Susana Galván and Dr Elid Morris.

Q155 The Chair: I welcome you both to the European Affairs Committee of the House of Lords. We are sitting today in Cardiff, in the Senedd, and we are extremely grateful to the Senedd for lending us this committee room for the session. The session forms part of our inquiry, which is nearly at its end, into the future relationship between the UK and the EU. This session will concentrate on education and the movement of people and will be included in one of the chapters of our report, which we expect to be out in April. It is a public evidence session, so we will take a transcript that we will send to you. We would be grateful if you could notify us of any corrections, because that is the basis on which we will take the evidence for our report.

We are very pleased today to welcome two senior officials from Taith, which is an exciting organisation that we will probe and learn all about. First, we have Susana Galván, who is the executive director, and, secondly, Elid Morris, the head of operations. Thank you both very much for coming along this morning.

I will start the questions, and then we will rotate around me and my colleagues throughout the session, which I think will take just under an hour. Susana, can you give us a brief introduction to Taith and its background, going a little into the money side of things?

Susana Galván: Good morning. I joined Taith in February last year when the programme was officially launched, having worked for the British Council for 25 years. I worked in different overseas operations of the British Council in east Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

Taith is the outcome of an announcement by the Welsh Government in March 2021 that they would commit £65 million in funding for an international learning exchange programme. The thinking at the time was to create a programme that would allow Welsh organisations to apply for funding to continue with exchanges and mobilities following the UK’s decision to step out of the Erasmus+ programme.

Following that announcement, Cardiff University agreed to host the programme and set up a wholly owned subsidiary company, the International Learning Exchange Programme Ltd. Fast forward to February 2022, almost exactly one year ago, and the programme was launched under the name Taith, which means “journey” in Welsh. It was the result of a public naming competition, where the people of Wales chose the name. The word journey tries to encompass the ethos and purpose of the programme. The strategy of the programme was launched at the same time, as well as a website, and that was the week when I joined as executive director. We had the first funding call under Taith in spring last year, and a second funding call in the autumn; I am sure we will talk more about the details of that. Just last week we launched a third funding call for the programme.

The ethos of Taith is to fill the gap left by the decision to leave Erasmus+, but it goes a step further in the sense that it is an all-inclusive programme, accessible and available to all the learning sectors across Wales, including higher education, further education, vocational education and training, schools, adult learning and the youth sector.

Another key aspect is reciprocity. Organisations that apply for funding can apply for mobilities from Wales outwards, and for mobilities into Wales, so there is a two-directional aspect to the programme. It has a strong focus on access and inclusion, in the sense of trying to reach out not just to more participants but to organisations that perhaps have not benefited from international opportunities in the past because they were not eligible, lacked confidence or thought it was too complicated—whatever barriers were there. We are trying very consciously to reach out to those organisations. Of course, I will be happy to share more detail about the outcomes of the programme. I am sure you will ask me lots of questions about that.

The Chair: We will come on to a lot of the detail. Before I move on to one of my colleagues, may I have a bit more clarity on the money side of things? Is it £65 million only, and does that all come from the Welsh Government?

Susana Galván: It is fully funded by the Welsh Government. It is £65 million over a period of four years from 2022, when the programme was launched, until 2026, and the £65 million covers the costs of running the programme. It covers all the funding opportunities for the pathways—the mobilities and exchanges—and the funding of Global Wales, a programme that supports the higher education and further education sectors with a joined-up, international strategy that raises the visibility of Wales in certain markets and helps those sectors broker partnerships and collaborations in specific markets. Global Wales has been running for a number of years; it was previously funded by HEFCW. It is now in phase 3 of the project, and we have taken over the funding of that.

The Chair: That is very helpful indeed.

Q156 Lord Hannay of Chiswick: To start, I should mention two former interests: I was pro-chancellor of the University of Birmingham, and I was on the council of the University of Kent. In both those capacities, I had some familiarity with Erasmus and Erasmus+, but that is in the past.

Will you say a little about the similarities and differences between your Taith programme and Erasmus+? Indeed, does the Taith programme now have any interconnection with Erasmus+, even though the UK is not a participant in Erasmus+?

Susana Galván: When the programme was set up, the idea, as I said, was to take on the potential gaps that Erasmus+ would leave, considering that the UK would be removing itself from it. The programme was set up very much with Europe in mind, and it was modelled through consultation with sectors on a similar framework to Erasmus+. It focuses on mobility and exchanges, and a lot of the framework and systems are similar—for example, the eligibility and assessment criteria and how we assess applications.

