John Swinney has identified an error in his contribution and provided the following correction.
At column 28397, paragraph 3—
Original text—
I would be grateful if, in the interests of cross-party understanding, Sarah Boyack would write to me to explain the calculation behind the figure of £600 million that she has just lodged in the parliamentary record. I am unable to work out how on earth that point can in any way be valid. Local authorities’ share of the budget in 2010-11 was 31.3 per cent. On a like-for-like basis, its share is now 32.2 per cent. I am afraid that I cannot, for the life of me, understand how Sarah Boyack’s proposition is valid. If she would do me the courtesy of explaining it to me, I would be interested to know its basis.
Corrected text—
I would be grateful if, in the interests of cross-party understanding, Sarah Boyack would write to me to explain the calculation behind the figure of £600 million that she has just lodged in the parliamentary record. I am unable to work out how on earth that point can in any way be valid. Local authorities’ share of the budget excluding Health in 2010-11 was 57.9 per cent. On a like-for-like basis, its share is now 58.1 per cent. I am afraid that I cannot, for the life of me, understand how Sarah Boyack’s proposition is valid. If she would do me the courtesy of explaining it to me, I would be interested to know its basis.
Previous
Thirsting for Justice