This search includes all content on the Scottish Parliament website, except for Votes and Motions. All Official Reports (what has been said in Parliament) and Questions and Answers are available from 1999. You can refine your search by adding and removing filters.
Even in a system in which everything was reviewed, with the best will in the world, and in which only a small percentage of decisions were wrong, if they did not have support and did not appeal, they could lose out on a significant amount of money.
I will take a different focus and ask the witnesses what parts of the 2002 act work or, even, work well. One of the best bits is that it is applicant blind.
How do we create the circumstances where they do get used and get used in the right way, with the best of intentions and to make a blinking—excuse me—difference?
We would normally apply a figure of around 10 per cent, but I am not sure that that is applicable in the circumstances. Will you have your best go at explaining what that might mean for Scottish tax revenues?
The bill proposes targets and measures, but it does not go into detail about how those targets can best be achieved. Does the panel think that the bill could give more direction on that front?
I thought that that really was smart ticketing at its best. Even though you do not have an app, a message comes up on your phone basically to tell you to remember to put your blue badge on your windscreen.
At this stage, I have no preconceived ideas about what the best solutions might be. All too often, we hear about the tensions and disagreements that exist in the sector.
Our key call is for people to be able to remove the M and the F from their birth certificates. That is international best practice. Different countries such as Australia and New Zealand, and two states in America, have allowed that.