 Scotland has a world-class higher education sector. We currently have five universities in the top 200 in the world, and each year, students from around 200 nations choose to come to our institutions to study. It is our belief that a child growing up in Scotland, regardless of their background, should have an equal chance of attending one of our great universities. I am also clear that widening access is not just about access to freshers fare, to graduation day and beyond. Ensuring that students from the most deprived areas of Scotland are supported to achieve their aspirations into, through and beyond higher education is at the core of that. Those end goals of graduation and positive destinations are central to our thinking as we move forward in the delivery of the commission on widening access recommendations and are a key focus and a priority for the Government going forward. Setting out her first programme for government, the First Minister made a crucial commitment, telling this chamber that our task was to ensure that a child born today in one of our most deprived communities has no less chance of going to university than a child born in one of our least deprived communities. She did so because we believe that education is by far the most effective means that we have to improve the life chances and deliver the best possible outcomes for everyone. We have enshrined the principle of widening access in legislation, placing it at the core of what we expect from post-16 institutions and the Scottish Funding Council. We continue to invest £51 million each year to support places for access students and those transferring from college into university. We established the commission on widening access in 2015 and accepted its recommendations in full. Since the publication of the blueprint for fairness in 2016, we have embedded our targets within university outcome agreements, introduced a full non-repayable bursary of £7,625 for young care experience students and established an access delivery group to oversee delivery. To support that work going forward, we have provided universities with a real-terms budget increase of 1.9 per cent and we are making progress. In December, UCAS reported that Scotland reached a new record for the number of acceptancies, the only part of the UK to see an increase. Within that, the acceptance rates for 18-year-olds also reached a record increasing for the third year in a row. More significantly, UCAS reported a record rise in 18-year-olds from our most deprived communities being accepted. In total, there was a 13 per cent increase in the number of Scots from the most deprived communities getting places to study at a Scottish university. That means that more than 600 additional people from the most deprived communities are being accepted to study at university. We have a record number of Scots going to university and a record number of Scots from the most deprived communities going to university. That is progress. Sitting behind that progress is a change in perception. We are eating away at the idea that university is not something that any child with an ability can achieve. Just last month, UCAS revealed, and I quote, Scottish 18-year-olds from the most disadvantaged areas are 67 per cent more likely to apply in 2018 than 12 years ago. We must maintain and, indeed, quicken the pace of change. As an independent commissioner, Sir Peter Scott's voice and the challenge he has provided to all of us is crucial, not only by providing a fresh perspective on the issues that are central to this agenda but also in continuing to drive forward change. I would like to thank Sir Peter for his work over the year. He has established the role of commissioner as one that provides a significant contribution to access in Scotland. That statement provides an opportunity today for me to respond to the commissioner's first annual report. The majority of the commissioner's recommendations relate to areas that we are already driving forward as a result of the commissioner's widening access. He has provided valuable advice on implementation and he has encouraged bolder steps to be taken by the Scottish Government, the Scottish Funding Council and, in his words, most institutions. I would first like to respond to the commissioner's call for the Government to make clearer its priorities with regard to our targets and ambitions for access. That Government recognises that Scotland's colleges are a key part of our higher education system. They play a crucial and valued role in widening access. Collegies often provide the first step into further and higher education, and while a valued place of study in their own right, they can also be a stepping stone on to degree level study at university. However, we are also clear that students from the most deprived backgrounds are well represented within colleges. It is within our universities where the greatest inequalities lie. I am therefore clear that we will continue to prioritise access to university within our work and our targets for fair access. Let me reiterate once again, no matter their background or circumstances, an applicant should have an equal chance of going to university by 2030. When we talk about fair access to university, I do not just mean some universities. We expect every university to take action now to ensure that by 2021, 10 per cent of entrance to each university are from Scotland's 20 per cent most deprived backgrounds. Through the delivery group, I believe that we will continue to see progress towards meeting those targets, but members should be assured that I will look to the funding council to use the outcome agreements process to ensure that delivery is achieved. I must also make it clear that our targets are for learners of all ages. Adult students from similar backgrounds should and will be given the same priority as school leavers within our work on fair access. The framework for fair access will identify the best methods to support adult learners into higher education. I expect learners of all ages to be considered within work to develop a more co-ordinated approach to access across Scotland. My vision is often efficient and flexible tertiary education system within Scotland, a system that supports all learners to succeed. Our work on the learner journey is examining how we can better connect the different parts of our education system and how we can ensure that learners' previous education is recognised fairly. I welcome the commissioner's recommendations on those areas and his insights into how such a system can better support learners from our most disadvantaged communities. As we take forward our work on the learner journey, we will take account of the commissioner's recommendations on improving the importance of access within the learner journey, the need to make more imaginative use of first year at university, option for learners with advanced hires