Claire Baker
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“Motion, as amended, agreed to, That the Parliament condemns xenophobia, racism and hatred in society, including recent instances of intimidation, violence and disorder; further condemns the actions and language of those who seek to stoke such sentiments and division; agrees that such beliefs and actions do not reflect those of the vast ma…”
“The UK Government has updated its planning policy, and there is a clear strategic approach to where data centres are sited, which is what members are calling for in Scotland. On the question around environmental impact assessments, at the moment, it is not mandatory for local authorities to carry out such assessments.”
“The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S7M-00461, in the name of Neil Gray, on the National Security (State Threats) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. Please cast your votes now. The vote is closed.”
“We need to be clear that climate change is an emergency that affects communities across the world and increasingly here in Scotland. We are seeing more extreme weather events, increased flooding, risks to biodiversity, pressures on food production, and growing risks to public health and infrastructure.”
“The Scottish National Party Government will go even further, putting in place the £2 bus fare cap across the whole of Scotland by the end of this session of Parliament. Climate action is improving the quality of our lives.”
“As I have made clear, collectively across the Parliament, we have agreed that we need to make progress on the targets, which are also legally binding by an agreement made here, and the committees have an important role to play. However, ultimately, the Government has to show leadership on the issue.”
The complete record
Every one of 360 lines we hold for Claire Baker, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 8.
“In addition to the issues raised in Murdo Fraser’s question, Parliament recently passed the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Act 2025, which looks to make the experiences of victims and witnesses easier. What assurances can the First Minister give to women who are now concerned about the risk of having to go through an appeal process? What does the Supreme Court decision mean for evidence in future rape and sexual assault cases?”
“I move amendment S6M-19632.1, to leave out from “, and calls” to end and insert: “; believes that bus travel is vital to everyone in Scotland participating in the economy and is concerned by the reduction in bus routes across Scotland of 44% between 2006-07 and 2023-24; calls on the Scottish Government to shorten and simplify the franchising process, enabling local authorities to bring bus services under local public control and for them to operate in the public interest; further calls on the Scottish Government to prioritise using domestic bus manufacturers to support good, skilled jobs in Scotland, and calls on the Scottish Government to act swiftly to make it possible to remove bus passes from those who engage in persistent abusive behaviour towards bus drivers and passengers.” 16:26”
“It is about giving local government real power, backing Scottish industry and ensuring that bus services truly operate in the public interest. Scottish Labour has long argued for a people- centred approach to transport policy. We want public transport that connects communities, supports local economies and tackles climate change. Affordable, reliable, safe and accessible bus services are at the heart of that vision.”
“It is now almost a year since the Parliament supported a Labour motion on addressing the abuse of bus drivers and its call for the ability to remove bus passes from individuals of any age— any age—who repeatedly carry out antisocial behaviour. I was pleased to hear from the minister that the Government intends to bring forward regulations on 4 December that would make some progress on that, which would be part of ensuring that buses are safe places for drivers and passengers. As part of that, it might also be helpful to have, at the same time, an update on work around the report that was prepared under Jenny Gilruth about women on public transport, which covered buses as well as trains. Our amendment is about action, not just aspiration.”
“The Scottish Government needs to prioritise domestic bus manufacturing—supporting good, skilled jobs that already exist and creating new ones in supply chains, apprenticeships and innovation. That is how we will ensure that the transition to net zero transport delivers benefits across the Scottish economy. The free bus travel scheme for under-22s has helped a generation of young people to access opportunities and participate more fully in society. We should all celebrate that. However, we must also ensure that there is a reliable service for them to travel on, because, as other members have highlighted, free travel means little if the bus never comes.”
“It is about giving councils the tools that they need to deliver reliable, affordable and joined-up public transport networks. We can look elsewhere in the UK for examples of how that can work. In greater Manchester, the move to publicly controlled buses under the Bee Network has already delivered lower fares, integrated ticketing and rising passenger satisfaction. There is no reason why communities in Fife, Stirling or Dundee should not be able to have the same benefits. If we are serious about rebuilding our bus network, we must also think about where the buses come from. Scotland has the skills, the workforce and the industrial heritage to build clean, modern buses of the future, yet, too often, contracts that could have supported jobs here at home have gone overseas.”
