Item 4 is scrutiny of financial memoranda. We agreed at our away day—and subsequently endorsed the decision at our meeting on 14 September—that we would introduce a revised system for scrutiny of financial memoranda.
I think so, although—from a cursory examination—the figures do not strike me as being particularly realistic, given the aspirations of the bill and the powers that it seeks to give to Bòrd na Gàidhlig. I think that costs have been underestimated rather than overestimated. I am not suggesting that the costs would be vastly greater—although it is difficult to judge at this stage. We must examine the issue in some detail, because the figures have been underestimated.
The proposal is that we take oral evidence from Executive officials, so we will get the opportunity to pursue that strand with the people who can best answer the question. On that basis, do we agree?
I ask members to agree that the questionnaire at annex 2 of the papers be adopted from now on. I think that it was Jim Mather who suggested that we provide a questionnaire on all bills in order to give us basic information. Are members content with that?
Good. At our last meeting, we agreed that our next three items—consideration of our budget seminar and two draft reports—be taken in private. On that basis, we move into private session.
Meeting continued in private until 11:32.
Previous
Water Industry