Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to build on the accountability point. We had a workshop with CARM members last week. They talked about their lived experience and collaboration with service users when they are designing services. I used this quote from one of the CARM members earlier on:

“One of the biggest challenges we faced was ensuring that our voices translated into meaningful influence. While our panel’s questions were put directly to the Minister, it was evident that translating these into real change requires persistence, transparency, and stronger accountability mechanisms.”

That was not about Scottish Government accountability but more about its partners. How can we ensure that the Government’s partners are delivering on the Government’s objectives, and that the voice of those with lived experience is reflected in delivery by partners? That was one of the points that was raised by CARM last week. I will ask the minister first and go to the cabinet secretary after that.

Good morning. I will follow up on the discussions about following the money and accountability. Last week, we had a meeting with CARM, and I will read part of a statement that was made by one of the participants:

“One of the biggest challenges we faced was ensuring that our voices translated into meaningful influence. While our panel’s questions were put directly to the Minister, it was evident that translating these into real change requires persistence, transparency, and stronger accountability mechanisms.”

That goes back to the point that Angela O’Hagan made about the Scottish Government meeting its minimum core responsibilities. One issue that came through strongly was a real lack of data—which confirms what has been said. That also relates to lived experience. We have heard about that today. It does not just relate to the issues that were raised through CARM; it goes beyond that.

Is that indicative of what is happening in other parts of the budget? Last week, we heard about a case study on employability, and the issues there came through strongly. In your experience, does the same thing come through in other parts of the budget? Does that demonstrate that the minimum core requirements are being met or not? The accountability issue came through really strongly last week, in that the Government has been passing monies on but has not been following the money to see the outcomes.

I noticed Aberlour’s comments on similar issues in the press this morning.

Allan Faulds, do you want to come in?

Data was also one of the key points mentioned when we spoke to CARM last week, and it is different in different parts of the country. One of the things that we talked about was how data on services that are available in Edinburgh and Glasgow might be different from that on services that are available in the Highlands, for example. When looking at the lived experience and the data that is available, is that taken into account to make sure that things are changing and that policy follows that?

Yes.

Cabinet secretary, will you expand on your responsibilities on that? One of the examples that was used this morning was the Government’s focus on, and success in, tackling child poverty. How does that determine the broader overview of the budget? Budget spending does not sit in one silo. It has to be a broader policy approach. From your point of view, where does the use of data come into that broader approach and how is that combined with lived experience?

Thank you, convener. For a number of years, I was a member of the commission on school reform with Reform Scotland, which is now known as Enlighten, and I was a member of Reform Scotland’s advisory board. I was also a member of East Lothian Council from 2007 to 2022 and sat on various education committees. That is my declaration.

I have no relevant interests to declare.

I cannot speak for the Government on tax policy. I mentioned that LBTT is under review.

Rachael Hamilton’s amendment 224 seeks to repeal the additional dwelling supplement entirely, which is at odds with the policy intent of supporting opportunities for first-time buyers and homeowners. It would also be likely to have a significantly negative revenue impact. Therefore, I ask Rachael Hamilton not to move amendment 224.

Rachael Hamilton’s amendment 225 seeks to exempt properties from the additional dwelling supplement in cases in which a buyer intends to renovate a property to make it habitable. We consider the amendment to be unnecessary on the basis that properties that are genuinely unsuitable for use as a dwelling are deemed non-residential and, as such, ADS does not apply to their purchase. If the intention is to exempt purchases of otherwise habitable properties, such properties will be correctly treated as dwellings for ADS purposes. In such cases, the current ADS repayment arrangements are considered sufficient. Therefore, I ask Rachael Hamilton not to move amendment 225.

I will finish my point on amendment 537 and then come back to amendment 536.

It is also unclear how such requirements could be effectively enforced with no formal agreement being in place between the prospective tenant and the landlord or agent. Setting additional requirements in this area might also inadvertently discourage mainstream landlords from letting to students rather than support better access. I therefore ask the member not to move that particular amendment.

As I mentioned, it is about the fact that no formal agreement is in place between the tenant and the landlord or agent, which might discourage that.

I will touch on number of points—I was going to come on to income, which is just one of the requirements. I am happy to engage further on that particular point with Ms Duncan-Glancy.