Skip to main content

House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee - 'Universities and Scotland'

The report examines the challenges and opportunities faced by Scottish universities as the sector adjusts to the pandemic and life outside the EU, and assesses what further action is needed by the UK and Scottish Governments. It breaks down the challenges and opportunities into three key areas: the finances of Scottish universities; student welfare, experience and opportunities; and academic research by Scottish universities. The report is based on evidence from written submissions and oral sessions, including with Ministers from the UK and Scottish Governments, and two private informal roundtables, one with students and one with academics. It makes a series of recommendations outlined below, some of which have implications for higher education not just in Scotland, but across the UK.

The full report can be found here

At–a–glance:

  • In mid-2020 insolvency was “a very real prospect” facing a number of universities in Scotland. It is quite possible that without significant financial investments from the UK and Scottish Governments, some institutions may not have survived. The Scottish Government’s commitment to make every effort to ensure no university becomes insolvent because of the pandemic is welcomed. (p3)
  • HE in Scotland is dependent on international students to fill funding gaps. As a result of the pandemic, international student numbers are volatile. Scottish universities should work with universities in other parts of the UK to seek out examples of best practice in diversifying income streams away from potentially volatile international student fees. In doing so great care should be taken to ensure that core focus on education and research is not lost in favour of commercialised corporate ventures. (p3)
  • EU student numbers dropped by about 40% for 2021–22 – a lower drop than many in the sector had feared. The UK Government should launch a new or expanded scholarship scheme to encourage the most talented EU students to study in the UK and Scotland. This would help heal UK-EU divides following Brexit, assist in combating falling EU student numbers in Scotland and provide a new pathway to attract the brightest and best from the EU. The UK Government should also increase funding to Study UK to increase its capacity to target EU students who may be hesitant to study in the UK. (p3)
  • The Scottish Government has indicated a desire to remain in the Erasmus+ programme. If it is willing to cover the associated costs, and should the EU consent to Scottish participation, the UK Government should not block this endeavour. (p5)
  • The Turing scheme, which will replace the Erasmus + programme, will not – as currently envisaged – support inward placements to the UK and there is currently no long-term funding commitment beyond year one. Inward placements are an important source of income, support cultural education and promote Scottish universities international agenda. The scheme should be continued with at least the same level of funding in future years, but also be expanded to incorporate the funding of international student and academic staff placements to the UK. (p5)
  • While the Scottish Government has invested in student wellbeing and mental health during the pandemic, the committee heard evidence of structural underfunding that predated the pandemic, long waiting lists and poor triaging of mental health inquiries. This pushed the provision of student mental health support onto academic staff, many of whom report facing challenges of their own, and may not be appropriately trained. The Scottish Government should review current triaging processes to ensure students are being quickly directed to the appropriate services and support providers. Further investment may be needed in order to shorten mental health support waiting lists, thereby also reducing pressures on higher education academic staff. (p4)
  • Scottish institutions have played an important part in combating Covid-19 and will have an equally important role in the recovery. Scottish Universities should be given greater prominence and influence within UKRI decision-making structures, including a seat on the UKRI Board (as is already the case for some English institutions), and a seat on the UKRI Executive Committee. (p5)
  • The Government should be praised for ensuring the UK’s continued participation in the Horizon programme. Concerns have however been raised about the UK’s status as a non-EU member. The UK Government should ensure that the UK reaps the maximum possible benefits from Horizon Europe and is not disadvantaged as a non-EU member or inappropriately excluded from relevant programmes. If the UK receives less in competitive grants than its financial contributions, the UK Government should explore why this might be and seek to adjust its financial contribution accordingly. (p6)
  • The post-study work visa plays a key role in attracting, and then retaining, the brightest and best students from overseas. The Global Talent visa is also very welcome, but its cost should be addressed. The UK Government should reduce the cost of visas for international researchers and their families, to a level competitive with EU countries. It should also take a pragmatic approach to researcher visa extensions, especially in light of Covid-19, which has caused unavoidable delays to some research projects. (p6)
  • During the inquiry, evidence was heard that EU academics working in Scotland have been returning home, and that job applications from EU academics are being withdrawn, because they no longer feel welcome following Brexit. The UK Government must promote a positive narrative that, whilst we have left the EU, the UK and Scotland remain an attractive place to work for EU nationals and that they are not just ‘allowed’ to work here, but are actively welcomed. (p6)

 

Implications for governance

Governing bodies in Scottish universities will be well aware of significant budget pressures over the last decade. Although Scottish Government funding for universities increased by 0.1 per cent in cash terms from 2014-15 to 2017-18, this equated to a real terms reduction of 5 per cent. Taken with a 7 per cent reduction between 2010-11 and 2014-15, the financial landscape has been a very challenging one.

According to Alastair Sim, Director of Universities Scotland, universities are entirely reliant on entrepreneurial activity, principally international, to fill funding gaps. This means fluctuations in international student applications, or changes in the value of SFC funding, has big implications across the sector in Scotland, and for some universities more than others. The pandemic has exposed and exacerbated this financial vulnerability.

Governors will note the report’s warning that some institutions have become too reliant on the international student market, and its recommendation that Scottish institutions should explore the avenues that universities in other parts of the UK have taken to diversify income streams away from potentially volatile international student fees.

Other points on financial instability raised in the report that have a bearing on governance include what, according to the SFC, are the main continuing financial pressures facing Scottish universities: the fall in stock markets; significant drops in regular donations and income from endowments; commercial income reductions from residence income, catering and sport; additional costs of IT and online teaching, assessment and feedback; and contract costs associated with the suspension of work on campus redevelopment programmes.

Research funding is also an area impacted by the pandemic. As well as funding from the SFC and UKRI, universities are dependent on sources such as charities and businesses. Giving evidence to MPs, Chris Pearce, at the University of Glasgow, raised concerns that medical research charities were scaling back because of a loss of donations due to the pandemic and this was likely to lead to a “significant drop in charity funding of research”.

A further blow will be the UK Government’s temporarily reduction in the funds it will make available for Official Development Assistance (ODA) from 0.7 per cent to 0.5 per cent of UK Gross National Income (GNI). UKRI has written to HE institutions to explain that this decision would have a “significant impact” on the work it funded under ODA programmes.

Given these pressures, a number of those giving evidence to the committee argued for a strengthening of Scottish representation on UKRI decision making bodies.

In terms of student welfare, the report highlighted that mental health had been flagged as a particular area of concern. The UK and Scottish Government’s have made extra provision in this area, however concerns were heard about how the burden of dealing with student mental health issues was increasingly falling on academic staff which, in turn, could be a risk to staff wellbeing.

The report suggests that a Scottish Government review of how mental health is supported in universities might be timely, to ensure students are getting the help they need quickly enough.

An area of discussion that will be of interest to governors with widening access oversight was the unofficial cap on the number of Scottish students studying at Scottish universities created by the Scottish government’s funding of free tuition.  Figures were quoted in evidence supplied to MPs that only 55 per cent of applications from Scottish students were offered a place at Scottish universities, compared to 74 per cent of English students at Scottish universities. This has the potential to raise questions about how institutions ensure Scottish institutions are open to Scottish students.

Read the full report

Keep up to date – sign up to Advance HE communications

Our monthly newsletter contains the latest news from Advance HE, updates from around the sector, links to articles sharing knowledge and best practice and information on our services and upcoming events. Don't miss out, sign up to our newsletter now.

Sign up to our communications