Seòmar agus comataidhean

Okay.

I appreciate that active consideration has been given to developers, so that they get money in so that they can pay the tax. Build to rent is, obviously, a slightly different model. What consideration has been given to build to rent specifically? Obviously, it is also an important pathway to get us to the number of housing completions that we need.

Good morning, minister. I have a few wee questions.

The Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland has commented on the use of what it called “quasi-hypothecation”. The RIAS subsequently wrote to the committee and, in explaining what it meant by that term, said that it thought that the legal basis was fairly “weak”. In other words, the RIAS would like to see it screwed down a lot more firmly that the intention—not just the policy intention, but the intention legally—is that the moneys raised from the levy must be spent on remediating cladding and not for any other purposes. Would you be willing to consider doing that?

Thank you for joining us—and thank you, Elaine, for all of your hard work in Revenue Scotland. You have created a culture that will influence and shape the organisation, which is very important.

Last year, I asked about the representation of, and the split between, men and women in the organisation. I can see that you have made determined attempts to improve that; I was heartened to hear about your new CEO and the two new board members. There is still a way to go in relation to the board and the audit and risk committee, which have 37 per cent and 20 per cent female representation. I can see that you have co-opted board members, too, because those are fixed-term positions. Aidan, will you state what your target is and give a sense of where you are in the journey towards that?

Taking a risk-based approach will be very wise for all the areas that you have outlined.

I have a final wee question, which I also asked last year. Going back to the convener’s questions about digitisation, I asked you last year about your thinking on artificial intelligence. We are a year down the line. I have heard that some public sector organisations have said that their staff should not use AI at all, which seems somewhat luddite, but I want to get a sense of where you are at. A lot of people are routinely using Copilot, Gemini, ChatGPT or whatever, but where is your thinking on that this year?

Good morning, and welcome to the 31st meeting of the Economy and Fair Work Committee in 2025. My name is Michelle Thomson, and I am the deputy convener. Our usual convener, Daniel Johnson, is unable to join us today. We have apologies from Sarah Boyack, and a former committee convener, Claire Baker, is standing in for her—welcome, Claire. Lorna Slater has also given her apologies today.

This is our second evidence session on artificial intelligence. I am delighted to welcome our witnesses: Steven Grier, industry adviser and former director at Microsoft; Professor Mark Schaffer, professor of economics at Heriot-Watt University and fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh; and Heather Thomson, chief executive officer, The Data Lab.

I will begin with some opening questions. Following that—you are probably aware of the format—I will introduce colleagues to focus on areas of interest to them.

Last week, we had quite an optimistic session, in which we talked a lot about opportunities. Today, I want to start by asking about risk and getting a little more meat on the bones. Last week, I asked about the black-box nature of generative AI—we do not know what is going on in there. Today, I would like to get a sense of what our witnesses see as the critical risks in the area, particularly economic risks and risks to the public sector. I invite Professor Schaffer to start—for obvious reasons.

I can see what you are saying. There is clearly a great deal of potential and I suspect that, as we go through the conversation, there will be more examples of what might happen. You have already given us some useful examples that we might not have thought of.

Heather Thomson, can you answer the same question?

Steven Grier, do you want to come in now?

I can see that you are correct with regard to what you say about society and trust. We can take a view on the issue, but we are an advanced economy in all ways. Of course, there will be bad-faith actors, but we have seen that in relation to other areas, too.

My opening question was about the uncertainty around black-box generative AI, where it will be much harder to track what is being done and capture some of the risks—some of which could be insidious, depending on how we are populating the systems. We know that there are concerns about biases being built in—I understand that that is one of your areas of expertise, Professor Schaffer—but do we have a good enough sense of the known unknowns, in that respect? I do not think that anybody can say that we totally understand the situation, because of the exponential rate of change, but are there enough people who are worrying about the possibilities and doing the thinking about them?

Professor Schaffer, you are inclining your head, so I will bring you back in.

Thank you. Stephen Kerr will ask questions about our next theme.

Yes, thank you—I appreciate that it is a difficult question.