 Good morning and a warm welcome to the 16th meeting of the Education, Children and Young People Committee in 2023. Our convener, Sue Webber, Bob Doris and Ross Greer all send their apologies for this morning. I would like to welcome Mellon Rechgan Gallacher and Ivan McKee as substitute members of the committee. Stephanie Callaghan is joining us remotely today. As a reminder for those of us joining us remotely, if you would like to come in at any point, please put an R in the chat function, and the clerks will let me. The first item on our agenda today is an evidence session on international learning exchange programmes. I welcome Susanna Galvan, executive director and Ilead Morris, head of operations at Taith. They are joining us remotely, a warm welcome. Liz Greene, workforce and practice manager at YouthLink Scotland, who is joining us this morning in person. We have a number of questions from different members who will direct their questions to either Liz Greene in the room or our witnesses from Taith down the line. Our first questions are to YouthLink Scotland, and they come from Stephanie Callaghan. I suppose that the first question is the obvious one. What impact has an Erasmus Plus withdrawal had on youth work in Scotland? It has had a huge impact at a time when the youth work sector is stretched. It is a very difficult time for the sector and for young people. They need youth work and they need opportunities to learn and grow more than ever. Having funding and learning opportunity ecosystem removed from Scotland is significant in terms of the financial value of Erasmus Plus. In the last seven-year cycle of the programme, Youth Projects in Scotland received £5,389,664. The funding cycle for this seven years has in Erasmus Plus doubled, so potentially we are missing out on €10.7 million. That is a quite significant financial impact on a sector that is really in need of funding for young people who need these opportunities more than ever. It is the young people who do not have opportunities to travel and to gain the benefits of international exchange and intercultural learning that the youth strand of Erasmus Plus and the youth work sector can support to have these experiences. Research has shown that it is those young people who gain the most from those experiences for whom it is most transformative and life-changing. Having a key route to these experiences unavailable to the sector and to those young people is a significant negative impact to the youth work sector and to young people. Finally, the youth volunteering strand, which has supported charities and youth organisations across the youth sector and beyond, is significant in terms of long-term volunteering programmes that we heard from British Red Cross, who are looking at potentially having to end parts of their 25-year youth volunteering programme because they do not have the opportunity to continue that funding. We are very hopeful that the Scottish Educational Exchange programme will enable a change in some of that negative impact. Thank you very much. That is very challenging indeed. You have said that young people need these opportunities more than ever, and I am very aware just now. I have to declare an interest here as a mother with a six-year pupil that is just leaving at this point in time. Our young people leaving in six years just now have really harshly impacted Covid status during their third year at school, lasted right the way through their nap fours and ffives and into their hires. They did not benefit with the previous year from getting those upgrades automatically as well when they were appealing too. It really does not seem fair that a Rasmus Plus replacement is not coming in time for them, that it is a bit too late for them when they have been through quite so much there. If there is anything specifically that you would be making recommendations about, that the Scottish Government can be looking to do to monitor and support those young people and maximise their positive outcomes and experiences when they are missing out in this part? That is a really good question. In terms of monitoring, investing in research on the impact on young people would be significant. I know that we have done some research on the youth work sector's response to Covid. I would like to consult with colleagues, because that is a really broad question, and there are so many aspects of life that that is going to affect. Investment in an exchange programme and in the youth work sector would mean that those young people would be able to gain some of those experiences if it came soon enough. Most of the youth strand of the Rasmus Plus went up to 30, and youth work in Scotland works with young people up to the age of 25, so if we were able to get the strand up and running soon, it would be possible for those young people to still benefit from those experiences. That is great. Maybe having a focus on that age group specifically then would be helpful. I think that that would be really of real interest. The sector has supported those young people throughout Covid and is keen to support them through the challenging time that they are having. We know that Rasmus Plus opportunities helped young people to gain skills for employment and helped young people who would not necessarily have gone on to further or higher education or employment to take those steps and to have much greater life opportunities than they would have had otherwise. We have an example from the Jack Kane community centre in which they took a group of young people, while the young people developed a programme and they did an exchange in Italy focusing with their peers on employment. All of the young people from that project went on to further education or employment when they were from Greater Craig Miller, one of the fourth most deprived areas of Scotland. Their prospects to move on to those opportunities were not necessarily there, and that is one example of significantly life changing opportunities through youth exchange. Just finally, if there is time for a very short question there, can I ask if there is anything specifically as well around additional young people with additional support needs that maybe Guggle to get that support during the pandemic, if there is anything specific there that you would like to talk about? I would like to follow up on that with colleagues who have got specific expertise in that. The comment that I would make around the educational international exchange is that one of the aspects of Rasmus Plus was that it was really trying to engage young people with fewer opportunities. Actually, that is one of the positive aspects of the Turing scheme that they have outlined specific provisions to support young people to participate who might need that additional support. In the proposed principles that we put forward to the Scottish Government team around the new programme, we have suggested, as well as having a very accessible programme, having an inclusion fund, which means that if there were costs for support and proper participation in a programme that was not identified in the initial application that they could be met so that young people with additional support needs who might not be in the original group could be well supported to make the most of the opportunities. A few points of follow-up that we would be interested to receive. I have a supplementary from my colleague Ruth Maguire. Thank you, convener. Good morning. Liz, you painted a great picture there of the value him of the schemes and obviously the type of young people who are missing out. Can you give committee an indication of the number of young people who are participating? I may need to follow up on all of those details. With the youth strand, it is not so easy to drill down to those numbers specifically. I apologise, I just need to get my figures up. I am really sorry, I am going to need to come back with the numbers, particularly because some of the programmes were around building capacity for practitioners as well and strategic partnerships in the sector. The number of young people positively impacted by those is a huge ripple effect, but I will come back with those numbers. That would be helpful. Thank you. A small supplementary from Stephen Kerr. Can you also tell us what the annual cost of those activities would have been when we had Erasmus Plus? You mentioned £10.7 million, but you said that that was a big increase, so what would it normally be? Each year, the successful applications for the youth strand over the last seven years of the programme came to nearly €5.4 million annually. It is different each year. In 2020, it was €656,000. That was the Covid year, of course. Is about €5 million about the average cost? That was €5 million over a seven-year period. Five million is a total. One of the elements of Erasmus Plus was that, like all European funding programmes, it is not a full-cost recovery, so there is an expectation that organisations will be part of the funding. One of the things that we have an opportunity to do in Scotland is to make