“The consequences are social isolation for individuals who rely on the services and decline for local economies. Poor services also prevent people from making the switch to public transport that is vital in meeting our climate targets. It is clear that our current system is not working in the public interest. Local authorities should have the powers and the resources to take back control of local bus services where that is what communities need. We want a model that puts passengers first and runs buses for the public good. Progress on change is glacial. The franchising process is far too complex and slow. It creates barriers that prevent councils from stepping in when private companies withdraw or fail to deliver. We need to shorten and simplify the franchising process, so that local government can act quickly and effectively.”
“I think that we all agree that buses are the backbone of Scotland’s public transport system. For many people, whether they are getting to work, school or hospital appointments or visiting family and friends, buses are not just a convenience, but a necessity. However, too often, people are left behind by a system that simply is not working. Across Scotland, communities have seen bus routes cut, services reduced and fares increased. In too many rural and semi-rural areas, buses have become unreliable or have disappeared altogether. Local bus services have collapsed under the SNP, since it came to power, with more than 1,400 routes gone and 1,700 buses lost from Scotland’s fleet. Too many people living on low incomes are priced off bus services, which limits their ability to access opportunities to work.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it will take to prevent the permanent loss of church buildings with significant cultural or heritage value, in light of the decision by the Church of Scotland to reduce its estate. (S6O-05124)”
“They offer a way to apply the bill’s underlying principles of accountability for landowners, fairness to communities and clarity of rights to reach a specific and tangible solution. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Ms Baker, can you bring your remarks to a close, please? Claire Baker: I do not believe that the amendments are heavy-handed or that they prejudge the outcome. Instead, they commission the proper review and determination that the community deserves.”
“They have highlighted a valid concern and an inequality in resources when attempting to challenge a decision that they do not accept. I urge the cabinet secretary to pay attention to the situation that is faced by the Burntisland community and to commit to finding a solution that balances the rights of all involved. I will be seeking those assurances before making a decision on how we go forward with the amendments. The amendments in the group seek to strike a balance between those in the community who have an interest in walking and using the harbour, and Forth Ports, which has raised concerns around safety, liability and operating requirements. Our role here, as legislators, is not to determine the outcome of that debate but to facilitate clarity and resolution, which these amendments seek to do.”
“Although the amendments in Mark Ruskell’s name are not specific to Burntisland, they offer a general mechanism that would allow communities in a similar position to seek a solution. I attended the meeting today with the cabinet secretary and members of the campaign group. The cabinet secretary indicated that she was not minded to support the amendments, and I will listen carefully to her arguments. If Mr Torrance and Mark Ruskell decide to withdraw or not move their amendments, I will have to ask what the Government suggests the solution is. To be clear, if the members move the amendments, we will support them this afternoon. However, if the amendments are not taken forward today, the campaigners will be sorely disappointed and they will feel further from a resolution than ever.”
“One of the challenges for those who are campaigning against the removal of public access has been securing appropriate legal advice, which the local authority was not permitted to do. The amendment would seek to resolve that by ensuring the provision of expert advice alongside sufficient time for a definitive decision that would resolve the issue and be binding on those who are party to it. For decades, people have been able to enjoy the waterfront as part of their daily lives, freely walking on the breakwater and enjoying the harbour environment, just as many other communities around Scotland are able to do. Burntisland Harbour Access Trust is looking not for confrontation but for us to listen to the voices of those affected and to provide them with clarity and a potential solution.”
“Access to that land is something that matters a great deal to many in the local community, as is evidenced by the correspondence that I and other members representing Burntisland have had on the matter, and there is a strong local campaign to restore access. Prior to its closure, the dockside land was used by fishermen, dog walkers, cyclists, nature lovers and visitors, and many in the community feel that the closure was unjustified. The amendment does not assert that a public right of way exists; it requires a proper review and determination to be made as to whether that is the case, while allowing the concerns of the landowner and the port operator to be addressed. I believe that that is a balanced approach that can provide a means of progress on the matter.”
“Through their amendments in this group, David Torrance and Mark Ruskell are trying to find a pragmatic way of addressing the current restrictions on public access to land at Burntisland harbour and to address any similar circumstances elsewhere. The amendments in the name of David Torrance apply specifically to the historic east dock at Burntisland harbour, recognising that the community has a particular set of circumstances. It is a breakwater that was originally built in Victorian times and has a heritage of public use that existed until fences were erected and gates were locked. It is currently home to a sailing club, a redundant caustic tank, derelict land and a pallet factory that depends on road transport.”
