Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 3 March 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2045 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”, and “Financial sustainability and taxes”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

So, with 0.5 per cent, what we are looking at? How many people per year will the Government lose? When you talk about back-office roles, you are presumably not talking about nurses, teachers, firefighters and police officers—or are we talking about those roles?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”, and “Financial sustainability and taxes”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

In relation to the consolidated accounts for 2024-25, the Audit Scotland report contains some figures on underspend—a £875 million resource underspend and a £134 million capital underspend, which is a total underspend of more than £1 billion. At a time when many public services are seeing quite heavy workloads and tight budgets, and when services are being cut and some capital projects are being cancelled or paused, that does not make sense. What happened to the £1 billion?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”, and “Financial sustainability and taxes”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

It sounds as though roughly half of the underspend was rolled over to the next financial year and spent accordingly, and that, with about half of it, you could not do that, due to its nature. That is helpful information. I appreciate the wider context, but I thought that it was important to check that.

Another issue that the Auditor General raises in the “Financial sustainability and taxes” report, and on which we have heard evidence in person from Audit Scotland, is to do with tax revenues in Scotland resulting from devolved policy decisions. I appreciate that those decisions are made not by civil servants but by Governments and, indeed, that they feature in budgets that the Parliament passes. However, there is still a wider question.

The Auditor General raises the valid point that, for 2025-26, £1.7 billion of extra tax will be raised in Scotland through policy choices that the Government makes, but that that will net only £616 million of benefit to the Scottish budget. Those are the Auditor General’s numbers. That is about a third of the amount raised—it is slightly better than the figure the year before. However, about 33p in the pound is reaped for the benefit of all your directorates to spend on public services. How are we going to fix that problem? How will we ensure that the £1.7 billion that we raise in extra taxes is available to the Government to spend on public services? At the moment, we are nowhere near that.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”, and “Financial sustainability and taxes”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

What is the debate? Where is the conflict? What do you not agree with?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of Historic Environment Scotland”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

Good morning to the witnesses. I will carry on the same line of questioning. The Auditor General gave evidence to the committee just a few weeks ago; I presume that you followed that session closely in preparation for today. The Auditor General said in that meeting:

“when it became clear that the accountable officer was going to be absent for more than a month, the Scottish Government ought to have appointed a substitute”.

He also said:

“We have seen a lack of clarity in why the Scottish Government chose not to appoint an accountable officer”.—[Official Report, Public Audit Committee, 14 January 2026; c 27, 9]

Ms Riach, do you agree with that conclusion that the Auditor General gave us?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of Historic Environment Scotland”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

I cannot get my head around the fact that an organisation as big and well known in Scotland as this, with such a high-profile role as a public body, could not find a single person in the whole organisation who could step up to the mark for a few months. How is that possible? Did no one want to do it? Was nobody suitably qualified? Were there relationship issues between senior executives and the board, or did you have issues with the board itself?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of Historic Environment Scotland”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

It did not need to be a permanent finance director who stepped up to the mark. My question is whether there was a lack of willingness to do the role or a lack of competence.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of Historic Environment Scotland”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

Goodness. I appreciate that, if you do not know, you do not know—it is perfectly fine to be honest with us.

Reverting back to the Scottish Government, then, I have to say that I find it difficult to imagine how you can come to the committee and say, “Oh, I don’t know why they didn't proceed.” Did you ask?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Section 22 Report: “The 2024/25 audit of Historic Environment Scotland”

Meeting date: 4 February 2026

Jamie Greene

Other members will go into those issues in more detail during the session, but, as the convener has alluded to, it seems that, according to the timeline of events, someone new was brought into the organisation, did a valid piece of work to uncover challenges with governance procedures and practices and with leadership and, in doing so, unearthed what were clearly unacceptable behaviours and practices. The board were clearly unhappy with that, as were other senior members of staff, and the individual was then off sick.

I do hope that you are okay now, Ms Brown, and I hope that you are being properly supported by the organisation and the board.