it more accessible to smaller grass-roots organisations by enabling that full-cost recovery. For example, with the youth exchanges with Erasmus Plus, there was funding for accommodation, a set amount per day for accommodation and subsistence, a set amount for travel for each young person. There is no funding available for staff time, but staff members from the youth work sector are supporting young people. The preparation, which is significant, could have taken two years to prepare young people to go on the exchange and the follow-up. We have an opportunity to really support the sector to more grass-roots organisations to participate. I think that the point that I was just trying to highlight or get out was the cost. The cost over a period of years is very modest. It is a very modest cost to spread over those years. It is a pity that it is really, frankly. For a significant impact. Thank you, Mr Kerr. In your follow-up list screen, if there is anything further you want to clarify in that regard, that would be useful for the committee. I am now going to turn to colleague Willie Rennie, who has got some questions for our witnesses here from Tithe. So, our friends in Wales, I wonder if you could just give us an introduction to Tithe, how it works, how successful it has been and what your organisational structure is, where you run from and how it is funded. So, good morning everyone. Apologies that we couldn't join in Edinburgh. We are joining from Cardiff. Thank you for inviting us. We are very proud about the Tithe programme. The Tithe programme was launched in February last year. This was the outcome of an announcement by the Welsh Government back in March 2021 to make an investment of £65 million over a period of four years to support an international learning exchange programme for Wales. That was clearly a decision made as a result of the decision to step out of the Erasmus Plus programme or the UK to step out of the Erasmus Plus programme. Following that announcement in March 2021, it was agreed that Cardiff University would host the programme. Cardiff University set us up as a subsidiary company of the university, and the reason why that was done is to ensure that the funding agency that is Tithe would have a degree of independence and, hopefully, would ensure that a level of sustainability may there be any kind of changes in government moving forward. The governance structure, as I said, was set up as a subsidiary company of Cardiff University and, as such, we report to a board of directors. On that board, we have directors who are linked to Cardiff University but also independent directors, with one of them being the chair of our advisory board, who is Kirsty Williams and who was the former minister for education in Wales. We have an advisory board as well. Obviously, the advisory board has the world challenge and sends check developments with the programme in terms of the accounts, policies and strategy. The decision-making board is the board of directors. Of course, the programme is fully funded by the Welsh Government. As our funders, we also report to the Welsh Government that we have a grant agreement letter setting out the conditions of the grant of 65 million that is given to us and that we disperse on the behalf. As such, there are certain reporting conditions within the grant agreement letter and how that money is utilised. As I said, the programme was launched last year in February under the name Tythe. Tythe means journey in Welsh. The name was trips in by the people of Wales through a public naming competition. The programme is very much set up following some of the strengths and learnings from Erasmus Plus, but we also have a view to make the programme very Welsh-focused in terms of listening to that there was a consultation process that took place with the learning sectors across Wales to make sure that the programme was just like a copy and paste of Erasmus Plus, but hopefully filled some of the gaps of Erasmus Plus and strengthened some of some of the aspects. The programme is open to all learning sectors across Wales, so that's higher education, whether education, vocational education and training schools, the youth sector and adult learning sector as well, and eligible organisations in Wales can apply for funding that will support outward mobility from Wales to the world, but on top of that they can also apply for funding to enable inward mobility into Wales as well. The percentage of inward mobility funding is 30 per cent of the total outward mobility funding that they apply for. I think that one of the key aspects, and we glad that Liz mentioned this in her address just now, is that TAFE seems to be an all-inclusive scheme, so inclusion, access, participation, widening participation are very much at the very heart of the programme. We are trying to deliver a programme that will reach out not just to all these sectors but to organisations within the sectors that perhaps haven't had the opportunity to benefit from these opportunities before, maybe because they thought it was too difficult or too bureaucratic or it wasn't for them, and within those organisations obviously we want to reach out to participants from widening participation backgrounds, disadvantaged backgrounds, participants with disabilities, additional learning needs and so on and so forth. Of course it's very early stages, we had the first round of funding in 2022, which was successful, and now as the projects are started to be delivered, we're starting to get data, and that data will allow us to identify any gaps in terms of meeting the aims and the objectives of the programme. We're kind of evolving as we go and see where we need to make adjustments to the programme being policies or processes to make it better and to make sure that we meet those objectives. In a nutshell, but I'm sure there'll be more questions. That's very helpful. Tell me about the problems that you've faced and how you've overcome them. We've heard concerns that perhaps with the free movement of people ending, that there may be problems with visas. Is that an issue with the rest of the world? What are the problems that you've faced and how have you overcome them? Internally and from a Welsh perspective, one of the challenges was the timeline in which the programme was set up. We were given a mandate to start having mobility happening from September 2022, and of course with the programme launched in the same year, you can imagine that we were working towards very tight deadlines. That was one key challenge that we are proud that we got to where we are today. Another challenge has been, obviously, it's a great feature of tight that includes so many sectors, but we want to make sure that the policies, processes and the criteria of the project are consistent and transparent and open, but sometimes meeting the needs of each of the sectors that are so different can be a little bit of a challenge. On the other hand, we have an advantage that Wales is a relatively small nation, so we are able as a programme to engage very proactively with the sectors. They can pick up the phone and talk to us at any point, so our relationship and our engagement with the sectors is just as important as the technical aspect of managing and dispersing grants. As you say, externally, one of the challenges is that it has been visas. Of course, there is an inward mobility aspect to tight, as I said. Particularly with work-based mobilities, things like apprenticeships or work-based learning, the current visa regime makes it really difficult for those mobilities to take place. Obviously, we are constantly racing with Welsh Government, which is the kind of feed that we are getting from beneficiaries. This is a topic that we discuss also with international, particularly European partners, when we meet them as a point of challenge. On the outward mobility, this can be a challenge as well, particularly because tights sometimes are not recognised or are not known as much as erasmas, so it is making sure that the programme is known and that it will facilitate those mobilities. Of course, visas and immigration issues are beyond our control, but it is certainly one challenge for us. You have overcome it, because you have had 5,000 people who have benefited from it over the past year, is that right? You have obviously had some success with that. The first round of applications that we had, we had two pathways, as we call them, so two open funding calls. In 2022, combined with those two funding calls, we had more than 100 applications with more than 70 successful applications from across all sectors. Those projects combined will deliver more than 6,000 mobilities, both inward and outward. However, it has been successful, but with work, volunteering and apprenticeships being part of the mix, that is obviously where the key challenge will be moving forward. I am pleased now to move to Bill Kidd, who has some further questions for Youth Link Scotland. Thank you very much, convener, and welcome to the screen. You did touch on this a wee bit