretary to extend her support for Crichton to the whole of the higher education sector by fully funding the £168 million
budget increase request from Universities Scotland.
15:28
Alasdair Morgan (South of
I start by reiterating the importance of the Crichton to
the economy of south-west
We see, for example, that participation rates among people
from the most deprived areas in Dumfries and
However, the strategy also says that there is no high level
of unmet demand for undergraduate places, so where do they go? The answer is
that they go elsewhere in
The minister talked about consensus but, fortunately, I have no obligation to do so. The pre-election period was deeply depressing. We had two debates on the Crichton campus. If Hugh Henry is worried about this debate wasting time, he should reflect on the fact that there would have
been no need for it if the 1.5 hours of debate earlier this year had been used more effectively. If he wants to discuss other issues, there will be Opposition time next week in which to do so.
At no time in our two debates earlier this year did the
Government give any commitment about the
Oppositions lodge amendments to motions because that is
what Oppositions do, but should they bother if there is nothing sensible to
say? The Opposition is playing politics. It is trying to distract attention
from its own dismal record compared with what the Government has done. It is
seeking a commitment that no other university in
There is a more serious issue. When students and staff are committing themselves to studying or working at the Crichton, they do not want doubts to be sown about the institution's future. After a one-year gap in enrolment, there may be a credibility issue for some people, but the minister's announcement should help to dispel that problem. We should all work towards that end. It would be unfortunate if posturing by the Opposition caused anyone to doubt that the Crichton's future is other than set fair. Even today, Hugh Henry raised the canard that the solution that has been reached will make it easier for institutions to walk away from the Crichton project.
The original Crichton bequest talked about having a
university for the south of
presence of the
There is still much to do—we need to build up
participation, particularly from the west of
15:34
Elaine Murray (
Back in January 2000, my
It was more than an official engagement for Donald Dewar.
He was enthralled by the Crichton campus, as successive ministers have been on
their arrival. He was intrigued by the liberal arts undergraduate courses that
his alma mater, the
The success of the Crichton experiment took even those who
were most closely associated with it by surprise. Even in the early days, there
were concerns over the sustainability of its funding. I arranged a meeting
between representatives of the
to the Crichton campus, split between
As a man from Annan, Jim Wallace, who later became Minister
for
I have just mentioned our meetings with Jim Wallace. Michael Russell might recall that he and I had a meeting about the issues that had been highlighted to us with Roger McClure way back in the first session. As other members have said, the degree of cross-party support for the campus has been exceptional. I should also mention Chris Ballance of the Scottish Green Party and Rosemary Byrne of Solidarity, who were vocal in their support for the campus in session 2.
Michael Russell: I would like to add the name of Murray Tosh who, both as a Conservative candidate and as an MSP, worked hard with Elaine Murray, me and many others.
Elaine Murray: I
am of course happy to endorse those comments. Most of all, however, it was the
students who would not let the issue go once they discovered that the
I always believed that a creative solution could be found
to keep
Scottish ministers, an innovative solution was found.
I have no hesitation in congratulating the cabinet secretary on her work to achieve that. I thank her for her support in the previous session, including during my members' business debate in February. Saying that does not mean that I have changed my view about how Scotland benefits from being in the union, and I still do not see the need for some interminable conversation about the powers of the Parliament, but I will be happy to congratulate ministers when they use the powers of this Parliament to good effect, and I believe that the minister has done so on this occasion.
The Labour amendment takes up some residual concerns of staff and students and seeks reassurance. I have read it differently from how the minister has read it. I know that the Government cannot direct the funding council—I was told that often enough earlier this year—but I wanted the Parliament to ask the University of Glasgow to commit for the long term. We have all worked hard for Crichton, so I would like to hear Sir Muir Russell publicly saying on behalf of the university, "Yes, we are staying at the Crichton campus for the long term." We would all like to hear that, as none of us wants to be back here to go through another debate on the matter in three years' time. That is my interpretation of the Labour amendment.
