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 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 17 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 2597 contributions

|

Economy and Fair Work Committee

Scotland’s Supply Chains

Meeting date: 26 January 2022

Colin Beattie

When you are endeavouring to put in place the measures that you are talking about, I assume that the skills shortages that have apparently arisen as a result of Brexit will constrain how far we can go in encouraging manufacturing in Scotland.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

My understanding is that it is notoriously difficult to comply with some of the European Commission’s requirements, and that a lot of countries hit that problem.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

From memory, in past circumstances where there have been similar suspensions, it has turned out to be the delivery agency that has failed to comply, and the Scottish Government has been left to sort that out. Is that the case again?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

What are the implications of the ESF programme ending in 2023? If the Scottish Government has not been able to clean it up and reclaim any funds, does it simply become a dead loss? If so, are there other financial implications behind that?

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of the Scottish Government Consolidated Accounts”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

Thank you.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

I am still struggling a bit with the positivity around this. You had a bit of extra time, which gave you a chance to spend more time enhancing and improving delivery of the census. I presume that that had a cost in itself, and that it is rolled up into the £14.4 million.

You still have not answered the question about what the goods are that are so significantly increased in price that they warrant a mention.

09:45  

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

You are telling me that the original specifications for delivery of the census were underbudgeted, because you are saying that you found out that some things would take longer and added it into the cost subsequently. It appears to me that your original costing was not accurate.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

You were talking about the coding of pieces of paper.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

You mentioned it specifically and said that the exercise that you did showed that it would take longer than you anticipated. That must indicate that you would have had a budget overrun had the census gone ahead as originally planned.

Public Audit Committee

Section 22 Report: “The 2020/21 audit of National Records of Scotland”

Meeting date: 20 January 2022

Colin Beattie

The impression that I got from Paul Lowe was that the £21.6 million is mitigated by the benefits that you have been able to achieve in additional experience and being able to look more closely at the programme and enhance it and so on, but that still does not actually mitigate the £21.6 million. It is still costing £14.4 million more than it would have had the census gone through.

It says specifically in the report that it is due to the cost of extending suppliers’ contracts. I do not know whether you negotiated with the suppliers to change their contracts, but that would obviously create an additional cost element. It is also mentioned that part of the additional cost is the increase in the cost of goods. What are those goods that are so significant?