The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 3690 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 16 September 2025
John Mason
It might be unfair to ask you too much about that sector. We got the impression earlier that planning is resistant to modern techniques. Some planning departments like to keep houses looking like they have always looked. Have you picked up on that at all?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 16 September 2025
John Mason
It has been mentioned that some issues are UK wide and some are specific to Scotland. The Scottish Fiscal Commission says that
“the UK-wide higher demand”
for disability benefits especially
“is because of a deterioration in health, meaning more people are eligible, and the cost-of-living pressures”
are encouraging more people to apply. Do you recognise that as a UK-wide issue? Is health getting worse?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 16 September 2025
John Mason
I agree with what you are saying and with what the Government is trying to do. The question for the committee is whether we can afford what we want to do. The SFC has talked about the fact that people in Scotland are supported more—you used the word “support”, too—and that we have promoted some of those payments more. I want us to be kind, gentle and nice, but I am left wondering whether we are going too far down that road, because we cannot afford it.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 16 September 2025
John Mason
I supported that amendment.
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 16 September 2025
John Mason
I want to go back to Tom Ockendon, if I may, on the combination of housing, skills, and the shortage of workers. I realise that the SFHA does not build houses, but I presume that you have some sort of feel for it. Is the sector moving on with skills and technology as it might be? For example, I have CCG in my constituency, and it does off-site building. I get the impression that off-site building has not taken off in the way that it might have done, despite the fact that it is a nicer environment for workers to work in and it might, for example, suit older workers better than being on site. I also saw an article recently about using robots for bricklaying because we are short of bricklayers. Is the sector really moving forward in that way?
Finance and Public Administration Committee
Meeting date: 16 September 2025
John Mason
Again, I agree with all your arguments, which are all well put. Clearly, if we can help people, then their health improves and there is not the same pressure elsewhere. However, I still wonder—as, I think, the committee does—whether we are getting the balance right in all of this. We call it capping, rationing or whatever. If people need hip replacements or want to get into a care home, they have to wait for quite a long time. The fact that there is a cap means that there is a limit to those budgets and that we can spend only so much on operations, care homes, nursing staff and all those things. However, there seems to be no cap on this budget. I understand that it is demand led, but must it increase by inflation every year, for example? I realise that, if it did not, people would be less well off, but would that not be one way of controlling the expense?
12:30Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 10 September 2025
John Mason
How do we overcome the risks? Is it simply by just moving very slowly?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 10 September 2025
John Mason
The previous panel seemed to feel that we were further on than that and that we actually knew more about the fostering side of things than we did about the residential side.
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 10 September 2025
John Mason
Okay. My final question is about the financial memorandum as a whole. On the specific point about profit limitation in residential services, I see that there is a cost to the Scottish Administration in 2026-27 and 2027-28—and then nothing at all after that. That surprises me a little bit, because surely there would need to be on-going supervision. What are your feelings about the financial memorandum? Is it a bit light, as I think the previous panel suggested? Is that your feeling, too?
Education, Children and Young People Committee
Meeting date: 10 September 2025
John Mason
You heard what I said in the debate last night, minister. It seems to me that, compared with other bills, this one is all about money—money is central, whereas we sometimes have members’ bills in which money is more at the periphery.
I am interested in the pilot, but we do not have time to go into that today. My question is whether there is room for compromise. If the Government has £5 million or £6 million available, could that money not be used to top up what is presently happening? Lots of parents can afford to pay and are paying for their kids to go. It seems to me that the real problem is whether we can get money to the families and the kids who cannot afford to go. That £5 million or £6 million would make a huge difference. I accept that it would have to be every year and not just for one year.
Could the Government make some kind of offer to put in £5 million to £6 million every year for 10 years or whatever, on the condition that Liz Smith pulls her bill?