Minister pressed on fears over £85million tax bill

'I know in my constituency of Edinburgh West, the wellbeing of our four universities in Edinburgh are vital not just to the economy but to the livelihoods of many of my constituents.
'International students in turn are vital to the wellbeing of those universities, and Universities Scotland say that the measures proposed this week by the Government on immigration could cost universities in Scotland £85 million a year in terms of the levy (as reported in The Herald).
READ MORE:
Scottish universities face £85m bill from new UK tax on international students
Ministers to consider writing off domestic abuse victims' council tax debt
Swinney under fire over '£1bn SNP ferry fiasco' as costs and delays mount
'There's a great deal of concern about this, so can the Leader arrange for me to have a meeting with the relevant minister to see how we can address this issue and perhaps reassure our university sector?'
Commons Leader Lucy Powell replied: 'Look, it's important to say that international students play a really important part to our country and bring with them skills and make a great contribution to our country. I think that's why (Universities UK) said this week that actually our measures will keep us very competitive in these areas, but I do take on board what she's saying.'
Under a proposal unveiled on Monday as part of the UK Government's drive to curb immigration, a new 6% tax would be imposed on universities on their income from foreign students.
Calculations by university sources in Scotland based on the number of overseas students at 19 institutions in the sector north of the border during 2023/24 estimated the bill would come to around £85m a year if the tax is introduced north of the Border.
The additional potential cost comes on top of existing acute financial challenges and major job losses at a number of Scottish universities.
Claire McPherson, Director of Universities Scotland, told The Herald last night the international students tax could exacerbate budget problems in the sector and urged the Prime Minister to reconsider its introduction.
'We urge the UK Government to think carefully about the impact that a levy on international student fees will have on universities and the attractiveness of the UK as a study destination," she said.
"Universities' financial and operating environment is already very challenging. We cannot understand the logic behind a levy that would move resource away from universities. It risks making a bad situation worse.'
She also called for the UK ministers to allow the Scottish Government to decide whether to introduce the levy.
'Within the UK, we'd hope to see the UK Government defer a decision on the applicability of any levy in Scotland to the Scottish Government, reflecting the fact that university funding is devolved," she said.
"We'd then hope that the Scottish Government will see this as an opportunity to differentiate Scotland's higher education sector from the rest of the UK, in terms of strengthening Scotland's appeal when recruiting internationally. That would be one way to create an opportunity for Scotland from amongst a suite of immigration policy measures that Scotland does not otherwise have the powers to control.'
Scotland's higher education minister Graeme Dey said he was 'as a matter of urgency" seeking clarity from the UK government on whether "the proposed levy on international students is intended to only apply to universities in England."
A UK Government spokesman told The Herald last night: 'We will fully consult all the devolved governments, including the Scottish Government, on the implementation of the international student levy and will be setting out more details around this in the Autumn Budget.
'The analysis we've given so far of the potential impacts is based on the levy applying to English higher education providers only.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Telegraph