The retention of the
David Mundell's comments about miracles were mentioned
yesterday. It is perhaps not the first time that the shadow Secretary of State for
The funding council and the
we should make it clear to everybody in Dumfries and
Galloway that they will not have to go through such a situation in the near
future, that the academic institutions are here to stay in
15:41
Christopher Harvie (Mid
We have heard much about exploiting
We can draw a circle with a 50-mile radius that has its
centre in Crichton. MacDiarmid was from Langholm. His 19th century
counterpart Thomas Carlyle—coiner of the "cash nexus" and "the
condition of
Crichton lies at the centre of one of the half-dozen great
cultural landscapes of
That is the inheritance. We must teach it, for our civilisation is in a tight place that requires intellect
and not emotion—in Carlyle's terms, a "seriousness amounting to despair". That reminds us of the thriller, "The Thirty-nine Steps", and of old Peter Pienaar—Buchan's invention—who always said, "We must make a plan."
We should forget about the bean-counting that brought about the threat and think instead about higher education as a birthright. Scots such as John Anderson, Lord Brougham and James Stuart pioneered mass higher education. Forty years ago, in the Open University—in which I was a tiny cog—Scots such as Jennie Lee and Walter Perry married that to new educational methods and communications technology. Such methods are changing yet again with the web and e-mail, which enable the facilitation of niche markets, regional studies and cultural tourism. As costs fall, the potentialities for local communities such as the Scottish south-west increase.
The Crichton's and
This is an age in which higher education has gone walkabout. The innovations that I have mentioned do not cost much, but they take tact, co-operation, and a stimulating environment, and they are all actually or potentially present at the Crichton and on both sides of the border in the partnership that they foresee, which is one of good neighbours, not one of strictly laid down laws of sovereignty and the like.
This is our chance for a new type of
15:46
Murdo Fraser (Mid
I have to oppose the rather mean-spirited Labour amendment. I gently point out to my friends in the Labour Party—and to their Liberal Democrat colleagues—that they had their chance to deal with the issue while they were in government and they failed to deliver. Frankly, it is a bit like carping for them to be criticising what is happening now.
In the short time available, I seek to address a couple of wider issues that arise from the situation
at the Crichton, the first of which is covered by the final part of the Executive's motion, where it refers to recognising
"the importance of the ability of students in rural and island communities to access higher and further education".
What happened at the Crichton campus highlights a wider issue. There is no doubt that delivering education in this way rather than on the traditional model of having a centre of learning on a campus comes at a cost. It costs more to have decentralised education. I hope that we would all come at the argument from the starting point of agreeing that decentralised education is a good thing. It gives people the opportunity to study closer to home. In particular, it gives mature students or those who have family commitments and cannot go down the traditional route of leaving their home town to study in a city or traditional seat of learning for terms at a time the opportunity to gain qualifications nearer to where they live.
Of course, to an extent, the Open University fulfils that role, but not everyone necessarily wants to follow the distance-learning route. People might prefer to study through a more traditional method. That is the sort of gap that the Crichton campus has filled successfully so far and will fill in the future.
This issue is not just one for the south-west of
The university of the Highlands and Islands is not
restricted to the Highlands and
The huge advantages to a town of having a university—the vibrancy that is created by the existence of a student quarter, the buzz, the energy and the spin-off from new ideas—are well documented, which is why it would be tremendous if university colleges were established in Inverness and Perth. Universities bring clear economic advantages. That is why the UHI project is so
exciting, for
However, funding is an issue. When the cabinet secretary winds up the debate, I would like to hear her say that the Scottish Government recognises that such a model of higher education delivery will ultimately be more expensive than the traditional, campus-based model. I would like the Executive to acknowledge the importance of such a model and say that it is prepared to bear the cost.
I will briefly address higher education funding as a whole.
The cabinet secretary is well aware that university principals are concerned
about a potential funding gap between Scottish institutions and those south of
the border. Scottish institutions have been well funded historically, but the
introduction of top-up fees down south has led to a situation in which English
institutions are becoming better funded and—perhaps more serious—have a
borrowing capacity to invest in infrastructure that exceeds that of Scottish
institutions. The situation will be exacerbated if the cap on top-up fees in
The funding gap is potentially serious. We cannot afford to
have the status of Scottish universities reduced as they lose qualified and
talented academics to the south, where there are opportunities for higher
salaries and better facilities. That is why we have called for an independent
review, to consider the future of higher education funding in
Jeremy Purvis: I acknowledge the member's call for an independent review. However, the outcome of the spending review is about to be reported to the Parliament. Will he support Liberal Democrat calls to fully fund Universities Scotland's bid for a £168 million increase in funding in the spending review, to ensure that the long-term situation that he forecasts does not come about?