However, the idea of Taith is that it very much focuses on the Welsh sectors. At the beginning, there was a lot of focus on consultation with the eligible sectors that I just mentioned, and on understanding what worked for them, from the perspective of Erasmus+, and where they saw the gaps.

In many ways it is similar, but one of the key differences is that there is a lot of focus in Taith on the sector engagement aspect. We are lucky in that Wales is a small nation, so it is much easier to engage at a very granular level with a sector. We work closely with all the sectors to understand their needs, raise awareness of the programme, and adjust it as we go along. Last year we had a funding call for a pathway and, when we launched it this year, we could see where things could be improved and how we could make the systems a bit easier and the application process a bit less onerous.

Another difference is that we try to be consistent in the criteria and the processes for all sectors. Erasmus+ is a little different depending on which sector you apply from. We are trying to make the processes more standardised and more consistent across the board. Another difference is that we try to focus a little more on the smaller organisations to see which ones, as I said, perhaps did not previously benefit from Erasmus+, and try to understand why. Is it that perhaps they are not interested in international exchanges, or they feel it is too difficult to apply? There is perhaps a bit of a perception that mobilities are available only to certain elements of society—the middle class or people who are more educated. We are trying to reach organisations to make sure that they feel empowered and confident to access the opportunities, and we offer them support throughout their journey to make it happen.

Those are the key differences, but the ethos is similar. It is about the realisation that international exchanges provide so many benefits not just to the participants themselves but to the organisations that host them. I should have mentioned that, under Taith, we fund mobilities not just for students and learners but for staff. A group of teachers could have an exchange with a school to learn about curriculum development, aspects of running the classroom or professional development. We think that staff mobility is key.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: Do Welsh universities, further education and others qualify for the Turing scheme as well as this scheme?

Susana Galván: Yes.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: So they can go for one or the other.

Susana Galván: Yes, they can go for both.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: Do you mean that they could be cumulative?

Susana Galván: They can go for both but, obviously, we would not fund a project under Taith that was already funded through Turing. We want to avoid double funding at all costs, because that would not be a good use of public funds. The sectors that are eligible for Turing—higher education, schools and further education—are also eligible for Taith funding separately; they can apply for both strands of funding. Under Taith, we have eligible sectors that are not eligible for Turing: the youth sector and the adult learning sector.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: And you are doing inward, which is not covered by Turing.

Susana Galván: Yes. The difference with Erasmus is that it had both directions, so you could be a school in France and apply for mobility to come to the UK, and I could be a school in the UK and apply for mobility to France, but you would manage your application, and I would manage mine. With Taith, a Welsh organisation can apply for funding to send people out of Wales to X country, and it can also get funding to bring people into Wales from that point, but it is all managed by the Welsh organisation, if that makes sense. But yes, it allows for inward as well.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: How much is the cost per head of your programmes? How does it compare with Erasmus+?

Susana Galván: For the grant rates—the amount of money that organisations get for particular mobilities—there are a lot of different variables depending on the sector and whether it is staff mobility or learner mobility, group mobility or individual mobility, and depending on the country of destination. Obviously, some countries are more expensive to travel to. The cost of living could be higher in Australia than in India, for example. We have travel rates and grant rates based on country groups. Similarly to Turing and Erasmus, we have additional eligibility rates for a widening participation background; a person with a disability will get extra costs. That is all published in the programme guide.

When we established the rates, we used Erasmus and Turing as points of reference. We do not want to create a situation where we deviate too much from what is in existing programmes, because we would be creating a problem for organisations that can apply for more than one scheme. At the same time, we take into account the feedback we get from the sectors here in Wales. We might say, “Okay, maybe these rates are too low, because the cost of living shows that we should put more money into it”. We are always reviewing the rates.

The cost per participant varies depending on the type of mobility, the destination and the type of institution.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: In a ballpark way, is it less costly or more costly than Erasmus+ would have been?

Susana Galván: In a ballpark way it would be a similar cost, because we have modelled the costing in a similar way to Erasmus and Turing.

Q157 Lord Liddle: This is all very interesting. Can you give us a sense of the numbers of both inbound and outbound so far? I might ask you a couple more questions after you have answered that.