before in a Stephanie Callaghan reply, but what has been the impact of erasmas plus withdrawal on youthworks links with Europe? Are they still in the same boat as they were? I will just get some of my notes. We are trying really hard to keep our relationships going. There is such goodwill from partners, particularly to us in Scotland, knowing that we want to be outward facing. We want to maintain these relationships for our sector for the young people that we are working with. We are trying really hard to keep those links going. The longer that we wait, the more fragile those relationships get, but at the moment there is still success in those relationships. A couple of examples would be we worked with the Bavarian Youth Council, our counterpart, to run a two-way exchange programme for youth workers on digital youth work and gender, and that was funded by the Bavarian Youth Foundation. We are extremely lucky to have strong partnerships that our partner was willing to seek funding for that bilateral exchange. Also, across our membership, we have a lot of members that are part of international organisations such as their uniformed groups and YMCA. They maintain their international connections beyond Europe and outwith erasmas plus funding, but in a time where everything is more financially stretched, not having that funding source to go to for the European work is always a challenge. We are also part of an international youth policy dialogue group around youth work policy across Europe and beyond. I think that there is a member in that group from Japan as well. Keeping those connections strong and trying to keep the door open for when there is a funding programme so that we can move swiftly. One further comment is that we are still part of the Council of Europe, and there is some work between the Council of Europe and the European Union Partnership for Youth. There is a European youth work agenda that is across the full Council of Europe and the European Union membership and a process to try to implement that, internationally called the bond process, in the recommendations that we have made to Scottish Government. It is critical that the youth work strand of the new programme aligns with that agenda to make sure that it is relevant to partners. Exactly what Susanna was saying, encourage people to buy into it when they could go to erasmas plus. Why would they want to take part in the Scottish education exchange programme while it aligns with the agenda that they are working to already? In Scotland, the youth work that we have is fantastic and we are making huge inroads to that agenda already. There is a great opportunity to make the most of that. You mentioned the financial side and funding. What sort of financial impact is no longer having access to erasmas plus? Has this had on member organisations? Are they struggling to get by or are they managing to cover this? It really depends on the organisation. We spoke with the British Red Cross who are potentially looking at closing a standard of their youth volunteering programme and losing staff if they cannot get that additional funding. At the moment, some of our sector organisations are in the—some of the projects were funded up to three years that we could apply to the end of 2020s. They are still benefiting from that. They are still able to pursue those projects, but that is coming to an end and there is no replacement. We will probably see people continuing to struggle. It is varied across the sector. For a lot of people, it has been about closing down those opportunities in order to keep running at all and not being able to pursue them. For some, there have been organisations that have closed or significantly reduced their work because of that. On that basis, youth work organisations are looking to continue to deliver and so on. Have many of them been able to explore alternative activities that they can use to replace the analysis plus in order to avoid that financial closure? We are a resilient and creative sector. We are always trying to find new sources of funding. We have examples from the scouts of the young people fund-raising themselves for their international exchange, doing bagpacking and so on. That is not sustainable for every organisation. For a lot of young people, that step is more than they can do in terms of getting that preparation and being able to ready themselves for it. I think that people are looking for funding elsewhere. We have encouraged people to apply to touring in partnership with schools and colleges. I think that it is really hard. We will probably get to that later, but it is not really made for our sector. There is one bilateral source of funding that I know about UK, German connections. There are sometimes small pots of funding that can be used for youth exchanges through that source. Actually, we are part of a group trying to look at reviewing that programme and growing it for the future as well. We will be putting a survey out to the sector in coming months around how that programme can be augmented. However, there are not that many bilateral relationships, and that programme is funded by the foreign officers of those two countries. It would be useful to grow further bilateral relationships. In spite of the financial difficulties, we are keeping a positive outlook on things anyway. Good morning to the witnesses and thanks for answering the questions that you have so far, and also for the information that you have given us in advance, which I have found particularly helpful. I am going to start my questions with our colleagues from Wales, if that is okay. I am keen to understand a bit more about how the system that you created has reached out to underrepresented groups and those from disadvantaged backgrounds. Can you tell us a bit about how successful Tyife has been in that and what are the key aspects of the programme that you have that have made it successful in that sense? Good morning. As Susanna said, that is part of the key strand of the strategy of the programme. As part of the support mechanism that we have in terms of encouraging applications consulting with a range of different groups, we have some dedicated team members who are responsible for engaging right across the sectors, as well as we fund key organisations to work across the sectors. That is a mechanism to really engage right across the board. Part of the funding that we offer is about very much in terms of what colleagues in Youth of Scotland were referring to as some of the challenges in terms of enabling the opportunities to be maximised. We offer additional funding for successful applications to cover things such as inclusion costs, those who have got additional learning needs and those who are facing exceptional financial barriers to ensuring that engagement. That is a mechanism that we have to ensure that. We run the programme very much like Erasmus Plus and the touring schemes on a grant rate unit cost basis. Those are reviewed annually to ensure that we are responding to any needs and requirements in terms of things like the cost of living, for example, and in terms of barriers to participation. That is a clear strand and it is a policy that we constantly review to ensure that wide engagement and barriers to ensure that those who are under represented, those who have additional learning needs and disabilities, that the programme really is inclusive to responding to those requirements. Does the programme that you offer offer shorter term exchanges? It does. That is a key part of some of the activities. That was a clear response in terms of the consultation and the on-going consultation. For many people who may never have left Wales, they may never have left their village or their county, undertaking an international exchange can be very challenging and often slightly overwhelming. We offer the shorter term mobilities as well as mobility opportunities within the UK for certain groups. On that, what engagement have you had with the Scottish Government about that aspect of the scheme? We have had initial engagement with colleagues in the Scottish Government generally about the principles of the programme and are always willing to engage in further discussion and consultation. As Susanna said, a lot now with the mobilities is starting to take place. We are having a lot more data in and we will be able to do a lot more in-depth analysis about the participant profiles and the types of organisations that are engaging with the programme. Very much going forward, we will be richer in the data to be able to have a lot more of these detailed conversations. I appreciate that. I will move on if that is okay to Ms Greene to ask some questions about youth work. The big question for us is what has the impact been of the Turing scheme requiring youth work organisations to partner with other organisations in order to access support? It has been that we cannot access it. As far as I am aware, the first couple of rounds was not even an option. In the recent round, it was possible for a non-formal institution to apply