Seòmar agus comataidhean

Will John Dickie clarify his understanding of the cost of doubling the child payment? The convener mentioned £163 million, but I heard that doubling the payment to £20 and covering everybody under 16 would amount to £220 million. Do you have a specific figure?

Would businesses pay slightly higher fees if they knew that they would get a faster service?

That is me, unless Mr Robertson wants to come in on any of that.

If no one else wants to respond to my question whether there is any scope with regard to tax, I will move on.

In its submission, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities made the interesting comment that the national care service was “a distraction”. Obviously we are focusing on the financial side today—the care side of things can be discussed elsewhere—but, from that point of view, is the national care service a distraction, or is it something worth investing money in?

I see Adam Stachura nodding. Do you want to say something, Adam?

Adam Stachura’s submission focuses—and rightly so—on pensioners and older people, who might be poorer, but clearly there are also some pensioners and older people who are very wealthy. For example, they might have made a big profit on their houses and have paid no tax on that. If national insurance is increased, that will probably mean that pensioners will not contribute. Is there room to free up resources for people at the poorer end by getting better off or wealthy people to pay a bit more?

That was helpful.

You have also mentioned the area of planning and suggested, I think, that council planning departments should get more funding. I wonder whether you can clarify something for me, as I have probably forgotten, and for the general public. Is it not the case that planning is more of a self-funding exercise, given that the fees match the costs?

Would an example of that be to say that we will keep raising landfill tax in an effort to discourage landfill? In that way, we could give a sense of direction, without giving all the rates.

Thank you. Since the other witnesses do not want to comment on that point, my questions are finished for now.

Thank you for that—I shall continue phoning that number, as I have been doing.

I have another question—it is still on vaccination, I suppose. I have a moral dilemma as to whether I should take a third, or booster, vaccine when half the people around the world have not yet had any vaccine. That strikes me as a bit greedy on my part. Where are we with boosters? Should we be holding back a bit so that the rest of the world can get some?

Thank you for that answer also.

My third and final point is on a completely different subject. We have heard suggestions from the airline industry and the wider tourism industry that they hope to go back to the same level that they were at pre-pandemic. However, we also have the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—coming up, and we have climate change concerns. Does the Government feel that we should be aiming to get the airline industry back to 100 per cent of where it was—I think that it is currently at 20 or 25 per cent—or should we be aiming at something in between for the benefit of tackling climate change?