Susana Galván: Yes, absolutely. We launched the first funding call last March. At the moment, we have two funding pathways: pathway 1, mobility of participants, which is very similar to Erasmus and Turing; and pathway 2, which focuses on strategic partnerships and collaboration.

For pathway 1, we received 71 applications from all sectors across Wales: youth, schools, adult education, FE, VET and higher education. For higher education we had two strands of funding in the pathway, one for mobility of participants and the other focused on the mobility of researchers. That is a unique feature of Taith. We have eight universities in Wales. Cardiff University could apply for both strands; it could apply for the regular strand of funding for mobility of participants and put in an application for the research strand.

Of the 71 applications, 52 were successful. If you want to know the split—I can share the numbers with you afterwards—we had 13 successful applications from the youth sector; 15 from schools; and six from adult education. We were very happy with that, because adult learning is a small and quite new sector to work with, and we were a bit worried and not sure about the appetite. We had four applications for further education and VET. For the regular strand of HE, all eight universities were successful. For the research strand, we had six applications and six were successful because, of the eight universities, six universities are more research-focused.

That made a total of 52 successful projects, which will benefit more than 100 organisations across Wales, because some of the applications were consortium-based. Those 100-plus organisations are spread across all the 22 local authorities in Wales. The value of funding was a little over £10 million for the successful projects. We issued the grant award letters over the summer, and we start making payments to the projects in the autumn, from September. A lot of the projects have started already. Altogether, the projects will produce more than 6,000 mobilities.

Lord Liddle: Is that 6,000 individuals going overseas and coming into Wales?

Susana Galván: Yes, both directions; it is outward and inward combined. It involves the mobility of students and learners as well as staff mobilities. There are more than 6,000 mobilities and just over £10 million of value has been awarded.

For pathway 2, which was launched in October—we closed the call in December—we had more than 30 applications. That pathway focuses very much on partnerships, but I cannot give you the numbers yet because they are being assessed at the moment. We will announce the outcomes from the end of February.

Last week, we launched another round of pathway 1: the 2023 pathway 1 call. It opened on 19 January and will be open until 16 March.

Lord Liddle: Are the partnerships you talked about mainly university partnerships?

Susana Galván: No. The partnership strand of funding is open to all sectors, except for higher education. I will explain why. When we did the consultation, the universities said that they wanted the allocation of Taith funding for HE to be dedicated fully to mobility. That is the feedback we got from the sector; they wanted all the money to go into that pot.

In addition, £10 million of Taith funding is going to Global Wales, which is the partnership project I mentioned that supports the FE and higher education sectors. A lot of the Global Wales focus is on brokering partnerships for the universities in key markets, so they are getting partnership funding through that pot.

Lord Liddle: You are spending £10 million on Global Wales.

Susana Galván: Yes.

Lord Liddle: Is that over the whole of the four-year period?

Susana Galván: Yes. It actually goes beyond that.

Dr Elid Morris: It is to 2026.

Lord Liddle: Is that focused on getting overseas students in new markets to come to Wales? Is that the object?

Susana Galván: Yes. The main focus is twofold. It is on raising the visibility of these sectors—the marketing aspect of education—in key markets, one of which is Europe. There is a recognition that Europe is really important, particularly post Brexit. The others are India, North America and Vietnam. The selection of those markets was based on a consultation with the sector.

Lord Liddle: I should have mentioned that I was pro-chancellor of Lancaster University, so I know a bit about that as well.

Susana Galván: I know you were.

Lord Liddle: On pathway 1, are you satisfied with the balance of applications in Wales from the metropolitan communities of Cardiff and Swansea, the valleys and the Welsh-speaking ruralities? Is it inclusive of different Welsh communities?

Susana Galván: That is a really good question. In short, the answer is yes, we are happy. As I said, we knew that initially we would get applications from the higher education sector, because it is very experienced in this space, has the capacity and knows it really well, but we were not so sure about the response we would get from the other sectors. It is a brand-new programme—almost like a start-up, in a sense—so we were happy with the spread of applications across sectors.

We were also happy with the success ratio. We follow a very similar assessment process to Erasmus or Turing. We have external assessors and an independent assessment system. We do not assess the applications; we have two assessors per application and there is a quality threshold and scoring system that is all published so that the process is very robust and transparent. We were happy that the ratio of successful applications was high. That was positive.

We were also happy that the spread of applications covered all 22 local authorities in Wales. We were worried that there would be a concentration from south Wales, which is the wealthier part of Wales, and we did not want that. I will send you a link afterwards to a map we created showing where the applications and organisations came from.

