Chamber and committees

The position on the engagement that the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government is broadly set out in the correspondence that I referred to. Clearly, the matters that are before us today—the issues that triggered the legislative consent process—are fairly narrow and technical and relate to the devolved aspects of procurement.

I recognise that there will be a range of views on the provisions of any trade agreement that the UK enters into. I recognise that the Parliament will have and take its opportunities to express its views on these matters. Ultimately, the decision on whether to enter into such agreements is a matter for the UK Government. We obviously appreciate and want to strengthen the opportunities that we are afforded for engagement with the UK Government, but the matter before us this morning is about the relatively narrow and technical aspects of implementation through the act and how they trigger legislative consent with regard to procurement.

These are, of course, minor changes that we are required to make, given the requirement to implement this particular agreement. On the detail and any specifics, I ask Alasdair Hamilton whether he wants to comment.

We will of course continue to seek to engage constructively with the UK Government on the implementation of the agreement, and we continue to engage with stakeholders. I am sure that the convener will appreciate that it is my colleague the cabinet secretary who leads on those particular matters.

We welcome the opportunities that the agreement will afford. The analysis that has been provided suggests that, overall, the impact on UK economic growth over the next couple of decades will be relatively minor, but any opportunities that are afforded for key Scottish industries, such as the Scotch whisky industry, are, of course, welcomed.

I am conscious that my colleagues the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs, Land Reform and Islands and the Minister for Small Business, Innovation, Tourism and Trade have written to committees setting out in some detail the work that they have undertaken in engagement with the UK Government on the broader policy intent of the agreement.

Thank you, convener, and good morning, committee.

The United Kingdom bill makes provisions in three areas—public procurement, technical barriers to trade and intellectual property—where legislative intervention is needed to give effect to the terms of the UK’s accession to the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership. Public procurement is a devolved matter, and the implementation of international agreements is devolved to the extent that it relates to procurement. The bill therefore triggers the consent process in respect of the procurement provisions that apply to Scotland. The amendments to Scottish procurement regulations are minor and technical in nature, relating to contracts that are awarded under international rules and contract award notices.

In contrast to the Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Act 2023, which conferred delegated powers on UK ministers for the purpose of implementing the procurement chapters of those trade agreements, and to which the Scottish Parliament withheld its consent, in this bill the UK Government has agreed to make necessary provision to amend the Scottish regulations in the bill. We welcome that change of approach, which affords the Scottish Parliament the proper ability to scrutinise the proposals.

We recommend that consent be given to the bill. My officials will continue to work with UK Government officials to agree a pragmatic approach to preparations for commencement of the provisions of the bill that relate to Scotland.

I am conscious that that goes beyond my remit on public procurement, and I recognise that, when the committee has previously considered LCMs regarding the ratification of trade agreements, its concern has primarily been with the contents of those LCMs. The Scottish Government’s position, in its constitutional aspirations and the policy position as set out in “Scotland’s Vision for Trade”, which was published at the start of 2021, is well understood. Our views are clearly set out.

With regard to how things operate at the moment, we always seek the maximum engagement possible with the UK Government to ensure that Scottish interests are represented, and our endeavours to that effect have been set out in the correspondence that the committee received and that I referred to earlier.

Again, it goes back to the point about seeing the power being utilised in a broader context of policy interventions. Tax can play a role. We set out the various functions of the tax system in the framework for tax that we published two years ago. Those functions can include, for example, revenue raising, promoting behavioural change, providing economic stimulus and carrying out redistribution.

Clearly, revenue raising will always be taken into consideration in any tax policy, but behavioural change is also an aspect of tax policy consideration. Again, the particular circumstances will be for local authorities to determine. It is a completely discretionary power, and it will be for local authorities to decide, on the basis of their local understanding of the priorities in their area, whether to use it.

The questions that you raise get to the heart of why this is a discretionary power for local government. Local authorities are best placed to determine whether tax measures can be utilised in a way to support their policy objectives, recognising, as I pointed out in my introductory remarks, that second homes in some areas might be making a positive contribution.

Equally, in other areas, it might be the view of local authorities that they are causing pressures and that a way of helping to address that, in tandem with other policy levers at the disposal of a local authority, would be to use these discretionary powers. We very much recognise that this is a decision for local authorities, to be informed by their expertise with regard to their local priorities and the best way to address them.

Again, those matters will be determined by the local authority. This power provides for something that is discretionary, and local authorities have existing powers to apply a discount. It would really be a question for an individual local authority in recognition of the fact that the decision is ultimately taken by elected members who are democratically accountable to the people who live in that local authority area. We recognise that there may well be a range of views in a particular area, but I note the broad support for the proposals in the consultation and the evidence that the committee has taken from some local authorities, which recognised—at this stage, at least—an intention to explore the utilisation of these powers.