Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 16 March 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3016 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

Do you have any timescale for completing these discussions?

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

If the bank is to successfully move to becoming a perpetual fund, do you anticipate that any structural changes in the bank would be required, or would it simply be a technical change?

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

If the bank becomes a perpetual fund, there will be different profiles of public finance risks, so there will need to be discussions—at least between the Government and SNIB—about how those risks are managed.

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

If the UK Government does not agree to any measures that would make the bank a perpetual fund, what is plan B? How will you give the bank the flexibility that it needs?

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

Let me ask you one final, simple question. My colleague Graham Simpson has been talking about potential losses and so on. What happens if there are losses that the bank cannot manage within its budget cover? How do you manage that in relation to the risk to public finances? Presumably, the Government stands behind the bank.

10:30  

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

If the bank was operating on a purely commercial basis, it would have to reflect risk through the interest rates and so on that were being charged. That would defeat some of the objectives around investing in companies and encouraging them to develop, as the rates and the fees that would be attached would be punitive. Presumably, there must be an element of flexibility when it comes to SNIB setting rates at a level that might be below a commercial rate so that a company can afford to take on the loan.

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

It sounds to me as though there are a few conflicts that have not been worked out, but I will move on.

Funding arrangements are important for the bank. Historically, it had to use its income in the same financial year. Of course, single-year capital allocations from the Scottish Government are quite difficult to align with properly commercial activity. The Scottish Government’s response to that was to give the bank £25 million of underspend or overspend for the next year. When the bank gave evidence to the committee, it said that it welcomed that, but that it did not go as far as it thought was needed. Why was that?

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

The £25 million has been agreed. What bits were not agreed?

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

I am sure that the Government would want that as well. Was that the only issue that was under discussion, or were there other issues for which you were unable to agree to what the bank was asking for?

Public Audit Committee

“Scottish National Investment Bank”

Meeting date: 10 September 2025

Colin Beattie

I accept that in relation to the multiyear settlement and all the rest of it—with the way that things are, there has to be alignment with what the UK Government is doing. Other than that particular multiyear settlement, what needs did the bank have that were not met?