Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will follow up on a couple of points. How much of the £34 million will be raised from local authorities?

Thank you. That would be very helpful.

What seems to have come out of the discussion is that the additional dwelling supplement appears to be a bit of a blunt instrument, although there are lots of really good aspects to it. John Mason made an interesting point. Raising the additional dwelling supplement to 6 per cent will not just make things more competitive for first-time buyers; it will probably deter a number of people in the buy-to-let sector from entering the market in the first place, which could reduce upward pressure on prices. That could be a significant positive gain from the policy.

The policy might deter people from buying second homes in our rural areas. In relation to some islands in Scotland, the figure is well over 50 per cent. A couple of years ago, I was in Colonsay, where, I think, 108 people live and only two children are in the school, with many of the properties having been bought by retirees who use them as second homes. However, some of the properties are not second homes; some people live in them. I realise that that is a housing issue rather than a finance issue.

The ADS can be a bit of a blunt instrument when it comes to people buying derelict houses or houses that are a wee bit rundown so that they can upgrade and live in them. Further thought should also be given to that. To me, the ADS is too broad an instrument. It has some positive aspects, but there are also negative aspects. In broad terms, it can act as both an incentive and a disincentive in relation to the Government’s objectives.

Minister, do you want to add anything before we move on?

There will be a division.

For

Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green)
Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP)

Abstentions

Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife (Con)

The result of the division is: For 5, Against 0, Abstentions 2.

Motion agreed to,

That the Finance and Public Administration Committee recommends that the Land and Buildings Transaction Tax (additional amount: transactions relating to second homes etc.) (Scotland) Amendment Order 2022 (SSI 2022/375) be approved.

It is not a criticism of the SPCB. This is a public meeting, and it is important for people to be able to understand where their money is going.

The other significant point is that the budget of every one of the commissioners and ombudsmen is increasing by more than the increase that you have bid for for the entire Parliament. You are bidding for a 4.8 per cent increase from £128 million to £134.2 million, but every commissioner and ombudsman is seeking to increase their budget by more than that, with the average increase being 8.1 per cent. If we compare that with areas in the draft budget such as justice, transport, local government or wherever, we could argue that the budgets of the office-holders are increasing by more than the budgets of all those front-line services. It is therefore important to put on the public record why that is happening.

The other one that stands out is the Scottish Commission for Human Rights, which has also had a significant increase of 22 per cent. Has there been a big deterioration in human rights in Scotland in the past year, or is it just that the commission is dotting more i’s and crossing more t’s? What is the situation there?

That is absolutely fine. It is just that, if the budget is £37 million and the submission says that that is “including use of contractors”, we anticipate that it will be a lot more than £4,000. It might have been easier just to have said, “including £4,000 for contractors”. That would have saved me having to ask you that question.

In 2022-23, the staffing baseline was increased by £2.7 million. We are told in the submission that that was to help to deliver strategic priorities, which are listed. One of them is to

“enable enhanced public engagement and participation in committee work”.

Has that happened and how many staff have been allocated to it?

Do you mean scrutiny of the post-Brexit constitutional arrangements?

John Mason is looking at me with doe eyes, with that appeal. [Laughter.]

We are all chatting about why that is costing £189,000, given that all the facilities are already here. The offices are here, and the staff, technology and desks are here.

I thought that that was finished.