in partnership. However, it is not set up for youth work. It does not have opportunities to do informal education programmes to make that youth work difference that we do to run a youth work programme through it. It does not seem really accessible to the sector. We put out a call to the sector to say, look, you are able to try to partner with somebody and apply. We asked people to let us know if they have not heard from anybody. That does not mean they have not, but I have not heard from anybody that it is something that probably feels—even if they could be successful, it probably feels very alien and inaccessible, particularly because it was set up without youth work as a priority or even a mention. We did get in the feedback from Red Cross saying that they did partner with—for their volunteering work, they did partner with a vocational education and training institution to make an application and they were unsuccessful because they were trying to do it under sort of traineeship, but it did not really cover volunteering. That is the one example that I have of somebody who would have got funding through the youth strand of Erasmus Plus trying and unfortunately being unsuccessful. The other side that we haven't really touched on yet, so I hope you don't mind if I take the opportunity to, is that a significant benefit from Erasmus Plus as well as the young people's mobility was practitioner, professional learning opportunities, opportunities to learn from others, to do study visits, and to innovate in their practice and build their skills. That is not provided for a tool within the Turing scheme and that is something that it is very hard to replace. You have highlighted quite a number of areas where you think the Turing scheme is left kind of wanting and where you think the Scottish Government should maybe move. What do you think are the really key aspects of the system in Scotland if it were to be developed and how are the things that are critical to making it work for your sector? There needs to be a ring-fenced youth work sector-specific strand where there is funding available specifically for youth work designed in partnership with the youth work sector assessed by people with knowledge and understanding of and experience of youth work so that they understand what the applications are trying to show and achieve. Ideally, we would have all of the strands available through Erasmus Plus, so opportunities for youth mobility, for practitioner mobility and strategic partnerships to be able to share what we have in Scotland and also learn from others and innovate in our practice. It would be absolutely critical that it is two-way, that it supports costs for both directions of mobility and that there are costs provided to partners, particularly as I was reflecting on the point that was discussed earlier around making it attractive and possible for partners when they could go to Erasmus Plus. I suppose that there is an opportunity to reduce bureaucracy, make it accessible for grassroots organisations, as was talked about in Tithe, and also that in that accessibility there is support for those organisations to implement the programme and to report on it and that that is provided locally by people who understand both the programme and the youth work that is happening. We submitted in our proposals, as well as being a very accessible programme, to have a sort of top-up inclusion fund, as I mentioned earlier, so that unforeseen costs would not be a barrier to participation. It is really critical and that it included funding for staff time so that small organisations that cannot afford to do international exchange without their staff being paid for it could make the most of this and the young people involved could benefit from the amazing opportunities. The inclusion fund that you mentioned earlier on would be key to that. Do you think that that would be about groups from underrepresented people coming in to use the fund, or would it be about some of the hidden costs? We have had evidence from College of Scotland and others about the hidden costs of the scheme, such as double funding for staff to go over two different periods. Would that be part of that, or do you think that that is separate? I think that it would be important to build into the scheme accessibility and try to reach groups that might have found it harder to access Erasmus Plus. I think that that needs to be built into the bones of what funding is available and how the scheme is administered and promoted. One of the things that we found in Erasmus Plus was that the grants are very rigid. You could apply for things like an accompanying carer or costs to get passports or suitcases for young people who did not have access to these things. You could build that into the proposal, which is fantastic. When you got the young people recruited, there was a young person who had additional support needs, but they had not been on the original list. There was not any way to make sure that those support needs were catered for, so having a top-up fund that could be accessed ad hoc so that every young person who might not have been there in the original proposal could take part. That is what we meant by that, but I feel that those costs, both the outreach and the actual costs of inclusion, should be built into the core of the programme initially with the opportunity to top up where necessary. Thank you. Much appreciated. The convener has one other short question, if you like. Thank you. You said in your evidence that you submitted that there could be opportunities in education reform for the exchange programme. It has developed what opportunities would they be? In the education reform process, the role of youth work as an informal educational practice and its recognition within the broader formal educational context is critical. The international exchange offers a really intensive mode of youth work. The evidence that we have heard about the way that youth work is able to put learners at the centre that we work with young people, we work with young people from where they are at, we are partners with them in a learning process and that being something that is important to the education reform. It was highlighted in Professor Muir's report that international youth work is one of the key ways to enable that to happen. For young people who would not get those opportunities otherwise, being able to offer them an educational experience in its broader sense, which involves exchange and supports the youth work sector to facilitate that exchange, would help with that wider ambition of curriculum for excellence to be that full, holistic educational experience for young people. Thank you, I much appreciate it. Thank you, I now move to Mr Kerr. My question is in the first instance to Liz Greene. Does the wealth government announced in the March of 2021 that they would have something ready to replace Erasmus Plus and we've heard this morning from our witnesses that they launched that from the beginning of 2022. We've heard about the 5,000 participants etc. It sounds to me like it's been a great success. What engagement have you had with the Scottish Government about the lack of anything like that in Scotland? We've been working collaboratively with the team within the Scottish Government who've been recruited to develop the programme. We've been working with the CRD team during the community learning and development team in Government who were working closely with DCMS and Welsh Government colleagues in the run-up to the end of Erasmus Plus around potential replacement programmes. We worked closely with them running stakeholder events with the youth work sector to identify what the needs of the sector would be for a replacement scheme. A new team was recruited into the Scottish Government. How many people are in the new team? I don't know if they're all new, but there's a current team. As far as I know, there's one manager and two policy officers, but I'm not entirely sure of it. We've been working with them since September 2021. We first had contact with them about the youth work sector's aspirations for the new scheme and submitted some proposals to them in January 2022, which I've included in the information that I shared with you about what the youth work sector would identify as the key features of the youth work strand. We've had monthly meetings with them, but during those meetings there was a point at which they were preparing proposals. They did prepare proposals, and they prepared a survey about the new programme that was being piloted. Have you seen details of a new programme? I haven't seen details of a new programme. We piloted the survey sent up to the youth work sector and the youth work sector replied above and beyond any other sector. We sent it to a few people to test the questions, and the youth work sector replied above and beyond any other sector because we're so keen to give it to the programme. Have you seen the feedback on that survey? That was just a pilot, and I haven't seen the feedback. The full survey