to go directly into second year at university should they wish to do so. The commissioner also made recommendations on articulation, contextualised admissions and bridging programmes, which I fully support. While universities have committed to taking action on all those points, we need further clarity on when the changes will occur. In each of those areas, universities need to pick up the pace of change on implementation. I welcome the very detailed work that has been put into the development of implementation plans by lead delivery partners in all those areas, and those will be discussed at the next meeting of the Access Delivery Group. However, as with the overall and institutional targets that I mentioned earlier, I will look to the funding council to further intensify its work in those areas if required. I fully accept the commissioner's recommendations for the Scottish funding council. The Government recognises the pivotal role that the funding council must play if we are to deliver fair access. I wrote to the chair of the funding council on October last year to set out my expectations and ambitions for the 2018-19 outcome agreements, and I have made clear in recent discussions with the funding council the way in which I expect them to lead and to co-ordinate delivery of a number of recommendations from the commission on widening access. The commissioner asked the Scottish Government to consider any savings produced by a reduction in demand for places from EU students. We will take future decisions on the higher education budget as part of our annual budgetary process, but for anyone in the sector who may be thinking that there is a shortcut to achieving our targets through a drop in demand elsewhere, then let me be very clear. There is no shortcut, there is no silver bullet, widening access will require systemic change. The targets and the timescales that we have all accepted from the commission on widening access will not be delivered in any other way. I also note the commissioner's recommendations around an increase in funded places. I fully understand why that recommendation has been made and we will continue to consider its merits. We are conscious, however, that ultimately we are engaged in reforming the system and that is best achieved by the fairer distribution of publicly funded opportunities. In the end, widening access will be achieved by building a fairer system rather than continually expanding an unfair system. Our ambition is for equality throughout that system, equality not just in access but also in completing and succeeding in their studies. Equality in the jobs that access graduates can enter once they have finished their degrees and an equal chance for them and their children to succeed. Only then can we create a fairer Scotland. Presiding Officer, I thank the minister for early sight. I would like to pursue three areas of questions, if I may. First, Sir Peter Scott said last week at committee, and he stated in his recommendations, and I quote, The fixed cap inevitably raises concerns that the drive to recruit more students from SIMD-20 background may reduce opportunities for other students, and that was a point that was reiterated by Audit Scotland. That is a hugely important point for the wider picture about university entrance and university funding. Can I ask the minister to tell us today whether the Scottish Government is minded to amend the current structure of funded places? Will the minister explain exactly what she means when she says in her concluding remarks that there will be no shortcut to achieving the Scottish Government's targets if there is a drop in demand for places from elsewhere? That answer is also crucial for the sector. Secondly, our universities are particularly interested in what Sir Peter has had to say about debating what constitutes academic excellence and the high standards that have traditionally been the hallmark of the Scottish sector. They are wanting to know whether, in the context of widening access, the traditional measures of academic excellence and success will be challenged. What is the Scottish Government's response to that? That, again, is a crucial question. Finally, can the Scottish Government tell us the timescale by which the universities can expect to receive up-to-date figures on the higher achievement levels of school leavers by the end of S6, equivalent to that published by Vicky Bollinver's research, to inform their commitment to set minimum entry levels for SIMD-20 students? On the aspects around displacement, as I mentioned in my statement, I recognise that that is a concern from some people. I would point Liz Smith to the fact that the commissioner himself has said that the available data on this is suggestive rather than conclusive, so there is a fear of displacement, but it is not proven within the statistics that we have had. Indeed, as I mentioned in my statement, we have seen a 13 per cent increase in the number of students from the most deprived communities except to the university. At the same time, we have seen an overall increase in the total number of Scottish students in the university, so I think that that is something that we can both welcome. I mentioned that there is no shortcut when it comes to EU students or anything else for that matter, because what I do not want us to get into a frame of mind about is that we will somehow cure widening access by hoping that enough places will become available when something that we do not want to happen in Brexit will lead to changes in demand. I do not want universities to sit by and hope and assume that they will get enough widening access to students in because something else will happen, and we do not know the scale and extent of that. We need to see systemic change to encourage those from the private communities from coming forward. I listened to Sir Peter Scott's evidence to the committee and his discussions around success. Again, as I mentioned in my statement, I want to ensure that we are looking at successful outcomes from those who go into widening access places. By successful outcomes, I mean graduation day and a good job at the end of it. I appreciate that Sir Peter Scott discussed with the committee about changes to how a student can perhaps get from one year to another in looking at whether the system needs to be more flexible. That is for universities to look into, but when we are looking at what success is, success is a degree and a good degree at the end of your time at university. That is why we are talking about not just getting into university but also from graduation days. I have committed to university Scotland to work with them to ensure that they have information on aspects to do with what happens in individual schools and academic achievement. However, I think that the commissioner made that point as well, universities do not need that information to set minimum entry