As indicated in BuildingBetter Cities, our framework policy document for Scotland’scities, the Executive recognises the importance of city-regions and theeconomic significance and potential of West Lothian and North Lanarkshire in developing the city-regions of Edinburgh and Glasgow.

This information wascollected for the first time in 2002-03. It showed that across Scotland 60%of young people leaving care were not in employment, education or training. Abreakdown by local authority area is not available as this was the first yearof collection and standards of data returns varied.

This information is not heldcentrally. However, in February 2003, the Executive published a report onprogress with implementing the recommendations of Learning with Care.This showed that all local authorities reported between 90% and 100% of lookedafter children as being in receipt of full-time education, although localauthorities were not consistent in including children being looked after athome in this return. This position is supplemented by information in the third annualreport of the Chief Social Work Inspector, Progress With Complexity, whichsets out the actions being taken by local authorities to improve theeducational attainment of looked after children, including the introduction ofpersonal education plans.

Proposals that emerge from NHSLothian’s review of possible future patterns of acute care across its area willbe subject to full public consultation. The board must obtain the Scottish Executive’s endorsement of its overall strategy in the light of publicconsultation. It would not be appropriate, therefore, for me to comment on anyparticular form of service provision at this stage.

The amount of student loan thata graduate repays each month and the period of time over which repayments aremade are linked to the level of the borrower’s income and the amount borrowed. Under the support arrangements introduced in2001-02, many students who will be liable to pay the endowment when theygraduate will have been eligible to receive the Young Students Bursary in placeof part of their loan entitlement. Most liable graduates will have borrowedless under these arrangements than they would have had under the previoussystem. No student should have borrowed more.

This information is not heldcentrally.

The Higher Education FundingCouncil for England (HEFCE) publish performance indicators for all UK highereducation institutions (HEIs) annually. The latest figures show that 10% of full-timefirst degree entrants to Scottish HEIs in 2000-01 failed to continue aftertheir year of entry.

Themechanisms in place to support students to the successful completion of ahigher education qualification are the responsibility of HEIs themselves; theseare supported through Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC) grantsfor teaching and learning. The nature of these support mechanisms is notdetermined by SHEFC, as they are based on the local circumstances andpriorities of the institution in question. However, SHEFC introduced itsWidening Access Premium in 2001-02 in order to support institutions inimproving the retention and progression of students from under representedareas. The total allocated to the sector through this grant in 2003-04 is£4,236,000.

In August 2003, the ScottishFurther Education Funding Council (SFEFC) published performance indicatorscharting the achievements of Scotland’s 46 further education colleges, in relation to theacademic year 2001-02. The performance indicators show that 85% of studentsstaying at college beyond the first quarter of their course completed theirprogrammes.

The performance indicatorsenable individual colleges to benchmark their own achievement against that ofother colleges and thus lead to quality improvement. SFEFC recently consulted on proposals for its futureapproach to quality improvement and assurance. SFEFC has agreed to proceed with changes to achievea differentiated review model, with greater emphasis on the effectiveness ofstudent learning. A working group has been set up to manage the detaileddevelopment of the review methodology.

The table shows the average graduate debt since 1999.

 

Cohort	Average Debt
1999	£2,863
2000	£3,174
2001	£3,876
2002	£4,294
2003	£4,924

Source: Student Loans Company (SLC).

Statistics on debt were not maintained by SLC until the introduction of income contingent repayment loans in 1998.

The figures requested are shown in the table:

Maximum Student Grant Available

Year	Amount of Grant	Value in 2003 Prices*
1979	£1,245	£3,981
1988	£1,990	£3,375
1997	£1,685	£1,940

Note: *Using the retail price index as a deflator.

The maximum level of grant was frozen in 1990 with the introduction of mortgage style student loans. The level of grant was reduced and the maximum level of loan increased between 1994-95 and 1997-98 until the maximum support available was made up equally of grant and loan.

The cost to each studentwill vary depending upon the personal circumstances of the individual, wherethey are studying within the UK and the level and length of their course. The Scottish Executive is, therefore, unable to provide an estimate of the average cost to aperson undertaking a course in higher education. The level of the graduateendowment is fixed at the beginning of the course and we estimate that up to50% of graduates will be exempt.

The Executive is about tocommission a Scottish-based student income and expenditure survey. This surveywill provide comprehensive data on theincomes, expenditure and anticipated debt on graduation of a nationallyrepresentative sample of full time and part time undergraduate studentsstudying in Scotland and attending publicly funded higher education and furthereducation Institutions during the academic year 2004-05.