Murdo Fraser: I must defer to my party's finance spokesman on the details of the budget. Mr Purvis is right to identify the medium-term issue during the next three years, but the independent review that we are calling for would look further ahead. If the review were established, it would not consider the next three years, because it would probably take two or more years to report; it would consider the situation in the longer term after 2009.
No party in the Parliament supports the introduction of
top-up fees in
I have addressed wider issues, but I reiterate my party's support for the motion and for the work that
has been done by the cabinet secretary and the Executive in helping to secure the future of higher education at the Crichton.
15:53
Jim Hume (South of
I will add to the list of great academic names of Dumfriesshire James Clerk Maxwell, the father of physics, who came up with a theory of relativity long before Einstein. I might take away John Buchan and James Hogg, who were Borderers and would have had no great link with Dumfriesshire—James Hogg was my old neighbour.
The Crichton campus in
I am sure that the campaign will continue, because continue it has to—the eye cannot be taken off the ball. The Crichton campus is a wonderful example of how dedication and co-operation can overcome obstacles to the provision of liberal arts and other university courses in an area that, until recently, was devoid of such a valuable asset.
The Crichton has succeeded in attracting young people into
university education from families where that has not been the norm.
Importantly, it has overwhelmingly surpassed expectations in encouraging age
and gender groups back into education, where others have struggled to do that.
Praise indeed has to go to the Crichton for being
With any co-operative project, buy-in from stakeholders is
important. On this occasion, the stakeholders are many and varied. As other
members have said, they are the University of Paisley,
The Crichton offers a great environment in which to work.
To those members who have not visited the campus, I say that it is probably one
of the most beautiful educational sites in the
I am sure that most members and the wider public will agree with me about the welcome nature of the cabinet secretary's announcement of the extra £1.5 million. Let us hope that the Administration is not just handing out a token sweetie—although I could do with a sweetie this afternoon. The announcement may be welcome, but an assurance that no other education projects or institutions will suffer as a result of that movement of funds would also have been welcome. The cabinet secretary has addressed the issue to some extent, but I am sure that we all agree on the usefulness of seeing the exact details and conditions.
Marketing the campus is essential. I am sure that damage
was done in the past as a result of uncertainty about whether the
We Liberal Democrats, students—past and present—and, of
course, staff need to see the Government make a long-term commitment to the
campus. We also need to see engagement from all the stakeholders, including the
The Liberal Democrats will not take our eye off the future
of the Crichton campus and its long-term sustainability. The focus will not go
away from the Crichton—ask any of the campaigners or the media. The Crichton
campus is a jewel in the crown not only of Dumfries and Galloway but of
15:58
Aileen Campbell (South of
Until I became elected to represent the South of Scotland
in the Parliament, my only real contact with Crichton was when, as a student at
the
Others who should be congratulated are the stakeholders at
the campus, including the
Although the new Government can take some of the credit, it
should not take it all. In addition to all those whom Derek Brownlee cited,
quite correctly, as having been involved with the campaign, I note that the
Crichton university campus students association ran an excellent campaign with
the assistance of students and staff, which attracted attention and captured
the imagination. As Elaine Murray mentioned, the students' passion for their
place of learning was shown by walking 100 miles to the
Parliament, so I am pleased that the campaigners are given due credit in the motion.
We are an open Parliament and we are accountable to the people. We need to respond to the people's wants and needs, and to do so for the greater good of the country. I can only imagine how delighted the students must be with the success of their campaign. I say that I can only imagine because, although I marched as a student along with thousands of others, our calls for free education fell on deaf ears.
Support for the campus has come not just from Dumfries and
The campus has also proven to be vital to the vibrancy and
long-term sustainability of the rural south-west of
When the Crichton was opened, the previous Executive was
rightly proud of the innovative nature of the project. The new Government is
carrying on that work and helping to develop that vision further. If we want a
smarter
16:03
David Stewart (Highlands and
acknowledge the work of Elaine Murray, who spoke earlier.
I should perhaps register an interest of sorts in that,
many years ago, I used to live and work in
The motion's final clause acknowledges
"the importance of the ability of students in rural and island communities to access higher and further education."
