Seòmar agus comataidhean

My last question is on the process and the production of the financial memorandum. It has to be produced alongside the bill—that is a matter of process in the Parliament. However, it strikes me that we are talking about a very large bill. Somebody referred to colleges earlier; I imagine that there were similar issues with them. The issue is absolutely huge, and I cannot see how a financial memorandum can be produced at this point in time with any degree of accuracy whatsoever, when there are still huge questions about the requirements and the enactment.

During the earlier panel session, I asked how we as a committee will ensure that there is adequate financial scrutiny. That is our primary purpose. I got back the assurance that the resultant business cases, which would contain risk assessments, would be brought forward to us. My question to you, from the other side, is whether that will be adequate. I think that we all agree that there are significant gaps in the financial memorandum as it stands. From a financial scrutiny perspective, will the process in the financial memorandum work for something of that scale?

Do Sarah Watters or Sharon Wearing want to add to that?

I have a quick supplementary on the pension schemes. Perhaps I do not understand the situation correctly, but I think that the existing schemes are defined benefit schemes rather than defined contribution schemes. Is that right?

I fully accept that.

Correct. I absolutely agree with you. My point is that, in getting to the detail around the financial memorandum, given that we are talking about defined benefit pensions, the liability for which will lie with whoever takes them on, getting those costed up would be a pretty big consideration. That liability consideration is a worry for every defined benefit pension scheme, so the transfer of that liability might be quite beneficial, but that is a minor point.

This is my last question and is for my own clarity. Will this be the only financial memorandum? Will you break down the detail, associated risks and potential cost overruns, which are what we are concerned about, through the detailed business cases and regular updates to the committee?

Good morning. My question goes back to the top level. How did we get to this point? I am surprised by the financial memorandum’s complete lack of what I regard as fundamentals. We have covered a number of those issues so far, in this session. I would like to understand why that is the case. I understand that the financial memorandum has to be produced alongside the bill, but how did we end up with an FM that does not even begin to cover the fundamentals? Speaking personally, and based on my experience, which is mostly in business, I say that I have no confidence whatever that the FM represents any level of accuracy or, therefore, of value for money. How did we get here?

Therefore, would the change not be a benefit to those defined benefit schemes, given that the liability lies with the provider? We have massive inflation, and I imagine that a lot of pension schemes are feeling somewhat nervous. To my mind, losing a lot of people would be a benefit from a local council perspective, albeit that I accept that it is a problem for the TUPE scheme. Am I misunderstanding something?

I used to work in a pensions company, so I am with you.

So, it is policy driven—I understand that. You are correct that the amalgamation of health and social care has been a wish for a long time. However, that different approach has clearly introduced significant other risks, even with apportioning or estimating costs up front. The ranges that you have set out are very wide.

Let me put it this way: if it was your personal money, you would not be risking it. How will you mitigate the risk of there being significant cost overruns in a multitude of areas? My colleagues have mentioned issues with VAT, defined benefit pensions, assets, staff, double running, IT and even uncertainty about the governance of boards. Each one of those issues would introduce additional costs. How will you mitigate the risks in the process that you have adopted?