39 minutes ago

• Telegraph

Assisted dying, abortion, grooming gangs...Britain is morally deformed

I've a friend in a nursing home with very bad cancer. Physically, he feels OK, but there are hints of mental confusion. One afternoon we watched a quiz show on a blank television that wasn't turned on. It was proof, he said, that his mind couldn't be going because he got all the answers right. With the passage of Kim Leadbeater's Bill – save a stay of execution in the Lords – he suddenly looks like a candidate for assisted dying, and yet his suffering strengthens the case against. My friend, at this stage, is miserable less because of the tumour than because he's poor – can't afford a home care – and anxious because he wakes up in a strange place and imagines he's been kidnapped. He tells me he is at the centre of a plot by the state to kill the old by driving them mad. Though I assure him that no government is competent enough to pull such a thing off, I'm beginning to wonder if he has a point. Last week, the Commons voted to decriminalise abortion and legalise state-assisted suicide, the latest twist on 'cradle to grave'. Supporters spoke of humanising the law, of continuing the 'progressive' effort begun in the 1960s when abortion was first permitted. But there's a big contextual difference. Social liberalism in a time of economic growth was about increasing choice; today, in a period of austerity, it suggests narrowing options. Can't afford a baby? Terminate it. Worry you might burden the grandkids? Take a seat in the suicide pod. Of course this isn't what MPs meant by voting this way – but when you cut benefits for the elderly and cap them for children, and then make it easier to destroy yourself or your baby, it's hard not to infer a link. People keep saying to me, with a dash of British humour, that the state intends to kill us all to save money. Let's assume this is wrong. Let's call the speculation tasteless. Nevertheless, we have to account for why so many people feel this way, for the historic loss of trust. This is not some opioid-induced fantasy; human beings respond to cues. The third story in the grimmest week of Starmer's premiership was the publication of the Casey report, which confirmed that Asian men raped girls, and that officials declined to act because it might appear racist. This is mind-blowing stuff and shows how morally deformed our establishment now is. It has no coherent understanding of good and evil – in the difference between innocence and guilt – and in its yearning to look good by its own bizarre standard, it permits evil to flourish. In 2025, a person who prays outside an abortion clinic faces arrest. Meanwhile, a foreign-born, convicted rapist might avoid deportation by invoking their human rights. Religion, in fact, barely featured in the assisted dying debate, except to suggest that opponents might be acting under orders from the Pope. This fantasy pays a backhanded compliment to a faith that has been losing its influence for a very long time. As far back as 1937, Cosmo Gordon Lang, the archbishop of Canterbury, abstained in a Lords vote on divorce because he judged it 'no longer possible to impose the full Christian standard by law on a largely non-Christian population'. Christianity defined the West for so many centuries that its loss is experienced as the death of a fixed order, but we mustn't forget that Jesus was a revolutionary who overturned an even older system of ethics. Pagans, who largely felt life was meant to be enjoyed, thought the martyrdom-chasing Christians were nuts. One can see why. They taught that death is not the end, life is a test, and suffering is an opportunity to imitate the crucifixion. For example: the 7th century saint Cuthbert had a best friend, Herbert, and the two men dreamt of spending eternity together. But Cuthbert was a famously holy man, so would pass through purgatory to Heaven fast, whereas Herbert was just a very good man, so, they feared, might take longer – delaying their reunion. How did God fix the problem? He generously gave Herbert a long, painful illness, so that when he died on the same day as Cuthbert, his soul was so cleansed by suffering that they entered paradise at the same time. Weird, isn't it? Yes, but it also seeded into the West the idea that our life belongs to God, that He made us in his image, and this is a foundation for the principle that you can't take away another's life at will. This gradually flowered into rights for women or slaves, the peace movement and abolition of the death penalty. The problem with a commandment, of course, is that it's inflexible: it extends to unwanted foetuses and relatives in pain. Around the 19th century, we detached God from ethics, getting around the 'Thou Shalt Nots' and opening morality up to negotiation. Add individualism, toss in consumerism, and moral action today is contingent upon personality, economics, circumstance. Back when I was a socialist, before religion came into it, I wasn't comfortable with the idea that one unborn baby gets to live because its parents happen to be married and rich, whereas another is aborted because its mother is single and poor. Humanistic morality seemed surprisingly naive about the reality of the human condition, its appetites and deprivations. Looking at my friend in the nursing home, to what possible extent can one say he has 'agency'? I'm not sure he understands his diagnosis. The notion that he might have a chat with Kim Leadbeater, she with a smile and a clipboard in her hand, and make a rational choice to die next Wednesday afternoon is preposterous. The opportunity for error or manipulation is self-evident, yet many cannot, or will not, see it. For anyone who does choose assisted dying, I hope Christians respond with mercy. We are not in charge of Britain, haven't been for a long time, and I'm not sure I'd want to be. The best options left are to witness and accompany, to do the sometimes depressing, occasionally rewarding work of being with people when they go. I enjoy holding my friend's hand. I'd never have done that when he was healthy.

