Seòmar agus comataidhean

The impact of the national insurance increase on the public sector is topical in Scotland at the moment, as there appears to be a potential dispute between the UK Government and the Scottish Government in relation to the Barnett consequentials that are coming forward. The Scottish Government says that it requires £500 million, but the UK Government is presently giving £300 million. How accurate or robust is either of those figures? How easy is it to project what the figure for Scotland would be on the back of the national insurance increase, specifically in relation to public sector jobs?

In relation to your assessment of the UK tax take and so on, the convener identified that you have some issues about making projections. In Scotland, there has more recently been a principle of Scottish exceptionalism—we do things differently, and we create new bodies to do things differently. Would there be a case for the Scottish Fiscal Commission being brought into the Office for Budget Responsibility so that you could work seamlessly together to get a more accurate picture of the state of Scotland’s finances?

Good morning, Liz. It is nice to see you.

I have a quick question about the estimates in the financial memorandum. You say that the assumption in the bill is that around 60,000 pupils would receive residential outdoor education, but you also identify a range of between 55,000 and 65,000 pupils, which is a range of about 18 per cent. With regard to the cost estimates in the financial memorandum, there is a 66 per cent spread. You said at the outset that, on the basis of what you have heard in evidence, you think that the top end of that spectrum probably represents the most realistic estimate. Where do you think that that range is likely to be? Are we now talking about a 20 per cent range towards the top end? There is quite a big spread—a 66 per cent spread—when it comes to the potential costs.

I suspect that you are backing a loser there.

I want to ask about the rationale for that benchmark. What underpins it? Does it represent international best practice? How does your performance in that regard compare with that of your equivalents in the rest of the UK and overseas?

On workforce and staffing, the convener identified that there was an increase of 11 in the workforce. There was also a 10 per cent salary increase in 2022-23, other than for the senior management team. Was that consistent with salary increases for the rest of the public sector in Scotland?

There is quite a big differential in LBTT between Scotland and the rest of the UK. In terms of the pre-compliance work and any subsequent recovery work, is there a difference between the patterns of behaviour that you see north and south of the border?

My final question is on the assessment of the tax gap. I am assuming that the tax gap is the gap between the tax that an organisation such as yours would expect to get and the tax that it ends up getting. You have said that, where self-assessed taxes are concerned, you are not in a position to estimate the tax gap. Could you elaborate on that point? What are the barriers to your ability to do so, and how do they play into the successful compliance work in which you have engaged?

Just to follow up on Mr Greer’s question on pricing by centres, one of the responses flags up the point that there could be an increase in dynamic pricing, because the use of centres is quite seasonal. It is probably safe to assume that, if there has been modest or significant capital investment in any centres, they may charge more as a consequence. What is the risk that the pricing landscape may change as a result of higher usage, particularly at peak times, and capital investment?

If 4.65 per cent was the lowest increase, what was the highest increase that someone in the organisation would have received?