“I welcome the UK Labour Government’s commitment to provide millions of pounds for Kirkcaldy town centre. That investment has the potential to kick-start the town centre regeneration of the lang toun. How will the First Minister work with the UK Government and the community to maximise the benefits? The First Minister: I welcome the investment that the UK Government has made in Kirkcaldy town centre. I welcome any such contribution, but we must see the whole picture. Kirkcaldy town centre’s difficulties will have been exacerbated by the increase in employer national insurance contributions, which has made it more expensive to employ people in our economy. I am all for giving a warm welcome to the benevolence of the UK Government, but I will also point out its shortcomings, and there are plenty of those. Homelessness (Protection) 6.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it is working with authorities in Mid Scotland and Fife to address antisocial behaviour. (S6O-04945)”
“I advise the chamber that we have exhausted all the time in hand that we had. I call Mark Ruskell. 15:38”
“I move amendment S6M-18763.3, to leave out from “that the UK Government’s” to end and insert: “the benefits of public ownership and welcomes proposals from the UK Government for the rest of the UK, including cross-border travel into Scotland; notes the repeated assurances from the UK Government that its plans on rail reform would not affect Scottish Government powers; welcomes the permanent removal of peak fares but notes that it only came about after significant pressure on the Scottish Government; acknowledges that ScotRail passenger numbers are still nearly 20% lower than pre- COVID-19-pandemic levels; recognises that, with punctuality and reliability being the highest complaint topics to ScotRail, more must be done to improve the service, including addressing overcrowding and short-forming, in order to achieve modal shift and attract passengers back to the railways, and acknowledges the importance of protections against violence and abuse for ScotRail workers.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Baker.”
“Finally, there have been assurances that the UK Government’s plan for rail reform will not affect Scottish powers, and we should take those assurances seriously. Improvements to cross- border services will benefit Scotland, and the Scottish Government’s focus should be on providing the best service for passengers. As we mark 20 years of devolved rail powers, we should celebrate achievements, but we must not be complacent. The real test of Scotland’s railways is in the daily experience of passengers and workers. That is why we should focus on driving up punctuality and reliability; delivering modal shift by making rail affordable, reliable and accessible; protecting workers from violence and abuse; and ensuring that public ownership works for the public by delivering a service that people can trust.”
“When it comes to short-forming in particular, I urge the Scottish Government to explore more consistent and public tracking of that in addition to the existing public performance measure statistics, as a basis for working swiftly to reduce short-forming as far as possible and to help to build passenger confidence. The Labour amendment urges a focus on service improvement alongside passenger experience and worker safety. Across our public transport, we need to ensure that passengers and staff are safe in their work and travel and that they are protected from violence and abuse. Changes in ticket office hours have meant fewer visible staff around some stations, and we must ensure that that does not mean that people—particularly women and girls—feel less safe when travelling.”
“As I have already mentioned, the cabinet secretary is well aware of the persistent problems in relation to reliability and overcrowding for rail passengers in my region of Mid Scotland and Fife. A recurring problem is the short-forming of trains on peak-time services to plug gaps elsewhere, which leaves Fife travellers in packed carriages or unable to board at all. I welcome confirmation of electrification work on parts of the Fife and Borders routes, but there needs to be a degree of honesty about what that will mean for passengers. Many stations will see little change for years. Improvements in reliability and capacity cannot wait until the end of electrification projects.”
“There is scope for a fairer, smarter approach to ticketing that reflects post-pandemic travel patterns and addresses regional price disparities that penalise some commuters. Alongside my colleagues, I have consistently pressed the Scottish Government to address unfair ticket prices and poor service reliability, both of which have discouraged people from choosing rail. If we are serious about tackling the climate emergency and reducing congestion on our roads, we need a rail network that people can afford to use and rely on. Encouraging more people to travel by train supports our local economies, reduces emissions and helps to create more vibrant town centres by making it easier for people to travel for work and leisure.”
“However, behind that, there are serious questions about the policy intention. Is the permanent removal of peak fares, as the First Minister said, about the cost of living and a policy that the Scottish Government is prepared to finance in the long term to deliver savings for passengers, or is it about achieving modal shift and increasing passenger numbers so that the policy will ultimately pay for itself? If it is the latter, how will the Government achieve that and within what timescales, given that that was its stated reason for the failure of the pilot? We should also note that not all passengers will be better off. Those who relied on super off-peak tickets might now pay more, and, although flexipasses remain, the percentage savings have fallen.”