We have a good spread. However, that does not mean that we cannot do better. There is a lot that we can do better. For example, we had 22 applications from schools, 15 of which were successful, but how many schools are there in Wales?

Dr Elid Morris: Well over 1,500.

Susana Galván: There are 1,500-plus schools across Wales; 15 were successful. It is not bad, but there is definitely much more scope for improvements. For this round, we are trying to get the data from the first round and look at the range of organisations that have applied and been successful but, more importantly, which organisations have not applied and why. We are trying to do a bit more targeted promotion towards those organisations.

We are also looking more at the type of projects that organisations are submitting. We are looking for projects that are innovative in some way, and are not so much the same. Let us say that I am studying French at Cardiff University and I get a scholarship to go to France for a semester. That is fantastic for me, but it is not necessarily very innovative.

There is a limited pot of money; in the grand scheme of things, it is not much money. Taking away the £10 million going to Global Wales, and some money that goes to the running of the project, how can we make the best possible use of the money to meet the objectives of Taith, which is an all-Wales inclusive programme that has a lot of focus on widening participation and that benefits organisations all across Wales?

The answer is yes, but we can do better, if that helps.

Q158 The Chair: Thank you very much. You kindly promised two things; I am keeping a list. First, there are the figures that you said you would send and, secondly, the map of the applications; I will remind you at the end. We would be very grateful for those in due course.

To go back to the structure of Taith, Erasmus+ was Europe-only, and Taith is worldwide, so there is nothing to stop someone under Taith going to Australia, although it might not be the best use of Taith. At this early stage, can you give a bit of colour about the split between the Taith that has ended up being a European thing and the Taith that is worldwide?

Susana Galván: Yes, you are correct. Taith allows for exchanges, partnerships and mobilities between Wales and the rest of the world, except for countries that the FCDO considers it not safe to travel to; we use that as the benchmark.

The 52 projects that were successful in the first round include exchanges with more than 95 countries across Europe and the world. There is a whole range of locations across all continents. Of course, Europe features prominently but, interestingly, our analysis shows that between sectors, as well as all the regular European countries you might consider for mobility—France, Spain, Germany, Italy—there is a whole range of other European countries. For higher education, it includes Romania, Slovenia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Cyprus and so on.

If you look at destinations outside Europe, you see the whole lot. For higher education, I have places such as Argentina, Cambodia, Honduras, Nigeria, Uganda, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe and so on.

The Chair: Of the 6,000 movements you referred to a moment ago, are two-thirds still European?

Susana Galván: Predominantly, but we do not have the exact numbers yet because the projects are still in the process of being delivered and some of the projects will adjust things as they go along. We do not have the exact ratio but, predominantly, Europe would be the preferred destination.

Dr Elid Morris: It is a predicted level.

Susana Galván: Yes, it is a predicted level. It is where most of the organisations already have links. Considering sustainable travel and costs, Europe would obviously be the preferred option.

The Chair: Under Erasmus+, relationships grew up between institutions. My children, for example, entered a pipeline where it was pre-known where the exchange would take place. Are you seeing the same with Taith? Are there repeat-order relationships going on around the world? Secondly, and finally from me on this bit, have any relationships that were active under Erasmus+ turned into active relationships under Taith?

Susana Galván: We do not have that granularity of detail yet because the project has just started. However, for the first round of funding, the expectation and assumption was that most of the exchanges would be with existing partners because the turnaround time for delivering Taith was very tight. As I said, the announcement was made in March 2021, but the programme was launched in February last year and the first funding call opened just one month later. In that sense, the assumption was that most of the organisations that applied for Taith funding would deliver mobilities with countries and partners with which they had a relationship, probably mostly through Erasmus+, but maybe not limited to it.

An important element of Taith is the funding of what we call sector organising bodies. We had an open call at the beginning of the programme where organisations could apply to become sector organising bodies and, with that funding, support their sector. We have sector organising bodies for youth, schools and adult education.

The role of the bodies is, first, to raise awareness of Taith among the sectors, because our capacity is limited; secondly, to offer the sectors support and guidance with the application process, to make sure that they know how to do it, do it well and have a high chance of success; and, thirdly, to support successful organisations with the running of the project, because running a project with public funding is demanding. There is monitoring and reporting, and it can be quite onerous. They also help the sectors make links with international partners. These are organisations that have good international networks and can support partners to make new partnerships internationally, or help organisations that have never done mobilities before but think, “I would love to do this but I don’t have any connections and I don’t know how to do it”.

