Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a couple of questions on the just transition fund. I will ask them together because they overlap. The first question is very general. To what extent, do you think, is the just transition fund being used effectively, and what could be done to make it more effective?

Secondly, and slightly more specifically, I was looking at some parliamentary answers that my colleague Liam Kerr got just last week about the just transition fund in year 1. Of the £20 million that was available for 2022-23, £10 million of capital grant allocation was spent, £0.5 million in financial transactions was allocated to Social Investment Scotland’s social enterprise just transition fund, and the balance of £9.5 million for financial transactions was unallocated. For 2023-24, the fund’s entire financial transactions allocation of £25 million has been allocated to the Scottish National Investment Bank.

In our informal evidence session this morning, we heard concerns from some stakeholders about the role of the Scottish National Investment Bank and how effective it is in liaising with communities. Therefore, my second question is this: is it right that the Scottish National Investment Bank is in charge of that money, and how effectively is it engaging with you?

Thank you.

Good morning to the witnesses. Can I broaden the discussion to a different topic? The committee has heard quite a lot of evidence about the minimal asset process bankruptcy. Some witnesses have said that they would like the current restriction on applying for that, which is 10 years, to be reduced to five years. It is fair to say that we have heard arguments both for and against that.

I am interested, therefore, in hearing any perspectives from you on what impact that change might have on your clients, and what difference it would make if they had to apply for full administration bankruptcy instead of the minimal asset process.

Great. Natalia or Joe, do you agree with that?

I have one brief supplementary for Mr Gillespie, given his answers to the convener. You talked about measures to reduce costs. Are you also looking at your staff complement, and might that include redundancies, for example?

Good morning. I want to follow up Gordon MacDonald’s line of questioning and look at the question of the multiplier effect of investment in the enterprise agencies.

Stuart Black, you highlighted that issue in your submission, which was interesting. We are about to enter a challenging budget phase, and we know that there are issues with the budget and that the finance secretary has a lot of challenges to try to address. If the finance secretary decided to spend money to support business, it could be spent in a number of ways, for example, reducing the tax burden or reducing business rates. It could be spent on the skills agenda, through Skills Development Scotland, it could be spent on infrastructure improvements such as dualling the A9 or constructing ferries, or it could be given to the Scottish National Investment Bank or enterprise agencies. What is your pitch? Why should the money go to you as opposed to any of those worthy causes?

That is helpful.

On funding, did you look at all at the apprenticeship levy and how that is allocated? I hear from UK-wide employers that south of the border, there is much more transparency around the apprenticeship levy and how employers can access it. In Scotland, the levy seems to go into the block grant. I have asked parliamentary questions to try to understand how much of the apprenticeship levy money goes into actually funding apprenticeships. Trying to understand that is like getting through treacle. Were you any more successful in understanding where that funding goes?

That is a very practical point—thank you for raising it. Do our witnesses from the City of Edinburgh Council have anything to add?

Thank you. That is very helpful. Are there any other areas of bankruptcy reform, whether within or outwith the bill, that you think should be highlighted? I am sorry—I realise that that is a very open question.

Good morning. I want to ask about other aspects of reform. This is a very narrowly focused bill, so there are issues that are perhaps not covered by the bill that we have heard raised by other witnesses. Specifically, we have heard calls in relation to minimal asset process bankruptcy. At the moment, individuals can apply for minimal asset process bankruptcy only once every 10 years. Calls have been made for that period to be reduced, perhaps to five years, or for the time limit to be removed altogether. Does anybody have a view on that as a potential addition to the bill? If you have no view, that is absolutely fine.