“However, more could be done. From speaking to constituents in my region, I know that those figures do not reflect their experience of using the train. If I were to have a discussion with them about the Government’s very positive spin on what is happening, they would say that that is not their daily experience. The cabinet secretary is familiar with the Fife circle. What I am saying might be particular to Fife, but what has been said is not the daily experience of my constituents. Scottish Labour welcomed the permanent removal of peak fares, but let us be clear that that happened only after significant pressure from trade unions and Opposition parties. Just last week, many of us spoke in the members’ business debate on the subject. I have to say that I enjoyed quoting some of the Scottish Government’s shifting reasons for ending the pilot.”
“Addressing those issues is core to improving the commuter experience. Fiona Hyslop: Will the member give way? Claire Baker: I will, briefly. Fiona Hyslop: Does the member acknowledge that Covid caused disruption for all rail operators, but that ScotRail is one of the fastest-growing operators with regard to passenger numbers and satisfaction rates, which went up to 90 per cent in the latest survey? Some cancellations are caused by network issues, but those affect a tiny percentage of the overall number of journeys. There are more improvements to be made, but does the member recognise the improvements of the past few years? Claire Baker: I started my speech by saying that I recognise the successes, that I believe that taking ScotRail into public ownership was the right thing to do and that it has been a success.”
“It must mean that passengers see a difference in the quality of service and that staff feel supported and safe at work. The motion refers to a one-fifth increase in ScotRail passenger numbers, but we know that passenger numbers are still 20 per cent lower than before the pandemic. One of the first actions after the Scottish Government took control of ScotRail was a cut to services, rather than an investment in stimulating demand that would have aligned with the aims of reducing car use and transport emissions. The motion also highlights “operational performance and passenger satisfaction under public ownership and control” but millions of pounds have been paid out in compensation under the delay repay scheme since nationalisation, and punctuality and reliability are the most common topics of complaint.”
“As we reflect on progress, we must also be honest about the challenges that our rail network faces and the work that must still be done. Although we may accept that the coming together of the rail bodies involved in Scotland’s railway has been a success, the running of our railways by the Scottish Government has not maximised the potential that exists, so we must focus on improving that. One of the most significant developments in recent years is the return of ScotRail to public ownership, a policy that Scottish Labour had long called for. Public ownership provides the opportunity to have greater accountability and a service that puts passengers and workers ahead of profit, but it must deliver better reliability, affordability and accessibility.”
“I am pleased to open the debate for Scottish Labour as we mark 20 years since the devolution of rail powers and recognise the progress that has been made on Scotland’s railways. The motion highlights some achievements during that time, including the reopening of the Levenmouth rail line, a cause that has been close to my own heart since 2008. That reopening was the result of the perseverance of a tenacious group of campaigners, alongside strong cross- party support, and is an example of what can be achieved when communities and campaigners work together. However, we must also acknowledge that it should not take decades of pressure to deliver essential transport connections. Communities in other parts of Scotland are still waiting for investment and deserve clarity about when promised projects will actually be delivered.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on work to improve safety on public transport. (S6O-04897)”
“I know that, before the Glasgow to Edinburgh line was electrified, short-forming was an issue, so it is not unreasonable to ask for the impact of short- forming to be measured. I will speak to ScotRail about whether it could consider that. Hydrogen Action Plan 4.”
“Short-forming is often the cause of the overcrowding. As the cabinet secretary has recognised, there is a need to increase capacity in Fife. Given that short-forming is not measured in the public performance measure, would she support the PPM being changed to recognise the issue? Although peak fares have been removed, which is to be welcomed, overcrowding could work against that policy and make it less attractive to travel by train. Fiona Hyslop: I have been very concerned about those areas where there is short-forming and what impact reduced rail fares could have on that. Short-forming could happen when units are affected by issues such as door cracks or wheel flats. That is why replacement is really important. Claire Baker makes a reasonable point about what impacts are measured.”
