Richard Baker : I know that Mr Brown is new, but I suggest that, if he had wanted to hear constant negativity, he need only have listened to members on the SNP benches in the past four years.

I cannot help but wonder whether, when the First Minister introduced the strategy last week, articulating aspirations for the sustainable economic growth that we all want for Scotland, he did not at least pause for thought—particularly given his surroundings at the University of Glasgow—that there was a crucial mismatch between the strategy and what was to be delivered by his Government in the spending review the very next day.

We can agree that the strategy should place at its heart the vision of a highly skilled workforce and economic growth, capitalising on Scottish excellence in research and innovation.

However, that vision needs to be backed by investment, which is where the Government's approach falters.

Richard Baker: I will give way to Comical Alex—Comical Alex Neil, that is.

Alex Neil: Does the member support the Labour Party policy down south of university tuition fees of up to £3,000 and the possible lifting entirely of the cap on such fees?

Richard Baker: As Mr Neil knows, that was not—and has consistently not been—part of our manifesto.

Mr Neil talked about fighting for Scotland, but the reality of the situation—which would exist both with independence and under the current settlement—is that his Government's actions on university funding are putting our universities at a competitive disadvantage to their English counterparts.

On that issue, it is the other parties that are standing up for Scotland.

Richard Baker: I do not agree that the budget maintains competitiveness.

I also saw the initial press release from Universities Scotland, which talked about the budget threatening competitiveness.

I understand today from Universities Scotland's own figures that, despite the triple or quadruple counting—whatever is going on in Mr Swinney's defence—it believes that, in real terms, it is getting only a quarter of what it asked for.

That is the stark reality of the funding crisis that the Government is creating in the universities sector and which will defeat the purpose that the economic strategy outlines.

The strategy contains aspirations with which I disagree, and it is unfortunate that the spending review announcement has undermined the aims with which we could agree.

The strategy has a fixation with selectively comparing ourselves with Scandinavian economies, but it does not refer to personal taxation levels in those areas or to the fact that, put together, all those Scandinavian countries have only one university in the world's top 100, whereas Scotland has two.

Perhaps we will head in the same direction as Scandinavia if the Government gets its way.

Richard Baker: The strategy would have done better at achieving more skilled workers if more commitments had been made to modern apprenticeships—it appears that none has been made.

In addition, yesterday I learned from Amicus that there are worries about what is happening to individual learning accounts. Improvements could be made.

Skills are important.

It is unfortunate that the Government is not delivering what it wants to achieve on skills.

Unlike the Government's economic strategy, in "A Smart, Successful Scotland" and the former coalition's refreshed strategy we put our money where our mouth was.

We increased investment in our universities by 18 per cent and investment throughout tertiary education by 22 per cent, which resulted in rewards.

The bleak picture of our economy in the economic strategy is not justified when we have had record-high employment.

The evidence is that people—particularly graduates—are benefiting from obtaining rewarding careers. Of course, we have also had consistent growth in our economy.

On the validity of targets, Derek Brownlee and Iain Gray talked about the UK growth target.

However difficult achieving targets is, it has been made tougher by the Government's inability to have joined-up thinking between its economic strategy and its spending review, which was published the day after the strategy was issued.

The funding settlement could not come at a worse time for universities, because the research assessment exercise is approaching.

The previous Executive's funding increase helped universities to win more than our fair share of UK research funding, which developed sectors such as the life sciences and brought in private investment from companies such as Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.

Under the current Government, universities have received a paltry funding settlement.

However appalling the Government's dropping of a firm commitment on student loans was—some of us expected that volte-face—we could not have foreseen from the strategy a funding settlement for universities that would cause Sir Muir Russell to warn that our universities' competitiveness with their English counterparts is threatened and would cause others to warn that, if we do not allow for extra activity, the settlement will have an impact on academic staff's pay.

That is a cost to our economy.

How on earth does that settlement follow the Government's statement in its economic strategy that it will

"ensure a funding system for Further and Higher Education ... that is responsive to the needs of individuals, employers and the wider economy"?

It is clear that the spending review will not do that.

On the day when the spending review was announced, Sir Muir Russell said:

"this settlement appears inconsistent with the Scottish Government's aspirations for economic growth in its strategy published only yesterday".

In that context, I give Fiona Hyslop full marks for bravery in responding to the debate.

I understand that she will meet principals tomorrow.

I hope that a rethink can take place on their crucial funding settlement.

The Government cannot afford to repent at leisure, although from Mr Swinney's and Mr Neil's statements it does not seem about to repent.

The Government's position is inconsistent and represents an opportunity cost to our economy.

It needs a rethink.

The only opposition to the aspiration to achieve economic growth comes from the Government's own actions on university funding.

Back to previous page