requirements. Those are based on what you need as a student to get through and succeed in your degree. Universities do not need that information. It may prove useful for them in other avenues that they are intending to do, but they need to get on with the job of moving on with contextualised admissions and minimum entry requirements. We cannot afford to wait another year for another round of data and to see another year of students not getting access to the universities that they should have. The minister knows that we on those benches support her aims of widening access to higher education in general and to universities in particular. As we have made progress, it is very welcome. However, what is especially welcome today is the minister's assertion, which she just repeated, that this is not just about access to freshers' fare but to graduation day and beyond. Living and surviving at university is important as well as getting there in the first instance. That is why those full non-repayable bursaries are so important for care-experienced students. However, surely the minister can see that access to non-repayable bursaries and grants to live-on while studying are also critical to young people from deprived backgrounds considering university because they too will not be able to turn to their families for financial help. Will she then commit to restoring the cuts that are made to grants and shifting the balance between grants and loans for living back towards grants for those students from low-income backgrounds? I begin by the fact that Iain Gray and I agree on something. I think that that does not often happen when we are doing statements. It is very important that we recognise the importance of graduation day and beyond. I will take that and the consensual part of your comments. The review of student support, as Iain Gray well knows, was reported at the end of last year. The Government is due to report back on our conclusions about those recommendations soon. We are looking very seriously at all aspects of the student support, including bursaries. I hope that Iain Gray can take some assurance from the fact that the work that officials are doing with the recommendations that came from that review is based on the first principle of ensuring that those from our most deprived communities get the support that they require to get through university. That is the first principle that we are looking at when we are looking at all the recommendations and all the areas in which the review has asked us to do further investigation. I will call Ruth Maguire to be followed by Oliver Mundell. Just to remind members, I give the opening speakers from each Labour and Conservative parties' dispensation to make a few remarks to outline their party position. That dispensation does not apply to everybody else, unfortunately. That means that the rest have to just ask questions and they will get a quick answer and we will get through everybody. Ruth Maguire. Does the minister agree that whatever barriers people face before they get to university, they do not simply disappear the second they get a place? With students from disadvantaged or non-traditional backgrounds less likely to stay until second year, more likely to obtain a general degree rather than honours, and less likely to get a first or a two-one, what does the Scottish Government do to encourage universities to attach higher priority to retention and success and achievement in the context of widening access? Will the Scottish Funding Council's Widing Access and Attention Fund provide £14.7 million of funding in 2017-18 to help students remain in higher education? That is allocated to universities that are the highest intake of access students. We are also ensuring that we use the outcome agreements process to encourage universities to set more ambitious and challenging targets for access. They also have to agree improvements in their attention and attainment and outcomes for their students. Our work with the Funding Council to intensify that outcome agreement process is ensuring that we look not just at entry into university but also to retention and attainment as well. Oliver Mundell to be followed by Jenkel Ruth. Can I ask the minister in the context of recommendations 17 and 18 in Sir Peter's report how the Scottish Government will ensure that pupils from SIMD 20 have more access to advanced higher courses, which will help their chance of taking up more diverse opportunities at university? That is something that we are looking at within our learner journey work that the Scottish Government is currently undertaking. It is very important that we ensure that students at school have opportunities to study and take up opportunities, whether it is at college, university or within apprenticeships, and that they have the opportunity to follow the career in whichever way they so choose. Jenkel Ruth to be followed by Daniel Johnson. Can the minister outline what role our schools and colleges will play in helping to meet the target that is set by the commission on widening access, and would she consider the feasibility of a pilot study that will track the work of St Andrews University as an ancient institution and a local high school in my constituency, where nearly one in three children live in poverty? I am very interested in tracking the progress of all the universities. I can ensure and take a close note of that, but I welcome the work that the new principle of St Andrews is undertaken to give further impetus to the widening access agenda. I made it clear in my statement that colleges play a crucial role in our higher education system and in widening access, but we also need to ensure that we are working with primary and secondary schools, where most of our young people have developed their dreams, ambitions and future lives and careers. We are looking at the approach from a whole systems approach. That is why I am delighted to see that, in the next couple of weeks, we will have a seminar in which regional improvement collaborative leads will come together to discuss what more can be done to develop that whole systems approach. We have Peter McLeod, who sits on our access delivery group, who will be leading that seminar. It is very important that we encourage our young people to develop their dreams and ambitions, regardless of where they will finally achieve that, whether it is employment, college, university and apprentices. I should mention, particularly in this apprenticeship week, that that is an exceptionally important outcome that young people can also take up. Daniel Johnson, to be followed by Ross Greer. The minister in his statement pointed to institutions in the Scottish Funding Council on addressing the issues around articulation and contextualised admission. Given that the fundamental issue there is about differences of approach between institutions, is there not a role for government in bringing