“She said: “The Scottish Government would be open to consider future subsidy to remove peak fares should UK budget allocations to the Scottish Government improve in future years.” Therefore, maybe it is the UK Government that we have to thank for the First Minister’s change of track. 13:19”
“The cabinet secretary also argued, just at the end of February, that “the trial had limited success, and Parliament simply cannot and should not overturn a carefully crafted and agreed budget for transport this coming year, the day after agreeing to it.”—[Official Report, 26 February 2025; c 69.] The plans were, therefore, not in the budget that Parliament passed in February. However, within a matter of months—coincidentally, before a crucial Scottish Parliament by-election—the First Minister announced a change of heart. Next week will provide more time to consider the detail of the policy, but I will finish with one more quote from the cabinet secretary.”
“Consequently, insufficient levels of income were generated to justify continuing the pilot, which mostly benefited existing passengers who have above-average incomes.”—[Official Report, 26 February 2025; c 51.] Some of us will be familiar with the argument that the pilot was flawed. It was not initially advertised or promoted, and it took place during industrial action, at a time when there was a reduced timetable and we were still in a post- pandemic period, when patronage of public transport was going through a transition.”
“The pilot, which ran from October 2023 to September 2024, was deemed by Transport Scotland to not have been successful, and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has previously defended in the chamber the decision to scrap the pilot. She recently said: “Was modal shift part of the original intention of the pilot? Yes. Did the pilot achieve the shift that we wanted or desired? Unfortunately, and regrettably, no.”—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 23 April 2025; c 10.] The cabinet secretary also said: “the pilot did not achieve its original aim of encouraging more people to travel by train. The analysis shows that there was only a limited increase in passenger numbers— 6.8 per cent—during the pilot.”
“There is also an additional benefit for Fife travellers, as the peak fares applied over a longer period and did not just cover the morning rush hour but restricted travel in the evenings for almost two hours, which made a cheap day return less attractive. The minister will have also heard me say that, in terms of price per mile, Fifers pay some of the highest fares, and that discrepancy will still remain. I appreciate that that is not always the best way to measure costs, but the fair fares review was designed to address some of those anomalies, and we need to see more progress on that. It is fair to say that some of us might have been surprised when the Government announced the scrapping of peak fares.”
“It included the removal of peak fares, which it argued were a tax on workers and a disincentive to using the train. This week, ASLEF welcomed the decision on peak fares, saying: “So while today is a victory and good news for passengers, more could and should be done to cut fares further and ensure Scotland’s rail services are as affordable and accessible as possible. We urge the Scottish government to keep on working to this end.” Although today is an opportunity to highlight the change in fares, next week’s debate may be the time to consider what more could and should be done to make rail more affordable and inclusive. Scotland and the UK have some of the highest fares in Europe, and reductions such as reducing a peak-time return from Kirkcaldy to Edinburgh from £19.60 to £12.60—a saving of £7 per journey—are to be welcomed.”
“I thank Bob Doris for securing the debate. The removal of peak fares from Scotland’s railways on 1 September is very much welcomed. In the rail debate next week, there will be an opportunity to discuss that policy, along with others, in our consideration of the future of Scotland’s railways. I welcome the fact that Bob Doris took time this afternoon to highlight some of those other issues. At the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow, the rail trade unions launched a vision for Scotland’s railways, recognising the significance of COP taking place in Scotland. That was a welcome document that firmly placed the future of Scotland’s railways as part of the way in which we can tackle climate change and meet our ambitious environment targets.”
“I recognise that there is a role for the UK Government, but there is more that the Scottish Government could explore to see what we can do here and whether we can make progress. 18:11”
“To address the problem, we need to not only increase the number of qualified dentists, but ensure that there are adequate numbers of technicians, nurses and hygienists, who are all vital parts of a practice. I have spoken to dentists in my region and they want to see every avenue explored to expand routes into dentistry and related roles. That includes ensuring that more students are being trained, by lifting the cap on numbers and encouraging them to stay not only in Scotland but in the NHS, as well as facilitating routes for qualified practitioners from other countries to be able to practice here—that is an area that I have previously spoken to the minister about.”
“I recognise that there has been some positive news in Fife more recently, with the opening of a new practice in Dunfermline, although Alex Rowley has highlighted the stress that is being experienced and the demand for that service. I also recognise that that has been supported in part by funding from the Scottish dental access initiative and that there are plans in place for Leven and Glenrothes. However, we have to remember that not only do those new practices come in the context of a greater number of closures and restrictions on access to NHS dentistry, but that NHS services are under significant pressures nationally and that the supply of dentists is finite. Therefore, for every community that benefits from a new practice, there will be more communities that miss out. That is the crux of the problem.”