In Taith we have a dedicated team called programmes and policies. It looks at the policy of the programme; we review the policy all the time. Another important aspect of that team is engagement with the sectors and trying to make connections for them.

Q159 Lord Hannay of Chiswick: I do not want to set this up as a beauty contest, but can you comment on how Taith and Turing compare or differ in scope? You have already told us quite a bit about some of that, but what are the main similarities, differences, advantages and disadvantages of the respective schemes as you see them? As I said, it is not a beauty contest but an attempt to understand where there are differences and whether they are advantages or disadvantages.

Susana Galván: It is difficult for me to compare because, obviously, I do not manage Turing. My colleague Charley Robinson, who gave evidence on UUKi, gave you a lot of information about the challenges, and I agree with the evidence that she provided. I can tell you about the features that make Taith unique; we have talked about some of them.

The first feature is the engagement with the sectors. To be fair, as I said, we have a bit of an advantage in Wales in that it is a small nation, and it is easy for us to have a direct relationship with the sectors and organisations. We have a fantastic advisory board, led by Kirsty Williams, who was the Minister for Education in Wales. On the board we have representatives from across all the eligible sectors. We have the sector organising bodies and very close relationships with the sector. Any organisation in Wales with a problem, complaint, issue or concern can pick up the phone and talk to us easily. That close relationship with the sector is unique to Taith. It is very sector-led, and we have our ears to the ground.

Another aspect that makes us unique is reciprocity and the fact that Taith allows organisations here to apply for funding that allows for outward as well as inward mobility. There is also the breadth of eligible sectors under Taith. As you know, the youth sector and in particular the adult learning sector are not eligible for Turing funding but are eligible for Taith funding.

We have a balance of focus on staff and learner mobility. The funding allows for both learner and staff mobility; it is not just for students. It allows for individual as well as group mobilities, which makes it unique. We also have a strong focus on partnerships. Pathway 2 is fully dedicated to strategic collaboration and partnerships. We have a special strand of Taith money that goes into Global Wales, which is a marketing as well as a partnership-brokering programme. We focus very strongly on inclusion and widening participation. I know that Turing does too, but our focus on accessibility and trying to reach out to the smaller organisations is different from some bigger schemes, again, because we have the luxury of being able to engage with the sector.

Something that makes Taith unique is that it gives positive visibility for Wales. We have had a fantastic response from European partners in particular, who have heard about the programme and want to know more about it. There is the reciprocity aspect and the fact that the programme brings something to the table to say, “We can fund people to go to you, but we can also put in some money to bring people from you to us”. That breaks some of the barriers that were perhaps created after Brexit. It gives a positive image of Wales as a welcoming nation that sees the benefit of international, mutual exchange. I hope that shows you some of the unique features.

Q160 Lord Hannay of Chiswick: That is very helpful. Broadly speaking, do you regard Taith and Turing as complementary in Wales, or as competing with each other or cutting across each other? From what you said, it sounds as though the two are operating side by side, and there are presumably Welsh university students who are applying for Turing. Of course, the inward side does not apply at all for Turing, but can you comment on the competitive or complementary point?

Susana Galván: We absolutely see it as complementary, rather than competing. I work closely with colleagues from UUKi—we share notes on policy and timelines—and we see Taith as an added value. For example, a university that can apply for Turing has the benefit of being able to apply for extra funding under Taith, but not necessarily in a competing way. The universities manage the project, and they know that they can submit an application to Turing for X amount of money, and an application to Taith for Y amount, and design the projects, according to the amount of money available and the framework of each of the programmes, in a way that is complementary rather than competing.

For the sectors that are eligible for both programmes, which is not all the sectors, as you know, we see it as an opportunity for extra funding. We do not have the exact numbers but we understand that, with Turing and Taith money combined, Welsh organisations will be able to have levels of funding similar to those they had under Erasmus, so, in a way, they are not in a losing position after Erasmus. With Turing and Taith combined, they are at the same level of available funding, which is a positive thing, and it creates more opportunities after all.

The Chair: We come to the final question in this section.