was due to go out last summer, but then all progress was paused. What was the reason that you were given by this team for the pause? The proposals that they submitted were being reviewed in terms of the potential budget by the minister and government officials, I think. I'm so sorry. No, it's okay, but it's very helpful. Basically, they submitted proposals and it was being reviewed. Since then we've had the cost crisis hit, and I presume that I'll have had an impact. We, as a committee, can follow up with the Government on those points. Those are questions for the Government itself. The reason that I'm asking these questions is because I want to be able to understand the assessment that you've made of where we are in Scotland. At the moment, I've asked questions about this. No one will be surprised to hear that. I've asked how much money has been spent on it, what allocation of resources has been put in it, and I was told just last week that there had been no money spent on this, but there clearly has been money spent on it because there's been these surveys. What's your assessment of where we are? When will we see anything to do with the Scottish equivalent to what they're doing in Wales so successfully? I don't know, and I really hope it's soon. You would like to know. I really hope it's soon. We would really like to know. I've actually got a quote from a practitioner about her ambition for this event. Give me a moment to find it immediately. Where do I think we are? I think that there has been work done in preparing a proposal for a programme, and it has stalled and... It's stalled, as of last summer. Summer autumn. We were still having regular meetings until January, February, this year, and they've pretty much been paused because there isn't any progress for us to discuss. Because our challenge as parliamentarians is the fact that we can't see any progress supports. There are no minutes. I've been told there's not been a penny spent, so your assessment of where we are is very useful. Did you find the quote you were looking for? Yes, it's from Gillian McDermid from the Ocean Youth Trust who recently took part into Erasmus Plus-funded professional development programmes, and she says, All we, as youth workers, want is to make the world a better place for ourselves and the young people we work with, and exchange programmes help us to try to achieve this. My hope for the near future is that the Scottish Government will fulfil their commitment to developing a Scottish exchange programme, and that the youth work sector will be at the forefront of this. Those experiences made me fall back in love with youth work and others should have the same opportunity. That's a good quote. Erkin, we move on to questions for our colleagues. Can we move on? That's just one last question about Scotland, because obviously that's more passionate interest. You said you were meeting monthly with the three people that were in the acquired team for this project. Since last summer, when did those meetings stop? I believe that the last meeting that we had was in January or February this year with one or two of them. I don't know if they are all new staff, so they are part of the advanced learning and higher education team. Some of them will have been people who have worked previously on Erasmus Plus, so we can ask that question to the Scottish Government. There's a point at the screen that I don't want you to feel that you're on the spot here at committee. If there are matters that you are uncertain about, that you would want to check and clarify, you've already kindly agreed to follow up with written correspondence and you can make those clarifications then. Mr Kerr, back to your questions for our witnesses and witnesses. Absolutely. I will turn my attention to Cardiff, yes. Sorry that this is slightly repetitious, but it would be interesting to hear more about how you work collaboratively with Turing and how Welsh institutions engage with both Tave and Turing, and where the overlaps are and where the strong points of collaboration are. Thank you. Of course, eligible organisations that can apply for Turing can also apply for Tithe funding, which is obviously welcomed by Welsh institutions who are in that position. Youth sector is not one, as you know, so youth, as Liz said, cannot apply for Turing funding but can apply for Tithe, so they can apply for both dreams of funding. We have worked particularly with the assessment strand of Turing in terms of trying to understand, just to share notes a little bit about lessons learned, timelines, making sure that what we are doing in terms of the assessment process learning from them aligns a little bit. For example, when we talk about rates that we offer to assessors, we are not totally off-kilter. Of course, we look at Turing policy quite closely to make sure that what Tithe offers is not really seen as being in direct competition with Turing that there is some degree of alignment in terms of the policies and some of the criteria, while at the same time, of course, through the consultation that we have with the sectors, that if there are any gaps that Turing has, that maybe we try to fill those gaps. I think that one thing that we have had in terms of feedback from the sectors here, who also apply for Turing, is that they welcome the fact that we can engage with the sectors much more closely. I guess that Turing is a large scheme and deals with many more organisations than we do in Wales, so that has been really, really welcome. Welsh Government, of course, works closely with central government and they work closely with DFE and they are involved more closely in that kind of level of dialogue with Turing. Our relationship is more at the working level in terms of sharing notes, best practice and trying to learn from each other as well. That is very useful. What about Erasmus Plus? You still have a strong tie with them, working relationship with them, do you, in terms of the same sorts of things that you have mentioned that you are collaborating with Turing on? We do not have a working-level relationship where we have an ongoing dialogue. Of course, when TIE was set up through the consultation with sectors, we picked up on a lot of learnings from Erasmus Plus. Having said that, we are part of a number of European networks in which Erasmus is also part of that discussed policy around mobility, international education for the different sectors that we work with. We are part of some of those networks, so we can learn from other programmes such as Erasmus, but for example, the Swiss have their own programme as well, which is equivalent to what we do, because it is a smaller programme. We are just trying to be seen as a funding agency in our own right, so we can bring something to the table as well as learn from others. For example, I have been invited to speak on a number of international platform fora. I have spoken alongside colleagues from Erasmus on the same panel or colleagues from the UK international who spoke on behalf of Turing. We have a kind of policy and collaborative approach to mobility. That is very helpful. My last question is again about returning to Scotland, which is always the focus of our concern. Obviously, there are lots of opportunities for Scotland and Wales to work together in the future when we have our own programme. Have you been in any way consulted by the Scottish Government about what you are doing that we can just frankly copy? We know that our colleagues in Welsh Government have been in discussions with the Scottish Government when we heard that there were plans for a similar scheme for Scotland. We have also worked and discussed at working level, especially in the initial set-up months of tide last year with the Scottish Government. We shared some of the initial learnings and some of the initial kind of structures that we were putting in place. As Elliot said, we are open and available to share our experience, the good and the bad, what we have learned along the process. For example, what Liz said in terms of her wishing list for youth sector, we were so glad to hear all of that because we can take all those boxes. How can we make a scheme that actually works for the sectors, particularly the less traditional sectors, so to speak? We know that mobility programmes work well for higher education. They are very experienced and have got resources, but how can we make a scheme work for sectors where there is less capacity, less understanding of how it works, less people to deal with and how can we make it work for them? We are available and happy to share our story and share our learnings. We are still learning and there is still a lot to review and improve along the way, but it is a really positive story. The last thing to say on that is that in terms of the positivity, it has been really positive for the sectors that have access to funding. The first round of funding that we have dispersed, the applications are worth more than £10 million worth of grants that will be dispersing for the first round. In terms of the