Of course, that has been a challenge in the Highlands and
It would be churlish not to recognise the work of the new
Scottish Government in putting extra funding into the project—I certainly
acknowledge it—but we also need to acknowledge the other long-term issues in
further and higher education. In the time available, I will discuss some of
those issues and will compare and contrast the Crichton project and UHI, with
which, as a
Like UHI, Crichton delivers higher education provision in
areas that have been underserved from the point of view of local access. Both
institutions need to be allowed to recruit more students and to grow to a
viable size—size is a crucial issue in higher education. That can happen only
if the Scottish Government allocates funding to the Scottish funding council
for additional student places. For example, although UHI caters for just under
3 per cent of the HE students in
In addition, further education colleges receive a funding premium that is based on island and rural remoteness, which, as many members have identified, recognises the higher costs in such areas and the relative inability of institutions located there to take advantage of economies of scale. At present, the same funding premium is not available through the higher education stream, so Crichton and UHI face similar challenges in delivering HE to island and rural populations.
Another point that has already been made, but which is worth stressing, is that although higher
education for young people in rural areas is vital, we must not forget the lifelong learning agenda, which is about adults of all ages. It is extremely important that they have access to the whole skills agenda, which often requires local access to part-time provision to tie in with their employment and personal commitments. Crichton and, to an even greater extent, UHI offer innovative examples of how that can work in the long term.
Given that young people in the south and south-west of
There are another three issues that I want to stress.
First, sponsoring universities have a key role to play in further development.
UHI has the
Secondly, we should never forget the crucial role that
regional development plays. A knowledge-based economy requires strong
universities at its core. Just as the south-west needs the Crichton campus, the
Highlands and
Thirdly, we must examine quality. The
The Crichton university campus and UHI are excellent
examples of slightly different models of further and higher education provision
for rural and island communities in the south-west and the north of
Living in rural and island communities should not be a barrier to education and training. We must keep young people in the communities in which they are born and brought up to ensure the future development of those communities. We should never forget the need to provide lifelong learning opportunities for adults of all ages so that they can maximise their potential. Education is the greatest agent of economic development. Long-term, sustainable solutions are necessary if we are to revitalise our rural and island communities.
16:09
Ian McKee (Lothians) (SNP): Other members have already adequately expressed their pleasure—shared, I am sure, by the whole chamber—at the news that Glasgow's Crichton campus has been saved. With due respect to Elaine Murray, and despite the wave of self-congratulation sweeping the chamber, I do not think that David Mundell alone thought, in February, that a miracle would be needed to produce this result. Truly, a miracle has occurred and we should be grateful for it.
As a former medical practitioner, I have long been
intrigued by the links between education and medicine at the campus. As
Alasdair Morgan pointed out, Mrs Elizabeth Crichton originally intended to use
her late husband's huge fortune—which, like the general practitioners of today,
he had earned in medical practice—to endow the
To understand fully the significance of this institution,
we need to understand something of the ways in which mental illness was
commonly treated in those days. Only a few years earlier, people paid to tease
and laugh at the inmates of
Mrs Crichton had other ideas. She commissioned Sydney Mitchell to design a true asylum, with elegant pavilions set in idyllic parkland. Rich patients could have their own servants and gourmet food, while the poorest patients lived in dormitories and were fed gruel. However, all benefited from the beauty of the surrounding countryside.
The first medical superintendent, Dr WAF Browne from
treatment. Patients had a task for every hour, they had their own magazine and they took part in plays such as Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night". Activities included singing, playing musical instruments and studying languages such as Latin, Greek, Hebrew and Arabic. The link with education was maintained even then, although the treatment, alas, turned out not to be very successful.
