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 7 September 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2216 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

How much money could have been lost?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

The head of finance should have been approached and asked to approve the appointment, but they were not. How did it go through, then?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

You have mentioned that you have had to speak to a number of people to get approval for your section 22 report. Was the Scottish Funding Council involved in that? I assume that you have spoken to the council about it.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

A number of companies are named in the report, including Paradigm Futures Ltd and Fuel Change Futures Ltd. I see from Companies House that Fuel Change Futures Ltd is now called Powering Futures Enterprise Ltd and that it has two directors, one of which is the consultant. The other is the former director of strategic partnerships and regional economy, and it was she who lost her job and went to the employment tribunal.

If you do not mind, convener, I will read from the judgment of the aforementioned tribunal, which was held in June last year. The section that I will read relates to a trawl of the email account of the director of strategic partnerships and regional economy. There is an email dated 8 January 2023 from the consultant to the claimant in the case, titled “FC cashflow” and with an attachment named “true cash flow Jan onwards”. In it, Mr Reid stated:

“the attached is what I think our real cashflow is and I have moved some income to when I think it will arrive. We have not been invoicing due to the issues and I am concerned Paradigm invoicing is either illegal or at best clandestine. However if the college invoice it could extend the project beyond 31st March and I cannot imagine they want a tail”—

that is, T-A-I-L. He goes on to say:

“In a reasonable world we would say paradigm is invoicing and as this will be the modus operandi until FC Ltd is set up properly and trading”.

The report from the tribunal later says that

“an internal auditor report”,

which we have mentioned previously,

“was produced dated 31 May 2023. The report found that the email”,

to which I have just referred,

“represented ‘false representations by words, or writing or conduct’, and that there has been an ‘intention to deceive’”—

that is what the convener quoted—

“by not disclosing all of the income relating to Fuel Change activity”.

The judgment says:

“The report went on to conclude that ‘because the amounts due to the College have not been lost the false representation and deception’”—

strong words—

“‘in withholding details of income due to the College has not been successful in gaining benefit or advantage, in that Fuel Change will not benefit as long as these amounts due are paid over to the College. Therefore a fraud is not present at this time because no financial loss has crystallized to date’.”

Well, what if there had been a loss? You have already alluded to that, Auditor General. Has the college had a lucky escape here?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

I want to clear something up, if I can. Paradigm Futures, which has one director, was given work that was not advertised and for which there was no competition. Has anyone explained why the work went to Paradigm Futures rather than someone else?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

It is quite key, is it not? Paradigm Futures is basically one person. Was there any evidence that that individual—we have not named anyone today and I will not—knew people at the college before the job was awarded?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

What event was that?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

Right. Okay.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

It is for accuracy.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2022/23 audit of Forth Valley College”

Meeting date: 4 June 2025

Graham Simpson

As you have said, colleges might increasingly go down the route of setting up such bodies, so rules or strong guidance need to be in place. I would have thought—and you can comment on this—that the Scottish Funding Council should be heavily involved in that.