Chamber and committees

Are city region deals the right way to try to improve growth in the economy? Are they laser-like enough?

I have a question on tax policies for growth. Are the right policies in place on non-domestic rates and corporation tax or should we consider something else?

Does that apply to business tax as well as personal tax?

I have a final question on that point. Do we have any idea how much that change would mean for councils if it were made?

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests: I am still a member of Aberdeen City Council, which is a member of COSLA.

I go back to the question that Michelle Thomson asked about capital concession regulations. Granting that approach does not appear to present a risk to the Scottish Government. I am trying to dig down a bit deeper into why that would not be allowed. I presume that councils could borrow more if that were allowed. Is that the case?

Would that mean that councils could borrow more because the debt would be spread out over a longer term?

Does the cabinet secretary agree with the First Minister’s adviser Mark Blyth that

“unwinding centuries of economic integration could prove devastating to businesses”

in the short, medium and long terms? Would he further agree with me that Scotland is best placed to succeed in the short, medium and long terms politically, economically and socially with the monarch as head of state, and with the union as the defender of Scotland’s interests?

I agree the with committees at Westminster, and I often see differences between the Westminster committees and those here. The findings are there and that is commendable. The minister has also said that her door is open and that she will talk with the trustees, as Christine Grahame said.

The trustees of the scheme have always prioritised the protection of the bonuses, and it is right and proper that they do so. However, for this to take place, the Government has to have a means by which to secure those bonuses in a time of deficit. No one knows what the future holds. In her evidence to the committee, the minister was eloquent on that point. We do not know how the fund will perform in the future or whether there will be future deficits in the fund that require the guarantee to come into effect. No one could have predicted the success of the fund.

I turn to the question of a review. At the committee, the minister was very clear that her door is open, and she met union representatives on 21 June. At that meeting, the minister asked the trustees to consider whether they would be willing to include the Government’s guarantee in any future discussions around surplus sharing and the investment reserve. I believe that the minister is still awaiting a reply.

The Government has been open in its discussions. It is more than happy to discuss a change to the surplus that would mean removing the guarantee. Up to this point, the trustees have not been open to that.

Scottish miners in all our constituencies have benefited from the strength of the guarantee offered by the UK Government. Their bonuses have been more than they could have expected without that guarantee, and the strength of the scheme is clear.

Vaccine passports are a contentious issue that has raised a substantial amount of correspondence from individuals and businesses across North East Scotland. People are expressing a huge amount of anxiety about the pace of, and the lack of consultation on, the scheme, the form that the passports will take and the impact that they will have on businesses and those who attend events.

The SNP-Green Government’s screeching U-turn has led to confusion, chaos and concern for many of my constituents, born out of a deep distrust of the devolved Government and its ability to deliver projects. We have already seen the fiasco over the new information technology system for the farming sector and the promising of apps that were never delivered. Businesses and citizens simply do not trust the devolved Government to implement a system that works for them and their customers, particularly when they have not been consulted on that sudden U-turn.

A year ago, the Conservatives called for a business panel to be established to be a sounding board for the Government on Covid measures. That never happened and I am positive that, on reflection, the minister is now wishing that he had listened to the Conservatives and implemented such a business panel, so that we could have heard what businesses need instead of working through what looks like a dog’s dinner of a policy without the knowledge of business on the ground.

This devolved Government has a habit of talking down to business and telling it what is best rather than listening to understand its needs and requirements. In my discussion with business leaders, this is what I have been told. I have been contacted by the chairman of a football club, who said:

“clubs with over 10,000 attending are going to be severely challenged financially. We have already had a huge number of season ticket holders state that if we force them to get vaccinated, they want their money back. We have done everything not to make anyone redundant at the club. Our initial estimate is that this will cost us at least £1.5 million in lost income.”

Clubs have gone through all the pre-season planning, jumped through all the hoops, put in place Covid measures and adhered to all the guidelines, but with this ill-thought-out policy the Government is putting all of that in jeopardy.

We heard earlier from Douglas Ross that getting test and protect working would be more effective.

When I read the proposals—if we can call them proposals—I can understand the concerns that football clubs have. The paper says that staff at a venue can download a free QR code verifier. Has anyone from the Government ever been to a football match? There is not one orderly queue for 50,000 people; there are hundreds of turnstiles, most of which are unmanned. There is not a guy at each turnstile with an app on a phone.

A couple of days after the regulations are due to come into force, four matches will be affected. The proposal will be a hammer blow to those clubs that have already suffered hugely during the past 18 months—[Interruption.]