message that the programme is sending to international partners, in terms of the commitment that Wales has towards international learning, exchanging and providing opportunities for young people and for the staff who support the young people, and promoting Wales as an internationalist nation, one that is open and outward looking. It has really put Wales on the map in that sense and that has been really good. That is what we want for Scotland. Thank you, Mr Kerr. A very short supplementary from Pamdan Cenglansi, and then I will move to Ivan McKee. Thank you, convener. Susanna, can you tell us when did the Scottish Government last reach out to you? I think we, the last time I am looking at Elid, sorry, sitting next to me a bit, she, I think it was in the initial months of the set up programme, so I think we had a few regular conversations around the spring last year, between March and probably before the beginning of the summer holiday, and then we haven't had any further engagements since then. I just clarify, you said that some colleagues had been in touch with, the Scottish Government had been in touch with some of your colleagues in the Welsh Government. Is that correct? I know that Welsh Government have a relationship obviously with Scottish Government, but I don't know the regularity of those conversations or when the last conversations took place. Great, thanks very much, convener. Just some questions to tithe on the cost of the scheme, and I suppose I would be interested that the £65 million number over the four years is obviously what has been allocated by the Welsh Government. I don't know how much of this you'll have the background on, but I'd be keen to understand the thinking that went into why that number is what it is and what it covers, if there's been comparisons against what the UK Government has put into the Turing scheme, which I believe is around about £100 million over each year, and the relative costs of arasmas. If you've had to make decisions on what's included and what's not included, given budgetary constraints. As I said, the scheme is worth £65 million. It's a programme that's funded up until the end of March 2027 at the moment. The majority of the £65 million, around £58 million, is in grant funding, so we operate the mobilities on what we term pathways. £46 million of that will be to fund mobilities and associated activities. Part of the funding package includes funding a discreet programme called Global Wales, and this is in its third phase, and this is a partnership for higher and further education, which is focusing on raising the visibility of Wales for student recruitment and for partnership. We manage that as part of that £65 million, and the remaining funds then is literally for, as Susanna said, we've had to set up a separate company of Cardiff University and the like. An endeavour of this scheme doesn't come without its staffing resources and the requirements to do that, as well as some of the technical aspects or the technical platforms to enable us to run the programme. The £65 million was awarded by Welsh Government on calculations that they'd made in terms of the equivalent in terms of what Wales would have benefited from within Erasmus on similar scales. The majority of the funding, as I said, is what we award to third-party organisations, to eligible organisations. I'm at an annual conversation in terms of the ring-fenced amounts per sectors with Welsh Government. That's very helpful. Just on the surface of it, and not understanding all the details of what is included or not included, it seems to be prorata a much more significant investment than the UK government has put into touring perhaps three or four times as large on the surface of it. It's helpful to understand how that would play into the Scottish context in terms of what the costs perhaps would be as we move forward with the scheme here. The other area I was going to just explore was a more open question of your like, just about what you're thinking is on next steps for Tide and where you see the programme going based on the learnings you've had over the last year or so, and is there scope to develop or change the programme in any way? I'm not allowed to touch the microphone. Where the programme goes from here. The funding commitment from Welsh Government goes from 2022 to 2026. That's the funding envelope and the current commitment, and with a wrap-up period that goes to March 2027. Of course, during this period, of course, we want to make sure, and as Elid said, as now the data starts to come in of the projects, just to make sure that the programme is meeting its objectives with that inclusion and access being very much at the very heart of it. For us, making sure that we are not complacent in that respect and as soon as we analyse the data and we identify potential gaps, that we are bold enough as a programme to implement any changes and adjustments to, let's say, processes, policies and so on, to make sure that we meet those objectives, while also we listen to the feedback from the sectors themselves. For example, Liz, you made an allusion to these other processes. Is it too complicated? Can we simplify somewhere to make it easier for smaller organisations? Can we offer better packages of supports to organisations to reach the programme? Are we reaching out widely enough across Wales, especially in areas of deprivation and so on? It's a constant evolution of the programme. We see it as a live project. The setup was really difficult, but now the task is even harder, just to make sure that we deliver on those objectives. Of course, a big measure of success for us will be hopefully a commitment from the Welsh Government to continue the programme beyond 2026. That would be the best testament to a programme that is successful, that is delivering on its objectives and, ultimately, that is providing life-changing opportunities to its participants. On our website, we started to develop an area called stories. At the end of the day, numbers are really important targets. At the end of the day, the human story is behind the numbers that really tell the story. We are hoping to, in the next year, to start sharing those stories, because it's all about human impacts, ultimately, on how the programme is delivering on those life-changing opportunities and how the participants share those opportunities with everyone. That's absolutely right, and the point that you made about putting Wales more firmly on the map in terms of international recognition is hugely important. Thank you very much. Thank you. Megan Gallacher, any questions from yourself? Thank you, Deputy convener, and good morning everyone. I'd like to pick up on the progress that we need to make here in Scotland in order to introduce and create a Scottish equivalent to what our friends in Wales have managed to achieve, because we've heard so far this morning in relation to a survey that's went out to our youth organisations. We've also heard that there were frequent meetings up until February and March, and I understand that there has been a few changes. However, I'm wondering, Liz, if you were able to tell the committee if it would be helpful if those meetings reconvened, because I think it would be good to have our youth organisations back round the table talking about this openly, trying to encourage the Government to move ahead and get a programme up and running. We're now halfway through 2023, and I'm just a little bit worried now that this is a slowed process. Do you think that it's likely that we would be able to launch a similar programme to our friends in Wales, given the timeframes that we're now up against? So, for your first question, we're having regular contact with the Government team, and each meeting has been cancelled and we've just paused them. I think we're always happy to sit round the table and to support and to get that survey out to the whole youth work sector when that's relevant and to bring the sector's voice in and to help to design the programme. However, it seems to me that that Government, that team's hands are tied, that they've been waiting for a long time, so I'll be very happy to meet with them, but I'm not sure how purposeful it would be until they are in a position where they can move on it and do some development. So, all of our communication over the last approximately six months has been where we're just waiting. So, yes, we'd love to, but if they can do something. I can't answer that. I'm really hopeful that we can work together to make it happen. The youth work sector is just absolutely crying out for this programme the longer we wait, the more young people are missing out on the opportunities, the more tenuous our relationships and connections get with previous partners, the less confidence that Scottish organisations have to do international exchange. So, I don't have the answer to that question, but I'm really happy to work hard with you and I know the rest of the sector is. I mean, I was getting replies in as I was on my way here saying, oh please, can you include