Although Dr Browne worked in
Mrs Crichton consented to be godmother to baby James, who
was given the surname Crichton-Browne to mark the honour. Later, he became a
medical student in Edinburgh and a president of the Royal Society of Medicine
which, at the time, was based in a tenement on
However, I digress. Mrs Crichton would no doubt have been
overjoyed to find that, 156 years after her hospital opened, it would be the
home of the university campus that she had originally desired. By strange
coincidence, at the same time, another of Sydney Mitchell's mental asylums,
Craighouse in
Elizabeth Crichton had the foresight to appreciate the fact
that the local provision of high-quality university education helps to keep
talented young people in an area instead of forcing them to cities, whence many
never return. The brain drain is certainly not a new phenomenon. That truth is
even more evident today. The loss of the Crichton campus, or even a substantial
part of it, would have been a disaster not only for the Dumfries area but for
the whole of south-west
I appreciate Hugh Henry's concern that one day the universities involved in the Crichton campus may pull out, even after £1.5 million of Government money has been invested—after all, he has had his fingers burned. He supported a Government that invested £50.75 million in
regional selective assistance for the Motorola factory in Bathgate, of which only £16.5 million was clawed back when it closed in 2001, with the loss of 3,100 jobs. His Government also invested £13.1 million in NEC Livingstone, of which only £2.5 million was recovered when it closed in 2002, with the loss of 1,260 jobs. I say to Mr Henry that no one can guarantee the future, but nothing ventured, nothing gained—and Crichton is a fantastically good investment.
My party has kept its electoral promise and I am proud to be associated with it.
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman): We move to wind-up speeches. I call Jeremy Purvis.
16:15
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): I, too, on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, commend all those involved in the campaign for the Crichton campus and all those who spoke with passion and determination about learning in south-west Scotland.
The debate has been interesting. I thank Mr Harvie and Dr
McKee for providing a history lesson. Two historical figures from my constituency
in the Borders were borrowed to demonstrate the history of learning in Dumfries
and
It is worth putting into an overall context the environment
in which we are having this full debate on this one campus. The Scottish
funding council published its report on
The new Administration has inherited not only a higher
education sector of quality, but a strong, combined further and higher
education sector. Of course, the Administration also inherited the difficult
situation affecting the Crichton campus in
higher education were available in south-west
In my constituency, which has the exciting co-location of
One role of this Parliament is to set the overarching aims,
and I know that there is considerable agreement across the chamber on that
principle. It is right and proper, therefore, that the Crichton campus has an
academic base for its future. It is also right and proper that the group that
developed the strategy has 14 stakeholders and partners, with the
"Many of the details of implementation of the strategy cannot be described at this early stage. Some of the actions will require more work to establish their feasibility and exactly how they would be implemented. But the strategy contains nothing that we do not think we can deliver together."
Crucially, such a partnership will provide for the future success of the Crichton campus and other proposed models for joint education provision by the further and higher education sectors.
The funding and the strategy are welcome, but one of the
minister's comments requires close scrutiny. The funded places will be for the
campus, but there is no guarantee about long-term sustainability, because if
the
Fiona Hyslop: It
is important that we, collectively, provide leadership to those in the
south-west of
teacher training programme unless it is in there for the long haul.
Jeremy Purvis: I
agree absolutely with the cabinet secretary. We should perhaps cast an eye to
the Scottish Borders campus, where
The academic strategy sets out a valid rider, which I quoted earlier and will quote again:
"However committed the partners are, the provision
described in this strategy will not continue unless there is sufficient demand
from students, most importantly in Dumfries and
That is not defeatist and nor is it appropriate to say that parties that highlight it are in some way skulking. We are realistic: it is our duty as members of the Scottish Parliament to scrutinise the work of the Administration and of institutions that receive public funds.
Rural areas are often characterised by greater fluidity in
student movements. We have seen a change in culture from the previous
preconceived ideas about the type of provision that is needed in rural areas,
some of which were held in the university sector. In my constituency, it was
proposed to move the school of textiles and design from the Borders to
I am a passionate advocate of rural provision, so I am
excited about the Crichton model and the Borders campus and other developments
that may follow. We are not developing a university of the south of
It is regrettable that some SNP members have suggested that
the developments are new and occurred post-election when, of course, they are
not. I support absolutely the work of the new Administration in taking on the
work of the previous one and the work of the south of
previous one to delivering those two strategies in the area.
Just because we are all committed to widening access to rural further and higher education does not mean that we should not scrutinise—as I said, that is our job as MSPs. The cabinet secretary said that where she wanted to bring consensus, the previous Administration had sought conflict. I am disappointed that she said that on the record, although I am not entirely sure that she believes it.
The co-location of Dumfries and
16:24
Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): By this stage in the debate, it has become abundantly clear that the Scottish Conservatives warmly welcome the new Scottish Executive's—or Government's—announcement of additional funding for the Crichton campus, and that we welcome the emergence of the academic strategy. We continue to support strongly the excellent work that is done at Crichton, and we praise the spirit that has been shown by staff and students in their campaign to protect their institution.
