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?
However, I assure members that we will continue to make best efforts to ensure that the secretary of state is held to account in the decision-making process, and I suggest that all stakeholders do the same.
The MS Society group in Lochaber is the one that I know best. As the MS Society briefing for NHS Highland says, one of the issues is long travel times involved in reaching outlying areas.
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?