“The British Dental Association is clear that the fall in attendance at dental surgeries will mean a bigger burden from a higher rate of dental disease and the likely widening of health inequalities. Unless we improve access to dentists now, it will cost the NHS far more to deal with the consequences. We need to consider preventative measures that can be applied to the approach to dental care more broadly. For years, those in the profession have been calling for a move to a more preventative system, instead of the drill-and-fill model. Instead of that comprehensive change, however, there has been only tinkering, which has simply not been good enough.”
“Lifetime registration does not always reflect access, and we need to focus on the number of people who are actually accessing NHS care. The headline figures that the Scottish Government promotes say that 95 per cent of Scots are registered with an NHS dentist, but what really matters is the proportion of those who have actually had contact with a dentist in the past two years, which is much lower. At the start of this year, out of those who were registered, 1.8 million adults and more than 177,000 children in Scotland had not seen a dentist in that period, and 28 per cent of registered adults had not had an appointment in five years. Those are the figures that we need to focus on. The number of NHS practices is still in decline, with NHS provision reducing or ending completely at many practices.”
“Instead of high- quality free NHS dentistry being ensured for all, many people are now being pushed into private practice, sometimes effectively to subsidise the delivery of NHS services at the same practice. They often have no choice, because the alternative that they are faced with is to leave the practice and not receive dental care, as they cannot get registered with an alternative NHS dentist. We know the potential consequences of that from the terrible examples of DIY treatment and from cases of people enduring discomfort and declining oral health. As other members have said, regular dental checks are important, as they identify other oral health conditions and allow for early prevention and treatment. The move to lifetime registration in 2010 should have resulted in a change to how we measure access to a dentist.”
“I, too, thank Alex Rowley for securing the debate. We are both familiar with the challenges around access to NHS dentistry in our region of Mid Scotland and Fife and across the country, with numerous concerns having been raised with us by constituents—both patients and dental practitioners—over a period of years. Not only have dental practices been closing; many are either reducing or entirely ending NHS provision for adult patients, leaving patients in the position of having to pay for private care or having no access to a dentist. That is entirely at odds with the belief that everyone should have access to NHS care when they need it.”
“If Claire Baker is arguing that the Scottish Funding Council should take financial resources away from other colleges to give to Fife College, perhaps she can provide a list of the institutions that she has in mind. I am sure that that would be of interest to some of her Labour colleagues who represent other parts of the country. If she is arguing that more money should be simply provided for the sector, I have to remind her that Labour made no such ask of the Government in the budget setting process. While Willie Rennie and the Lib Dems worked with the Scottish Government to secure an additional £3.5 million for colleges, Labour members sat on their hands. Therefore, they do not have a shred of credibility on the issue. The Presiding Officer: I call Annabelle Ewing to ask the briefest of supplementaries.”
“There is no question but that it is one of the losers in the funding changes, which will have consequences for staffing, academic provision and accessibility. Fife College principal, Jim Metcalfe, has said: “The scale of the challenge now created by these changes is clearly precipitous.” Does the minister recognise that the decision risks creating for Fife College the situation that the changes seek to solve for other colleges, and that it places the college at risk? Graeme Dey: The underlying assertion that other colleges are somehow being favoured over Fife College simply does not stand up to scrutiny given the brand-new £150 million Scottish Government-funded campus in Dunfermline that the college will take ownership of later this year.”
“Of course, next year, the college will be moving into new facilities at the Dunfermline learning campus, which has been supported by tens of millions of pounds in Scottish Government investment. Operational decisions, including those on course provision and staffing are, of course, a matter for individual colleges. Claire Baker: The minister is well aware that the 1.26 per cent increase in teaching funding is a real-terms cut that is below inflation and compares unfavourably with other colleges. Over the past decade, Fife College’s core budget has been cut in real terms by almost 20 per cent. The college now faces defunding of £1.3 million in annual learning and teaching investment for the coming year.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of any impact of the recent changes to college funding arrangements on Fife College. (S6O-04820) The Minister for Higher and Further Education; and Minister for Veterans (Graeme Dey): Colleges play an important role in our communities, which is why the budget for this year sees a 2.1 per cent uplift to the college resource allocation. It is also a fact that the Scottish Funding Council has ensured that no college will have their teaching funding reduced for this financial year against the previous year. Fife College will receive a 1.26 per cent increase in teaching funding and a 4.9 per cent increase in capital maintenance funding in the final allocations.”