Many people have praised MSP colleagues in the south-west
who have done so much to make the case for resolving the impasse in favour of
the
In the introduction to the prospectus for the
"As long as humankind has been resident on this planet, individuals have wondered about the meaning of existence, asked questions about the plight of humanity ... and have speculated on whether there might be a better way of doing things."
In six minutes it would obviously be totally impossible to explain the meaning of existence, but it is right today to ask questions about the plight of people who live in rural areas and who may wish to take up the challenging questions that are encountered in higher and further education. On this side of the chamber, we will not hold back
from suggesting that there is perhaps a better way of doing things. Wider lessons can be learnt from Crichton, including lessons on university funding.
I want to refer to the specific events that have given rise
to this debate. At the time, we made plain our concerns over inaction that
would have resulted in the withdrawal of the
Many of the young people who leave are intelligent and
hard-working. They leave to go to university but never return, and although
school leavers from Dumfries and
As the introduction from Professor Cowan that I quoted implies, the Crichton campus was founded on noble ideals. Giving rural areas higher education provision is not least among those. If both undergraduates and postgraduates are given opportunities to access higher education in their local area, it is much more likely that young people will stay put, for reasons of convenience and cost. Equally, some young people—who might otherwise have been put off entirely—may decide to attend university for those same reasons. If a rural campus is very good, it may even attract a significant number of students from further afield, although that is more of a long-term goal for the Crichton.
It should also be noted that campuses such as the Crichton are often the only means of providing access to tertiary education to many mature students, who generally have families and jobs and hence find it difficult to relocate.
Fiona Hyslop: The member makes a very important point: the demographic challenges of the south-west are considerable. Does she acknowledge that we have to provide access for mature students so that they can provide the professional services that will be needed in the area, and does she also acknowledge that the
staff that will be needed in the campus, and the students that will be attracted to it, can help to provide a lifeline so that the demographic challenge in the south-west can be met?
Elizabeth Smith: The cabinet secretary makes a perfectly valid point. The security that goes along with resource provision will be extremely important.
There will also be benefits to the local economy in retaining bright young people in the area through their university years and beyond, in upskilling the existing local workforce, and in presenting local employers with easy access to a pool of very good-quality graduate labour, and to the technical expertise and facilities of a university.
More widely, we must add that the uncertainty that has been experienced over the future of the campus, however unfortunate that was, has bolstered the case for a wide-ranging review of the way in which all higher and further education is funded in Scotland. Sufficient funding must be provided and—as my colleague Murdo Fraser has said this afternoon—the provision of funding on a decentralised basis will be a major issue in the future.
Funding must be sustainable on a long-term basis—not just for a few years, but for a long time in the future. If we recognise that outreach campuses that offer a large number of courses to a small number of students in rural areas are desirable, we must also recognise that there is a need for different and much more generous funding. As well as supporting the cabinet secretary's motion, I urge her to turn her attention to the generous funding arrangements that must be put in place for all university campuses and all further developments in higher and further education.
16:30
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab): Like all members who have spoken, I warmly welcome this funding solution, which we all hope will secure the future of Crichton campus.
The debate began with some rather ungenerous remarks, not just from the cabinet secretary but from all sides of the chamber. It is worth my repeating that the Labour Party accepts the terms of the motion but has sought to add an amendment to ensure that the campus is genuinely sustainable in the future. It is not a critical or, as Murdo Fraser put it, a mean-spirited amendment; rather, we hoped that it would be helpful.
Derek Brownlee pointed out that the campaign to secure the Crichton campus was and is a cross-party campaign. It is clear from today's debate that
members from all parties are pleased by and relieved at the outcome. It is worth my pointing out that the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats have a positive record on Crichton. This debate is about not just the £1.5 million that the new Administration is investing, but the £30 million or more that the previous Executive invested over the past eight years.
Elaine Murray reminded us of Donald Dewar's delight and
pleasure at the opening of the Crichton campus, of subsequent funding decisions
by Wendy Alexander and Jim Wallace, and of the support that MSPs, including the
Presiding Officer, Alex Fergusson, and many others who are in the chamber today
have given to the campus. In particular, she reminded us of the campaign by
students and staff to maintain
Aileen Campbell, Christopher Harvie and David Stewart
highlighted not just the importance of the decision that ministers have taken,
but the need to move to the next stage in developing the further and higher
education institutions in the south-west of
I will echo another point that members have made today.