forward a harmonised and co-ordinated system? Is that something that the delivery group might look at? Ultimately, the minister surely will agree with me that having a clear view about how youngsters can get to university is ultimately important. I absolutely see that there is a role for government to encourage articulation. Our role certainly within the next few months will be demonstrated when I finalise my letter of guidance that goes to the funding council, which again will look at the intensification of our outcome agreement process. Within that will include our work on articulation. I think that Sir Peter Scott raised very valid points around articulation. I was interested to read his views and to discuss with him last week an assumption that young people should have full articulation rather than their presumption against that. That was a very interesting discussion that I had. I see that there is a role for government. That is through my letter of guidance to the funding council and to put them through their outcome agreements with the different institutions how we will take that on. The member can be assured that we will be discussing that in the access delivery group to see what more can be done by the Government, by the funding council and by every institution. The cost of living of everything from rent to transport remains a barrier to widening access. Current financial support for students from low income backgrounds simply does not cut it. Following Iain Gray's question, can I press the Scottish Government to commit increasing bursaries and to equalising support for university and college students, which is essential to successfully widening access to higher education? As I said to Iain Gray, the Government will be responding to the recommendations of the review of student support in due course. We will be looking at the aspects that were in the review and also looking to see how we need to carry out further investigations that the review asked the Government to do. There were some areas that the review did not look at and they have made clear that they want the Government to then pick that up and investigate certain areas. I would point out that we have put an initial £5 million into the budget for the initial implementation of that and other aspects within the review of student support will require longer implementation if they require, for example, changes to the student's loans company or discussions with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. Tavish Scott will be followed by Fulton MacGregor. Can I thank the minister for early sight of her statement as well? Can I also ask her to recognise that vocational routes into work this week in apprenticeship week are everybody's important as a university education given I and no doubt many other colleagues met apprentices in Lerwick and Scalloway yesterday? Can I have a further go on the line of questioning that Iain Gray and Ross Greer have pushed? Would she hope that the review of student support would be in place for the next academic year, and would she be able to give Parliament any details of the timescale that she is working to on that, given that the very students that we are seeking to help here from the most disadvantaged backgrounds appear from some evidence to be the very ones who are seeing more difficult circumstances in terms of the debt burden that they then face? I would absolutely reiterate once again that it is important that we encourage young people to take the destination after school that is right for them. Universities, colleges, directly into employment or apprenticeships are all equally valid and valued opportunities for our young people, so the Government's commitment to ensuring widening access for university should by no means be read as a sign that university is the right aspect for a young person to choose. It is up to that young person, depending on their ambitions and their careers. I saw the pictures of the member with their apprentices and looked at a thoroughly interesting visit. The review of student support, as I said, looked at a number of different challenges that we have within the student support system. Some of those will be able to be achieved for the next academic year. Others will not. If they require, for example, a change to the student's loans company rulebook, that will require us to look at a longer time period for that. If we did not, if we simply piggybacked on a system, a scheme that is already in place, there may be a disadvantage to that. For example, we would have to join the system that is already in England with a higher interest rate. There are disadvantages to moving fast if, by doing that, you join a system that is detrimental, particularly to those for the poorest backgrounds. That does not mean that the Government is not taking action on that issue. However, we have already taken action to ensure that almost 3,000 additional students are qualified for a non-repayable bursary or saw their funding increase last year due to our decision to raise the income threshold from £17,000 to £19,000. We have confirmed within the programme for government our commitment to raising the repayment threshold for student loans to £22,000 and reducing the repayment period to £30,000, as well as implementing the care experience bursary. We are taking action on that. We will take action for the next financial year where we can, but there will be other aspects of the review of student support that will take longer. In terms of universities accepting young people from more disadvantaged areas, it seems that there is a real disparity between universities. Would the minister agree with me that meeting those ambitious targets that we have set cannot simply be down to the work of just some of our universities and it is time for our older universities to work a bit harder on that? I have made it very clear in my expectations to the sector that, when we talk about widening access to university, I do not just mean some of the universities, I mean to each university. The UCAS figures published in January demonstrate that good progress is being made in widening access with the majority of universities showing an increase in place applicants from deprived areas. However, targets have been set for individual institutions and I am determined that they will all be achieved. People from the most deprived backgrounds should have the same choices as everyone else. I will not get into a position where we are putting a few institutions who are already performing well to pick up the responsibility for delivering the agenda. Every institution can and must play their part in widening access. My apologies. Four members did not get in there, but I am afraid that we have run out of time. We have too many items this afternoon. We move on to the local government finance order. I will take a few moments for members and ministers to change seats.