this and send this in your follow-up? The sector is extremely keen to make this happen and will work very closely with yourselves and government to make it happen if it's possible. I think we've heard that through your contributions this far. In terms of waiting, if they explained what they're waiting for, is it the green light to create the policy and get it approved here? You know, why are we stuck in a little bit of limbo here? I'm just, I'm really keen to try and move this along and I think colleagues around the table will probably be in the same position. So, as far as I know, they're waiting to find out if and how much budget may be allocated to the programme and I suppose if the proposals they have submitted so far are acceptable or are viewed well. That's the level of detail I have about what they're waiting for, sorry. No, thank you very much, Liz. I could ask just one question to our friends on the team. Thank you. Just on that point, if I may make a list again, I think as a committee it's likely we'll follow up with the Government following this evidence session and, of course, just a hiatus in correspondence does not necessarily mean that work isn't happening within the civil service and that is what we will try to establish through follow-up communication. Just to say for that team, you know, they have sought our views and views of the sector and they're definitely trying to bring us along with them in terms of crafting proposals that are appropriate for youth work and for young people. So, we've had some really positive collaborative working with the team up until the stall. And that's great to hear and that's what we would hope and expect. Thank you for that. I'm back to yourself, Megan Gallacher, for questions for our witnesses in Wales. Thank you, convener, and I think it is helpful, you know, if we've got a date of September 2025, you know, that is the date that we should be working towards. So, I think it's imperative that we try and, you know, work together in order to make that date a realisation. But if I could move on to questions from our teeth colleagues, please. And, you know, I've just been so keen to hear all of the work that you've been doing with relation to the programme and the success that you've had thus far. And I'm just wondering what advice could you offer to us here in Scotland about setting up a similar programme, and if there's any advice that you could give to Scottish institutions as well about how they could expand their international exchange programmes, too. Thank you. Thank you. I mean, we feel kind of humble to be asked for advice. I mean, obviously, we wouldn't dare to tell you what to do and advice, but we can tell you what we think it's important for us and if that helps in any way. But I think a lot of the points Liz has touched upon, I think, making a programme that it's all inclusive of all learning sectors has been a real benefit for us to make sure that you include all learning sectors. I mean, adult learning, for example, we've talked about youth and schools, of course, but let me highlight also adult learning as a sector that felt a bit excluded from the game a little bit and bringing them as part of that has been really positive. I think that the consultation and engagement piece has been critical for us to make, you know, it's never perfect. You cannot please absolutely everybody, and there's obviously always lots of dynamics within sectors and organisations and so on, and you're talking about funding at the end of the day, but that consultation and engagement from the outset has been really critical for us making sure that we talk to the sectors. I mean, Liz, you talked about understanding the sectors and bringing their expertise and their knowledge and their experience to the mix and trying to use that kind of to build a programme that works for them. I think that the reciprocal aspect has been mentioned many, many times as an example of best practice, so the fact that the funding available allows not just for outward mobility but to bring mobility into Wales as well. I think that the fact that the programme allows for mobility not just of learners—and again, I'm just repeating what Liz said, but also staff, academics, administration, staff, teachers, you know, just looking at the learning sector as an ecosystem of people that can access those opportunities. Just make sure that also for us that obviously the technical aspect of running a funding agency is really important, so all the operational, you know, of course, when we talk about public funds, so making sure that, you know, we've got systems that are transparent, that are compliant, that we can justify and defend confidently that we've got a strong governance structure of reporting, et cetera, and that everything is properly documented. And, you know, if we were challenged that we could defend appropriately, but the other element which is as important is the, is the kind of human element of it. So, you know, the constant engagement with the sectors, never taking anything for granted and approaching the programme with an open mind, that, you know, you set up a programme based on assumptions that you make at the beginning and, of course, as soon as you start delivering those assumptions, totally change and then you have an open mind to review and adjust as you go along. And I think that the inclusion and access aspect is really important to us, you know, make a programme that is truly accessible or that is truly inclusive and that we always keep that at the forefront of our minds and that we, moving forward, we are brave enough to make adjustments if needed, let's say, if we need to tighten policies or criteria, but it will meet those objectives that we do. And I would say to Liz while speaking that, you know, you're very welcome to come to us and talk to, we've got programme managers within the team that are specialised in the different sectors, so the role is absolutely 100 per cent to work with the sectors and to have that level of knowledge and expertise about the sectors. And we're very happy to connect you with with Alid for the youth sector to tell you a little bit about the experience. And as I said, we're here to share any learnings. We're obviously very proud. I think the other thing, sorry, Megan, just one point. I think the fact that the agency was set up brand new. I mean, this is a very personal opinion, maybe it's a controversial opinion, but just from my personal point of view, that the funding was given to a brand new agency rather than, let's say, an existing large organisation that is out there. I think it's been positive. It's brought people with a brand new fresh mindset. We're all new to the team. We all come with great passion. We all bring different levels of knowledge and expertise. I worked for the British Council for 25 years before. I think that fresh start, fresh team, has been really positive because we all come with an open mind and I think that's been really good. But that's my personal view. No, thank you so much. I mean, I think that the summary of all funding, governance, inclusion, youth organisation involvement, young person focused on being flexible. Thank you so much and I think that there's a lot that we can certainly learn from this convener. Thank you very much. I just wanted to add a little bit more flesh to what Susanna was saying about involving the sector, so regularly in contact with our counterparts in Wales, the Council for Welsh Voluntary Youth Services, and they've been part of the sector organising body consortium for the youth sector. So when Susanna said sector involved, it's not just a consultation. They have youth work infrastructure bodies involved in the delivery of the programme in getting grassroots youth organisations to apply in supporting them through that journey. I mean, please do correct me if I'm wrong, Susanna or Eilid, but it's really built into the infrastructure of Tyth and also to the governance as well. So one of their staff is a representative on the governance board as well. So it's not just a consultation, it's built in and I think that that's a real strength. And also this is something I think we can learn if that's okay. One of the, he's the feedback that Paul gave and it's really good to hear that you're looking at changing the grant amounts over the next year with Cost of Living because he has said that because of the significant cost crisis and change of costs, a lot of their programmes funded are not able to deliver within the original budget that they had because things are just so much more expensive. So that's something that of course in Scotland will need to be cognisant of and make provision for as well. So that's great to hear that you're able to change the costs based on the context. In that similar way of thinking, I'd be interested in anything that Susanna Galvan particularly wanted to elaborate on around. You talked about the stories that you're collecting, but is there an assessment of the student experience that is being carried out and taking on