The next item on our agenda is the legislative consent motion on the Higher Education and Research Bill, and I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to move the motion—Kirsty Williams.

Motion NDM6233 Kirsty Williams

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales, in accordance with Standing Order 29.6 agrees that provisions in the Higher Education and Research Bill, relating to the rating of higher education, financial support for students, the independent student complaints scheme and support for research in so far as they fall within the legislative competence of the National Assembly for Wales, should be considered by the UK Parliament.

Motion moved.

Thank you again, Presiding Officer, for the opportunity to speak to this legislative consent motion. I would also like to thank members of the Children, Young People and Education Committee for their scrutiny of the initial and supplementary memorandum. Additionally, I would like to record my appreciation of the engagement by Universities Wales, NUS Wales and the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales with this matter.

The UK Government introduced the Higher Education and Research Bill to the House of Commons on 19 May 2016. The Bill subsequently transferred to the House of Lords where it passed its Second Reading on 6 December, before proceeding to Committee Stage, where it was subject to significant debate. Higher education is a devolved matter. However, legislative change proposed by the UK Government in this area inevitably has implications for Wales. In seeking provision in this Bill, my priority is to ensure that students and institutions in Wales are not disadvantaged. I consider that limited provision should be made for Wales in relation to the matters set out in the two memoranda for which consent of the Assembly is required.

I’m pleased to note that the scrutiny committee did not raise any objections to the agreement of the motion and has no concerns with the approach being taken. The committee reported that a number of concerns were raised in consultation responses. Nevertheless, the committee concluded that the consultation did not raise any matter that impacts on whether the policies contained in the relevant provisions should be extended to Wales.

I should like to respond to the two topics of concern, namely the teaching excellence framework, or TEF, as it has become known, and the interaction with tuition fees in Wales. I not only recognise but I also share some of the concerns with regard to the TEF proposals. They are not the criteria that this Welsh Government would put forward as, to be frank, we do not share the same marketisation agenda that they have across the border. However, we have to deal with the realities that we face.

The Welsh Government is committed to the local, national and international success of our higher education institutions, and we do not therefore want Welsh institutions to be at a disadvantage in comparison to those in the rest of the UK. The provision being sought in the Bill is enabling, and will give Welsh Ministers the power to provide or withdraw consent for Welsh institutions to participate in the TEF in the future. But let me be absolutely clear: tuition fees will not be linked to TEF ratings in Wales, and I have made it clear to the UK Government that I don’t want to see the ability to recruit international students linked to TEF either.

The Welsh Government will continue to set tuition fee levels to its own criteria, taking account of financial stability, how we maintain our international competitiveness, and the impact on students. I believe that the proposals will enable us to keep our distinct approach to higher education while ensuring that institutions in Wales, the students who study at them and the Welsh Ministers’ ability to deal with the implications of the UK Government’s reforms are not adversely impacted. I therefore, Presiding Officer, ask Assembly Members to support the legislative consent motion.

May I thank the Cabinet Secretary for her opening remarks, much of which I would agree with, particularly from the point of view of the TEF? I welcome that clear message about your direction of travel on that issue. Indeed, there is much in the LCM that, certainly, I wouldn’t oppose. But there is an increasingly important question arising for me in terms of the possible impact for research in Wales, as a result of the proposed Bill in Westminster. We know how important funding sources from the research councils are for education institutions in Wales. We know about the BBSRC, which significantly funds our IBERS, we know of NERC in Bangor, and there are other examples across Wales. In this interim period, I’ve become more and more aware that any developments that could put those funding sources at risk are ones that we as an Assembly should guard against.

We must pose the question, in looking at the Bill: where will Wales’s voice be in this proposed UKRI? There is no certainty at all that Wales will have any considerable input into that body. Indeed, if we look at one of the amendments that was passed to the Bill in Westminster, it mentions that Westminster Ministers should consider whether it would be desirable for one of the devolved nations to have representation. That is, ‘have regard to the desirability of’—that was the wording used. Well, surely we should insist that each of the devolved nations should have a voice on UKRI? Indeed, the Bill states that there has to be a student representative in some of those contexts, so why not give the same status to the Welsh voice in this process?

Plaid Cymru, like many others to be fair, has consistently over the years highlighted the fact that Wales is underfunded in terms of research. There is a risk now, I think, that that unacceptable situation could get even worse.

The Bill provides powers to Welsh Ministers to provide support for research, including grants and so on. And I would just ask myself: what’s the intention here then? Because at the moment, the Welsh Government does fund, through HEFCW, much of this research, or at least it’s part of the dual support mechanism, this core funding that provides the infrastructure for universities to compete for much of the funding from the research councils and others.

That mechanism is one that provides a great flexibility for the HE sector when it comes to research. Indeed, Sir Ian Diamond highlighted much of this in the work that he undertook most recently. But there is a risk now that we could see a situation where Ministers in Westminster would say, ‘Well, if you’re not happy, then Welsh Ministers can directly fund research.’ That is a risk I think that we shouldn’t leave ourselves open to. So, I do feel that there should be an element of ring-fencing here. I’m sure that many would agree with that from the point of view of research in Wales. But, certainly, I do think that Wales should have a stronger voice than what’s currently proposed in the Bill. You referred to evidence from other organisations as part of this process. Universities Wales is one body that’s expressed concerns about this. HEFCW too has expressed concern about where this could lead.