Q161 Lord Liddle: What would be your view if a future Government decided to apply to be part of Erasmus? Would you be upset about that, in that it would conflict with your Taith programme, or would you think it was positive? Do you think that what you are doing on Taith could have applicability across the whole UK? Would you recommend it as a model that other parts of the UK should follow? I hope you see what I am trying to say. What lessons do we draw from your very interesting and fascinating experience for what future British policy should be in this area?

Susana Galván: Obviously, I am not a representative of the Welsh Government, so I try to stay out of the politics of it all, but I am very clear about the mandate of Taith. I left a successful career of 25 years with the British Council, moving from South Africa to Wales, because I really believed in this. I have worked in international education all my life. You can tell that I am not British; I am British, passport-wise, but I was born in Spain. I studied in the UK as a foreign student, so I know the benefits of international exchange and I believe passionately that Taith is a really good story.

One year into the programme, we have a lot of evidence that it is a positive story, ultimately, for the people who benefit from the mobilities. Soon, we will be able to share more stories about them and how it changed their lives. It is a really positive story for Wales at a time when—this is a personal view—the perception of the UK is perhaps not as positive as it used to be, particularly in the Europe context.

Lord Liddle: I understand the point.

Susana Galván: It has opened a lot of doors for Wales in the European space and internationally. It has provided good visibility and is creating fantastic opportunities. For me, a great measure of success will be if Taith continues beyond 2026. In a way, the fact that I am here today is a measure of success, because the programme is attracting interest.

I do not know whether there is scope for other parts of the UK to take on the model. I was in Scotland last week and I did a presentation about Taith alongside Turing—we have run lots of joint presentations—at the Scottish Universities International Group conference. We did a joint session about mobility under Turing and Taith, and a European partner presented the European perspective. Last week I gave evidence about Taith and what it has meant to Wales at the Scottish Parliament’s cross-party group on colleges and universities. In October I gave a presentation on Taith at the European Parliament alongside the Welsh Minister for Education. Again—

Lord Liddle: If I may interrupt, one of the things you have stressed throughout your evidence is the nature of Wales as a relatively small country, and your ability to maintain very close contact with the wide range of organisations that you are trying to appeal to. England, of course, is not like that, and there is no effective devolution at present in England, so a scheme would be more bureaucratically rigid—it might have to be—because it would be very difficult to achieve the level of local contact that you are talking about. Do you have any views about that? How important is your ability to connect with people at the grass roots?

Susana Galván: I think it can be scaled up. We are lucky that it is a small nation, but we are a very small team as well. We are not a huge team dealing with a small number of stakeholders. Any mobility scheme should put more focus on the engagement side because, at the end of the day, any national funding agency ultimately serves the sectors it is funding. Any focus on the engagement side could be scaled up, even in England or for a UK national scheme.

Obviously, I will not comment on Turing, as I do not know how it works in detail, but even though we have an advantage in the size of Wales as a nation, that sector-led engagement focus could be scaled up for any size of agency. It is just about making sure that it is a focus. From our experience, that is important.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: I want to go a little further and try to understand better. From what you have said, it does not seem inconceivable that two schemes can operate in the same place effectively, as in Wales with Turing and Taith. If that were applied to the UK as a whole, and an effort were made to work Turing and Erasmus+ alongside each other, would that complicate your lives more, or would it be just another arrow in your quiver, another possibility?

Susana Galván: When Erasmus was running, the idea of a Welsh programme would have been inconceivable. If anyone had said three years ago that there would be a mobility programme for Wales, everybody would have thought it was a crazy idea, yet here we are. I do not think anything is inconceivable. Turing is out there, lots of organisations in Wales can apply for both Turing and Taith, and Erasmus projects are still running until May this year. Focusing on complementarity makes it possible, so I do not think it is inconceivable, but that is beyond my powers.

The Chair: Unfortunately, it is time for the next session. I am sorry to cut you off in your prime, but you have both been extremely interesting and we are very grateful that you could come along.

Susana Galván: I apologise to Elid for talking so much.

The Chair: I am sure that Elid will end up contributing via the two things you promised to send us that I referred to earlier. It would be very interesting for us to understand more. Any figures you have on the worldwide aspect would be very helpful, because what is so different is that the genie is now out of the worldwide bottle. To go back to saying to people that there is support only for European trips would be very difficult once we have gone worldwide. In the meantime, and on behalf of the committee, I thank you both very much for coming along.

Susana Galván: We have loved it. We love the programme; we are so passionate about it. Thank you so much.

Dr Elid Morris: Thank you for the opportunity.