Seòmar agus comataidhean

You make some important points about a culture shift, with which I completely agree. There is a business support element, even before people get to the point of going for funding.

A report published by Women’s Enterprise Scotland at the tail end of last year said that business support that is on offer still does not take a gendered lens. In other words—this is an issue that we have seen with banks—the operational nature of women-led businesses, which are often referred to as kitchen table businesses, is not understood. In that context, what consideration have you—or the Government—given to how enterprise agencies, or any public sector support, can take a truly gendered lens to women-led businesses?

You opened your remarks by referring to the committee’s letter and, in particular, the disaggregation of data. I have no wish to create a massive data factory, because I appreciate that that would expend a huge amount of time. My interest in the issue started with a simple question that I put to a business organisation when I asked for assurances that it routinely disaggregated all its data sets by gender. I received a long, fulsome answer that said absolutely nothing and could be summarised as, “No.” I then started to think about all the other data sets—you mentioned private equity, cabinet secretary.

Will you give the committee a flavour of how actively you are progressing work so that, when asked, any body that is in receipt of public funds—as well as the Government—can give assurances that they are routinely disaggregating their data sets by gender?

Good morning, Auditor General, and thank you for joining us. I just have a couple of questions, as I am mindful of the time. The first is a slightly technical question that follows on from Mr Hoy’s questions. In the update that it gave in December 2024, the Government stated that it was taking

“a cascade approach to savings”.

What is your understanding of the implications of that, in the light of the fact that all change programmes that are under way anywhere in Government are arguably now part of public service reform?

I accept what you are saying. In future reports, would you be prepared to actively consider culture as specific and measurable, for the reasons that we have outlined?

In your evidence thus far, it sounds as though the position is very complex, and the data that you have cited probably confirms that we are not entirely certain of the impact of the rise. Therefore, to pick up on the issue that the convener was probing earlier, is it reasonable and accurate to say that we do not have complete transparency—probably for a very good reason—about the impact of the original rise in ADS and that you therefore have not been able to model the potential impact of a subsequent rise from 6 per cent to 8 per cent?

Okay. Convener, I should have drawn committee members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests.

If I may, I will follow up one area in relation intra-landlord activity. There is evidence that, over time, quite a number of landlords have exited the market across the whole of the United Kingdom. That was triggered by the UK Government’s withdrawal, some years back, of mortgage interest tax relief. More recently, some landlords have been choosing to exit the market but to sell with the tenant in situ, so that another landlord buys the property. That is done for the very good reason that the property is somebody’s home. Surely a by-product of the increase in the rate of ADS will be more tenants being evicted, because a landlord will be less likely to buy properties. To what extent have you factored that consideration into any scenario planning that you have done?

I will move on to my next question. I have not seen culture mentioned specifically in your report. It is a very good report, but the reference to culture is implicit, rather than explicit, in some of the commentary, such as that on transparency and leadership, for example.

Considering your understanding of the culture that prevails and that you have seen, how confident are you that changes can be made, given that the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour?

I do not know the names of the companies concerned, but I asked the question because I am aware that there has been increasing activity in landlord-to-landlord sales, which keeps tenants in place. Of course, at that point, the landlord is knowingly and deliberately taking a cut in what they might be able to achieve on the open market, to allow the tenant to stay in situ, and rightly so. However, this measure could discourage investors from coming to the table. Therefore, it would be worth while to look into that.

Yes, although the evidence of the impact of the previous increase from 4 per cent to 6 per cent does not necessarily follow with regard to the increase from 6 per cent to 8 per cent. It is your view that that might be the case, but we do not actually know that and the only thing that we could be certain of, if we did projections, is that they would be inaccurate. I ask about that because I want to know how you can evidence your assertion that the increase will support first-time buyers rather than merely fulfil the intention to increase the tax take? I am not against that per se, but is it not quite a bold statement that the increase in the rate of ADS will necessarily lead to more first-time buyers being able to access property?

Correct.