So, there’s a great deal, as I said, that I wouldn’t oppose, but unfortunately we can’t amend or propose amendments to an LCM in any way. So, we, as a party, will be voting against the LCM this afternoon.

I rise to support and endorse what Llyr Gruffydd has just said. I have been increasingly concerned over the past few weeks about the work of this UKRI. I have asked several questions, but unfortunately I haven’t reached the list for oral questions yet. But I did receive a written answer to the question that I had hoped to ask the First Minister today. The response says that the Government and Kirsty Williams as Cabinet Secretary have met with the chief scientific adviser and the responsible Minister in the UK Government to make an application for Wales to be fully represented on the UKRI. I take it that that has taken place. Of course, the LCM before us today does state clearly—or the context states, as Llyr has said—that Wales is not fully represented on that board. So, the Government has asked this—this is the Government’s policy—and having failed to achieve that, it comes to the Assembly to ask it to approve a policy that it hasn’t succeeded in achieving. That’s not good enough in this context as there are genuine risks for Wales, our research councils and for funding in our universities with the establishment of UKRI.

What’s happening is this: all of the research councils are gathered together in one body. Research funding from HEFCE, the council in England, is placed in that pot too, and also innovation funding from the UK Government with regard to England. So, rather than having research councils that look across the United Kingdom—and there are problems with those anyway, as Llyr pointed out—you have a new body that is dominated by the interests of the university sector in England, and it is also under the increased influence of Ministers in England as well, without any direct representation by Wales on that body. The response that I received from the First Minister today goes on to say further that it’s only very recently that we started discussions with the universities with regard to the relationship with his body. Well, again, that’s not good enough. We don’t understand how this body is going to work, the effect it’s going to have on research funding in Wales, and, for those reasons alone, we will oppose this LCM today.

To conclude, may I give one specific example? I’m aware of the work that is happening in IBERS in Aberystwyth, because I live in Aberystwyth and represent the region, but, for many years now, IBERS has been in strategic contact with the BBSRC, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, for expenditure worth £4.5 million a year in Aberystwyth, on a strategic basis, to support IBERS’s work. If it should happen that there’s a change in the priority of the research councils, because there is a restriction on the funding available and because there is a change of priorities because Ministers in the UK intervene in those priorities, then we will be losing significant funding for Aberystwyth. I’m not content to see that happening without there being certainty that there is an allocation and ring-fencing of the research funding that we already have. That’s not part of the agreement that lies behind this LCM, nor is there certainty that there will be representation from Wales on the board that makes these decisions. And, of course, as we deal with Brexit, the exit from the European Union, the work that is done in IBERS to look at pasture and to look at the kind of agriculture that is important in Wales—it’s important in the international context, but not in the UK context—then I’m concerned that it will receive less priority in that context. So, I know that the Cabinet Secretary has been forewarned of the concerns that a number of us have who represent Ceredigion and Aberystwyth about these specific problems. We want certainty and assurance that the research funding will continue, and we want certainty that there will be representation on this body; without that certainty, we can’t support the LCM today.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Education to reply to the debate. Kirsty Williams.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I regret that Plaid Cymru do not feel in a position to support this LCM today, because, actually, what we’re trying to do is secure important safeguards for Welsh higher education institutions in being able to accrue these powers for Welsh Ministers with regard to the future of TEF as well as our ability to be able to continue to provide student support in a way that will be necessary and we need to move forward on because of the changes across the border in England, and to actually make some progress as well on alternative student finance, where we know from evidence there are certain members of our community who are put off from applying for student loans because of the nature of the student loans system that we have at the moment. We have a certain group of students who don’t avail themselves of that support, and I believe that to be discriminatory—that we’re not allowing all Welsh citizens to be able to apply for student support systems, to be able to do that, and this is the most timely and effective way of being able to address what I believe to be the discriminatory system that we have at the moment.

With regard to the operation of the UKRI, the Minister for Skills and Science and I met with Jo Johnson, the Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation in England with regard to the new research funding architecture, and I’ve had a number of bilateral meetings with my counterparts in Scotland and a quadrilateral meeting, where all four administrations were represented, to talk about this. Whilst it is welcome that there has been an amendment at the Commons Report Stage that says that there is to be due regard, I do not believe that it goes far enough. I do believe that there should be full Welsh representation on the UKRI. I share the Member’s concerns about the consequences that this may mean for the flow of research funding and we continue to try and push that case. With regard to joint working with HEFCW, I can assure the Member that the Bill allows the relevant authorities to work together if it appears to them to be more effective or if it would allow the authorities to exercise their functions more effectively. So, the effect will allow HEFCW to work jointly with UKRI, insofar as its Research England functions are concerned, and will also allow HEFCW to work jointly with the Office for Students, the Scottish Funding Council and the relevant Northern Ireland departments. This does not alter the scope of the existing arrangements for joint working with the Scottish Funding Council. I regret that Plaid Cymru have decided not to support the LCM, but I think it is, on balance, an important step forward, Presiding Officer.

The proposal is to agree the motion. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.