Seòmar agus comataidhean

The saving from cups is estimated to be about £453,000 a year. Compared with the overall costs of this, that is a relatively modest figure.

I did not know that Forestry and Land Scotland and Creative Scotland, for example, were sitting on reserves before that was announced by the cabinet secretary in the chamber. It seems a bit odd, to me.

I referred to paragraph 48, but my question was not about the detail of the paragraph. We have been talking about co-design and co-operation with local authorities, and I am concerned that they seem not to have been aware of where the figures came from. Clearly, there is a communication issue with regard to that.

My other question on numbers is about the £70 million that is being allocated for the recycling improvement fund. Ross Greer referred to the fund as well. We were told that, of the £70 million, £53 million is being allocated to 17 local authorities, which means that 15 local authorities have not received an allocation from the remaining £17 million. In response to John Mason, you said that £21 million has been allocated to Glasgow, which is 30 per cent of the fund going to an urban area that has roughly 10 per cent of Scotland’s population. If those figures are right, it means that only £32 million has gone to 16 local authorities, which seems quite disproportionate. Is there a reason for that?

I commend Glasgow for its ambition and securing 30 per cent of the fund, but it means that we have only £17 million left for 15 other local authorities. Will the Scottish Government look to top up that fund significantly, given that other local authorities are still looking at what the impact of the legislation might be and where they need to spend money to deliver their recycling targets more efficiently and effectively?

I am just concerned that some local authorities might have missed the boat. Ms McVea, do you want to come in on this?

The next item on our agenda is an evidence session with the Minister for Community Wealth and Public Finance on the Budget (Scotland) Act 2023 Amendment Regulations 2023. I intend to allow up to an hour for this session. The minister is joined today by Scottish Government officials Craig Maidment, who is a senior finance manager, and Niall Caldwell, who is corporate treasurer. I welcome the witnesses to the meeting.

Before I invite the minister to make a short opening statement, I would like to apologise for the fact that the previous session overran by more than 30 minutes. I certainly hope that this session will not do likewise. I apologise to the minister and his officials.

Over to you, minister, for your opening statement.

Is there a reason why the rural portfolio does not get additional funding, rather than the funding being returned in future years? Why is it not just kept within the rural portfolio? Is it because there are pressing needs elsewhere?

I find it intriguing that so many areas appear to have reserves in the first place. Has there been any assessment of the quantity of those reserves across the portfolios that the Scottish Government manages?

We have spoken about local government reserves ad infinitum over the years, but we have never really covered reserves that are held in other areas. It would be quite interesting to have a response on the level of reserves across the portfolios that the Scottish Government manages.

The “Guide to the ABR 2023-24—Finance Update for FPAC” says that

“Marine Scotland have been able to surrender”—

that is a disappointing word—

“£2 million of budget following savings exercises involving enhanced recruitment controls, maximising income and continuing focus on delivering operational efficiencies.”

I have to say, as someone with two islands in their constituency and large sea borders, that there are concerns that Marine Scotland does not have enough resources to ensure that fisheries are effectively and efficiently managed and that conservation is also taken into account. When there are breaches, Marine Scotland has to be called on. I could give an example from my constituency. Over the years, there have been concerns that there is not enough resource in Marine Scotland. Why is it felt that £2 million should be removed?

I touched on internal transfers and baselines. Paragraph 40 in the guide, under the heading “A.5 Internal Transfers”, says:

“The majority of internal transfers are moving budgets from the policy lead area, based on policy accountability at official level, to the appropriate delivery body.”

That was what I asked about earlier. How do we know which ones are being transferred because of policy accountability and which are not? The guide does not seem to say. It gives a list of significant budget internal transfers between portfolios, but it does not say which ones have been moved because of policy or delivery. It just says that they have been moved because of one or the other. Would it not be more helpful if that was clarified?