Although the funding decision is welcome, it is to be contrasted with the lack
of certainty that surrounds the funding of higher education generally. Hugh
Henry began by highlighting substantive issues such as the future of
probationers, the schools estate and class sizes, which are crying out to be
debated by Parliament. In particular, a question hangs over financing of our
university sector. Murdo Fraser, Liz Smith and Hugh O'Donnell made the point
that the new fees regime in
Despite today's debate and the welcome financial support
that has been provided, there are still underlying anxieties about Crichton's
future. I ask Mr Russell to expand on the cabinet secretary's opening remarks
about the long-term commitment to Crichton's future of
funding will be maintained and has not been provided to the detriment of other institutions, we are not minded to press our amendment. We will seek the chamber's permission to withdraw it.
16:34
The Minister for Environment (Michael Russell): I thank Mr Macintosh for indicating that the amendment will not be pressed—I am certain that that is the appropriate step. It reflects the spirit of the debate today, which has been overwhelmingly positive, and it reflects the assurances that the cabinet secretary has given, not only in the chamber but throughout the process.
I pay tribute to the overwhelmingly positive nature of the debate. The only negative contribution came at the beginning from Mr Henry. Mr Henry exemplified in my mind P G Wodehouse's memorable remark that
"it is never difficult to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine."
Mr Henry's approach was out of keeping with the nature of the debate, so I am glad that sense eventually prevailed with the charm of Mr Macintosh being applied to the problem.
On a serious note, I declare a number of interests in the
matter. The earliest of them is that I visited the Crichton site more than 40
years ago to visit a relative who was an in-patient at the Crichton when it
treated people with depression and other nervous illnesses. That was an
upsetting experience for a child, and I remember it very well. The air of hope
and the positive nature of the work that is now being done at the Crichton and
the way in which it draws people in never fails me to excite me every time I go
there, because it contrasts so strongly with that childhood memory. Another
interest that I wish to declare is that I gave the first public lecture at the
The Crichton is a place of amazing potential, which will be fulfilled not only as a result of the actions that have been taken by my friend the cabinet secretary but because of the tremendous abilities and enthusiasm of all those who are associated with it. We should pay tribute to everyone who has campaigned with vigour in recent months to ensure that that potential is not diminished in any way.
I am happy to pay tribute to Elaine Murray. She and I have had a strong and positive relationship on this and on other matters. I am glad that we have been able to work so constructively together with a wide range of people: Alex Fergusson,
Alasdair Morgan, members who have spoken in the debate such as Mr Brownlee, Mr Hume and Mr Hume's wife, Lynne Hume—who was a candidate in Dumfries during the recent election—and a range of other people.
The real impetus to the campaign has come from the people
of
Members: Hear, hear.
Michael Russell: Absolutely. I am happy that it may happen again.
Dumfries was invaded by a group of men on horseback who
fenced the market cross, burned the articles of union and told the provost of
Dumfries, who was a delegate to the Parliament, that on no account should he
support the Act of Union. That action made
The investment that is being made today is not small by any means, but Mr Fraser in particular raised the issue of funding for rural delivery. My colleague the cabinet secretary informs me that the Scottish Funding Council is reviewing the costs of delivery, including the costs of rural delivery and delivery in areas of deprivation, as part of its funding methodology review. The cabinet secretary will, apparently, write soon to the chair of the council to reinforce the messages that require to be reinforced.
Jeremy Purvis and Elizabeth Smith raised the question of demand. It is important to acknowledge that the number of places that the
package allocates for primary teacher education is a conservative estimate of continuing local demand. There is a larger demand that is currently met outside—with an associated loss to—the area. Given that demand, I am certain that the places will be taken up. Regarding demand for the liberal arts, there are currently more students than funded places, which was one of the problems that already existed.
The Government aims to—and does—work competently, quickly and with vision. There are three aspects to the Government's approach to the Crichton campus. First, we worked with all partners to deliver an effective, value-for-money solution. Secondly, we acted quickly and ensured that others did the same. Thirdly, we considered the issues from fresh perspectives to identify a creative solution. It might, as David Mundell MP has asserted, have required a miracle, but the miracle was the ability to consider things in a different way. That is precisely what the cabinet secretary and her colleagues have done.