student feedback for how future funding for Teth is undertaken in due course? As part of the reporting and monitoring and evaluation process, beneficiary organisations need to report to us on a regular basis on not just the financial aspects of managing the programme but also on the actual programme itself and the impacts. There will be participant surveys as well where we will get data from the participants directly in terms of their experience. Also, one of the conditions of our grant agreement letter with the Welsh Government is that there will be an independent evaluation of the Teth programme and that's part of the conditions of that grant. That's open up to an independent process and an attended process where we will have external evaluators doing an in-depth evaluation of the programme and the impact of the grants as well. Thank you. Any other questions from members? Thank you, convener, for indulging me in one final question and it's to our colleagues in Wales again. Am I right in saying then that in the time that it's since Erasmus closed until now you've been able to develop a system and the policies and procedures and relationships and set up an organisation and deliver for all those students that you've already spoke about. If that's the case, do you have any sense of why the Scottish Government hasn't been able to do the same? The answer to the first question is yes. We've been able to set up and deliver and, as I said, we're constantly reviewing the success of the programme and we make adjustments to make sure that we're on track. In terms of why the Scottish Government has not developed a similar programme, I would not be able to answer that question. I do not know. I do know that there were plans or at least it seemed that there were plans to establish a new programme and, as I said, we talked to Scottish Government to share some of our experience in the early months but we haven't been approached since the summer last year around that time. Stephanie Callhan has a question online. Thank you very much, convener. Just a short one here and again to colleagues and mails too. There was some discussion earlier on. You've spoken about wanting to be really truly inclusive. There was some discussion earlier on about the extra cost that can be involved for carers and different things like that. I'm just wondering when you're looking at the funding or whether you can set a proportion aside to tackle that stuff in particular or is it more about the numbers of people that are benefiting and then the funding follows that? Who wants to answer that? Susanna Govan or Aled Morrist, are you able to come in on that? Sorry, my camera has been turned off. Am I back on? You're back, yes. Sorry, do you mind repeating the question? Someone came into the room and distracted us. Is that okay? Apologies. Yes, yes, not at all. You've said there about being truly inclusive and how important that is. I mean, we're hearing earlier on about how there can be additional costs. For example, there can be costs that are in carers, etc. I'm wondering when you're looking at the funding, are you kind of potioning that up to start with and looking at what will be allocated to that type of work or is it more about looking at the different proportions of the numbers of people that you're looking to support and the funding following that? Yes, there's two elements to that. At the time of application, organisations that apply for Tithe funding need to demonstrate in their applications that they will be making a commitment towards some of the crosscutting commitments of the programme, with one being delivering towards achieving number of participants from underrepresented groups. At the point of application, they need to provide evidence that that's going to happen and they need to quantify that at the application stage. We do have, as part of the grant that includes travel rates, assistance rates and organisational support rates as well. There's also 100 per cent inclusion support rates both for participants with additional learning needs, people with disabilities or participants from disadvantaged backgrounds, for example, to cover costs of applying for a passport or getting proper clothes for a change of climate, travelling to airports and so on. Of course, organisations put an indication of numbers at application stage, so the initial calculations of grant will take that into account. However, going back to the point that Liz made, sometimes it's really difficult at application stage to provide an actual accurate number. Throughout the life of the project, organisations can make a change request and ask for additional funding when they have actual number of participants in those cases. However, the uplift for inclusion costs is based on 100 per cent basis. We've embedded that flexibility in the programme so that it can notify us about that throughout the life of the project. That's clear and very helpful. Thank you. Just before we conclude, are there any statements or aspects that Liz Green or Susanna Govan or Aled Morris wanted to say, but you haven't been able to utilise in response to questions that you have said so far? Have you covered everything that you wanted to convey to us? I think that I've covered the importance of the opportunities for young people and the significant loss of the sector that we're not able to easily replace elsewhere without support from Scottish Education Exchange programme. I hope that I've highlighted the workforce development challenges as well, that without that source of workforce development funding and opportunity is a challenge. The two other aspects that I suppose we're missing that I just wanted to highlight is around the ecosystem of Erasmus Plus, so this is something that will be difficult to replicate in Scotland, but potentially we would want to find ways to tap into it so around the youth strand for Erasmus Plus. There is a whole set of centres of learning at Salto, centres of expertise in different elements of youth work and informal education. There are training opportunities through that and there are a range of different networks and training programmes. When I was looking through the funding results from Tithe, I saw that one group had applied for funding to take some trainers on to a European training programme so that they could come and bring that learning back to Wales. I would be very keen for us to find ways to tap into that European ecosystem with a new programme to make the most of it because it's wonderful and there are so many opportunities. For example, Movitzia in Switzerland fund people to go on Salto programmes where they can't get the funding through Erasmus Plus. They still have Swiss participants through that funding, so I would really want to see us try to tap into that opportunity. Finally, I just wanted to mention strategic partnerships. I know that Tithe has built in is it pathway 2, is that right, for strategic partnerships in the sector? I just wanted to give an example and I'll send the case study. For us at YouthLink Scotland, we led a strategic partnership with seven partners in six different countries between 2017 and 2019. It was around developing digital youth work and it was an opportunity to build resources and training good practice for the youth work sector around developing digital youth work. We didn't know but it had a significant impact on the sector in Scotland being able to pivot to deliver that online youth work that was critical for young people throughout the pandemic. Through that strategic partnership and that funding from Erasmus Plus, we were able to have training resources and practice examples there ready for the sector. I trained 200 practitioners in the first six weeks of lockdown and then we trained up to almost 1,000 in the first six months of Covid. Having had the opportunity to work with European partners to innovate in terms of what youth work practice was going to be in the future and have those resources available, we were able to equip the sector to deliver for young people at that critical time. We wouldn't have been able to do that without that funding. Thank you. Any final points from Taith? Just to say that it's been a great pleasure to present evidence and I think we feel proud of what we've achieved. I haven't said that before but we are grateful for the structure to be under one of the universities in Wales because it's facilitated the process of accessing systems, IT, finance and HR and that's accelerated the setting up of the company. It's a learning process but it is definitely a really positive story for Wales. What we are doing very much aligns with the Welsh Government's international strategy as well so that the message is consistent and we look forward to hopefully make Taith a permanent feature in the ecosystem in Wales. Thank you very much. We really appreciate you sharing all of your insights today and your thoughts. Thank you very much for all of your time. The public part of our meeting is now concluded and we will consider the final agenda items in private.