The National

an hour ago

• The National

Scotland 'should not be treated as afterthought' of HS2 project

Last week, the UK Government admitted the flagship infrastructure project had been 'no less than a litany of failure'. The Labour administration blamed the previous Tory government for the overruns. The link to Scotland for the project was cancelled in June 2022, with the route from Birmingham to Manchester scrapped by former Tory prime minister Rishi Sunak in 2024. READ MORE: UK providing 'political cover' for US and Israel after Iran attack Now, the scheme is running £37 billion over budget, and has been delayed beyond 2033. The UK's Secretary of State for Transport, MP Heidi Alexander, told the House of Commons last week: 'I'm drawing a line in the sand – calling time on years of mismanagement, flawed reporting and ineffective oversight. 'It means this government will get the job done between Birmingham and London. 'We won't reinstate cancelled sections we can't afford.' Alexander (above) also admitted there was 'no reasonable way to deliver' on the 2033 target for the first trains to run between London and Birmingham. The SNP are now urging the UK Government to look again at extending the line to Scotland, after taxpayers north of the border will have contributed to the project but see no benefit. Willie Coffey, SNP MSP, said: 'The fact the UK cannot construct a high-speed rail network - the norm in many countries around the world - speaks for itself. 'While we know HS2 won't have any stations in Scotland, with the way things are going it'll be lucky to have any stations in England either.' Coffey pointed to claims made during the 2014 independence referendum that a Yes vote would jeopardise Scotland's opportunity to benefit from HS2 'only to find that promptly after the referendum the connections to Scotland were ditched'. READ MORE: Douglas Alexander refuses to set out route to Scottish independence 'This is nothing new sadly, 30 years ago we were promised that Scotland would be connected to the Eurostar - but that was dumped despite Scotland's sizeable contribution to paying for the creation of the Channel Tunnel,' he added. "Promises broken and public money squandered is par for the course for Westminster. It's clear we need to get Scotland's finances and transport investment out of the hands of Westminster and into Scotland's hands with independence." It comes after new HS2 Ltd chief executive Mark Wild said the 'overall situation with respect to cost, schedule and scope is unsustainable' in a letter to Alexander. He said costs would continue to rise if ministers did not renegotiate engineering contracts awarded in 2020. Wild also said that the testing phase alone would be likely to take three years, rather than the 14 months that had been previously assumed. The Department for Transport has been contacted for comment. The £3bn Scottish link to HS2 was quietly dropped by the then-Tory government just 30 minutes before the result of a no-confidence vote on Boris Johnson was announced. When Sunak cancelled the Manchester leg at the 2023 Tory party conference, he said the money would be diverted to other public transport projects and roads in the North of England and the Midlands.

Daily Record

2 hours ago

• Daily Record

Celtic see Matt O'Riley windfall put in major jeopardy as 'preferred' suitor performs £30m Brighton transfer trick

A host of Italian clubs are on alert despite the Premier League side remaining keen to keep the playmaker at the AMEX In-demand Matt O'Riley has reportedly told Brighton he would prefer to join Roma this summer if he leaves the club. But that could leave Celtic's sell-on windfall at risk with the Serie A giants looking to avoid a major Financial Fair Play pitfall. ‌ The Hoops have already seen the Parkhead coffers boosted this summer by a sell-on windfall after Jeremie Frimpong 's move to Liverpool from Bayer Leverkusen. ‌ And the Scottish champions powerbrokers are on alert again amid reports that Napoli made a £25.6million (€30million) offer for the Danish international just 12 months on from his £25million Parkhead exit. Celtic hold a 10 per cent sell-on clause in the deal that took the 24-year-old to the AMEX Stadium last season - but the Seagulls are said to be in no rush to sell with talks "ongoing" over a deal. La Gazzetta dello Sport now claim Roma have already made contact with the midfielder's entourage with O'Riley "eager" to join the club. However, I Giallorossi are said to be 'formulating" a loan offer with obligation to buy next summer - with Brighton demanding £30million for the playmaker. It is noted that Roma are currently focussed on selling players to balance the books before the June 30 FFP deadline. O'Riley is said to be willing to wait for a move to link up with Gian Piero Gasperini - who is a big fan of the player having previously attempted to bring him to Atalanta from Celtic. ‌ O'Riley endured an injury-hampered debut campaign at the AMEX Stadium but showed flashes of his best form in the final weeks of the season. But the man himself has bemoaned the fact he's been unable to play in his favoured position under head coach Fabian Hurzeler - with Georginio Rutter deployed in the playmaker role. ‌ Speaking in his homeland, the Denmark international said: "I am not completely happy, and I am just giving my opinion. 'It makes it difficult to show off when you play a position you are not completely happy with. I can play better for the team if I play the number eight position, but I can play well in other positions. "You can say it in a way that is not aggressive. If you are honest with another person, you don't lose anything. The coach can always say he doesn't agree." You can get all the news you need on our dedicated Rangers and Celtic pages, and sign up to our newsletters to make sure you never miss a beat throughout the season. We're also on WhatsApp, where we bring all the latest breaking news and transfer gossip directly to your phone. Join our Rangers community here and our Celtic community here.