Jeremy Purvis: On a factual point, the minister said that the Government acted quickly to rectify the situation. Will he tell Parliament when work started on the draft academic strategy?
Michael Russell: Mr Purvis has to take on board that the question is not when the work started but when it was completed. On 8 March, I spoke at a public meeting in Annan with the First Minister—of course, he was not First Minister then. He made a clear, high-level commitment that a new SNP Government would ensure that the issue was resolved. If my memory serves me correctly, he became First Minister on 16 May. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning took office a day later, so she had one day less to work on the matter. The solution was announced on 20 August. Time was of the essence and the solution was delivered such that there was no delay whatever.
We have to consider the detail of what the Government has
done as well as the broad sweep. We did not respond to the
and innovative multicampus strategy. Again, it will make a contribution to the area and the nation.
In the minute or two that remain to me, I will concentrate
on an issue that is particularly important to me, given my responsibilities as
Minister for Environment. The development of the new and unique carbon centre
will bring to the region additional postgraduate and research opportunities in
a field that is of national and international significance and which has clear
economic potential. One cannot live or work in the south-west of
The issues of climate change will face us all for a long time to come and some of the solutions will come from the carbon centre at the Crichton campus. I pay tribute to those who are involved: Mary-Ann Smyth and Vimal and Gillian Khosla are key figures in promoting the carbon centre, which will help to address the needs of the energy sector in the region and be of national significance. It will drive the local aspiration to become the first carbon-neutral region in these islands. It will provide opportunities to commercialise the activities of the higher and further education sectors—again, good news for both the region and the nation.
That development is an example of innovative thinking. It
shows where we can look to utilise natural resources and enable communities to
benefit economically and environmentally from renewable energy. That
demonstrates that rural communities can benefit from cutting-edge industrial development
in 21st century
The Crichton carbon centre will work collaboratively with a
range of Scottish universities, offering academic expertise in return for
access to research facilities. It is a great example of
The Government's expectations for the Crichton campus are high. We would not have been involved, nor would we have intervened as we have if we did not have the highest expectations and strongest aspirations for it. We look forward to working with the people who work at Crichton and with all the people of the south-west so that it can become an exemplar in innovative delivery of higher education in rural communities. It is now important that the people who are involved—those
who have been most affected and who have campaigned—can move forward with confidence. That is why I am glad that the negative amendment will be withdrawn.
Parliament can send a completely united message: Crichton
can move forward, and we support it. The academic strategy and the Government's
additional support will help the region to seize the opportunities that are
offered. A strong foundation has been put in place, not only to preserve what
already exists but to move in new directions that will meet the needs and
expectations of the people of Dumfries, the south-west and the whole of
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman): As we have reached the end of the debate before the time that is set out in the business programme for the next item of business, under rule 7.4.1(d) I now suspend the meeting until 4.59 pm.
16:46
Meeting suspended.
17:00
On resuming—
[…]
Decision Time
17:00
[…]
The Presiding Officer: On the third question, Ken Macintosh said in his closing speech that the amendment in Hugh Henry's name would not be pressed. Does Hugh Henry seek to withdraw the amendment?
Hugh Henry (Paisley South) (Lab): I seek to withdraw the amendment.
The Presiding Officer: Do we agree that amendment S3M-416.1, in the name of Hugh Henry, be withdrawn?
Amendment, by agreement, withdrawn.
The Presiding Officer: The fourth question is, that motion S3M-416, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, on a sustainable future for the Crichton university campus, be agreed to.
Motion agreed to.
That the Parliament congratulates local campaigners, including MSPs from all parties, on effectively highlighting the issues surrounding the future of Crichton University Campus in Dumfries, leading to a successful outcome; commends the work of the local stakeholders, academic partners and the Scottish Funding Council in developing an academic strategy for the campus; welcomes the allocation of additional resources by the Scottish Government to protect existing provision, help deliver the strategy and widen the range of higher education opportunities delivered in the south west of Scotland on a long-term sustainable basis, and recognises the importance of the ability of students in rural and island communities to access higher and further education.
Reference: