Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 5 May 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2559 contributions

|

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

A lot of ground has been covered already but, as you might have seen, one of the questions that I asked the previous panel of witnesses was whether the framework was too high level and whether it should have contained more detail. Perhaps I can ask the same question of this panel, starting with Mr Melhuish.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

I will ask the others for their responses to that question later, but another witness whom I previously quoted suggested that one way of giving more certainty over five years is to hold back money at the beginning, which means having less spending but allows a reserve to be built up in order to give a bit more certainty further down the line. Would you support such an approach?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

In response to Mr Johnson, you said that the UK Government has been floating some kind of tax on online retailers. Do you support such a move as something that would take pressure off our having to tax the shops in the street?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

Mr Bradley, would you like to respond to the general question whether the framework is too high level?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

I accept a lot of that—I totally accept that universities are doing good. I am very proud of the fact that we have some of the best universities in the world. I just think that, when the Scottish Government will be so tight for money over the next five years, we maybe need to see a little bit more financial contribution from universities.

I do not think that colleges, the NHS or local government holds reserves at such levels. I do not want to spend all my time on the University of Glasgow, but the creditors figure is £252 million in its previous accounts. That fine figure is presumably being used for investment. However, the cash and cash equivalents figure is £488 million and the investments figure is £247 million, so there appears to be a lot of extra money sitting there.

Would you not accept that, if the Scottish Government is tight for money, we need to concentrate on the colleges, the NHS and local government, and the universities really must tighten things up a little bit?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

Mirren Kelly, do you agree?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Resource Spending Review Framework

Meeting date: 1 March 2022

John Mason

That leads quite well on to my next question. I will start with Ms Rowand this time.

One of the submissions that we have received says that, in taking the five-year approach, the Scottish Government would not have to spend all its money now but could save some and put it into reserves to give more certainty towards the end of the five-year period. Following on from what you have just said, I have a feeling that, although that would give more certainty, local government and others would not be happy if we held a lot of money back.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Replacing European Union Structural Funds

Meeting date: 24 February 2022

John Mason

That is a fair answer—it is actually quite a good one. I will leave it at that.

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Replacing European Union Structural Funds

Meeting date: 24 February 2022

John Mason

I am all for budget discipline. In your letter, you talked about helping to “troubleshoot delivery issues”, which is a bit vague, but I am encouraged by the fact that you have said that you would “look sympathetically” at such situations, which is a bit stronger and will probably reassure people a bit more.

To change the subject, you have a very long ministerial title. I want to ask about the intergovernmental relations part of it. Liz Smith touched on the budget and issues such as transparency, but I am thinking about the timing of it. It is clear that the past few years have been strange, so, in a sense, we can leave them aside. For me, the ideal scenario would be for the UK to set its budget, after which Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland could set their budgets, and then local government could set its budget. That would seem to be the logical process, but we have not had that recently.

I do not know whether that falls within your remit; I am sure that the Chancellor of the Exchequer and other people have a part to play in that, too. In the longer run, do you think that we can get to a place where first the UK sets its budget, then the devolved Administrations and local government set theirs?

Finance and Public Administration Committee

Replacing European Union Structural Funds

Meeting date: 24 February 2022

John Mason

I also take the point that you made in answer to Michelle Thomson that the first bid that appears will not necessarily be typical of what will come thereafter. The first one in Glasgow that I am aware of is for £13 million for the Pollok stables. I am all for horses and I am all for a bit of culture, but some people would feel that that is not the top priority if we are trying to level up the poorest communities in Glasgow. I presume that we could build 130 houses for that money. What is your answer to that? I would have thought that that bid sent out a strange signal.