Seòmar agus comataidhean

That would be helpful as we scrutinise the budget. It would also be very helpful to understand the position that HES is in. My understanding is that there is currently a £3 million shortfall in reaching that target.

You must understand why people might raise their eyebrows at an organisation having financial difficulties and, at the same time, increasing its directors’ pay by up to 18 per cent.

We regularly discuss skills shortages, and you mentioned earlier the skills issue that the sector faces. We know about the shortage of apprenticeships, and we know about the shortage of tradespeople. There is not necessarily a shortage of directors, perhaps, but there is certainly a shortage of apprenticeships and tradespeople. At the same time as directors’ pay has been hiked by between 16 and 18 per cent, the increase for apprentices within the pay and grading framework that has been agreed by your organisation is between 3.5 and 5.4 per cent—which is a significant difference. The increase for skilled tradespeople is between 0 and 0.7 per cent. How is that fair?

In the context of the issues around culture that were mentioned earlier, maybe the fact that the pay increases are so significantly different explains why there are concerns within the organisation. Going back to the point about the budget, how is the organisation tackling the skills shortage by focusing on increasing pay for those at the top but not by as much for apprentices and tradespeople?

Good morning to the panel. I, too, have some specific questions on the budget for Ms Turnbull. As a committee, our job is to scrutinise the Government’s financial decisions and the financial performance of bodies that rely on Government funding. That is even more the case when there are calls on the Government to increase that funding. The last time that HES gave evidence to the committee, we heard about the new business model and the plans to increase its income by £10 million while, at the same time, experiencing a reduction of £2 million in its grant-in-aid funding. You mentioned income. How is HES currently getting on with that target of raising an extra £10 million in income?

It would be helpful if you could come back to us with the details. You are having to manage a significant shortfall.

That would be very helpful.

This is my last question on pay and financial planning. I understand that, in June 2024, HES budgeted for a 2 per cent increase in pay despite the Scottish Government having set out a public sector pay policy just two months before that suggested an increase of 3 per cent in the public sector. Is that correct? Is that your understanding? What does it say about your organisation’s financial planning if it is not adhering to the Scottish Government’s pay policy?

Clearly, it is a challenging period. You have to put measures in place and make efficiency savings in your organisation. Money is tight, and you have a considerable number of staff—around 1,800. With all of that in mind, why did HES agree a new pay and grading framework in April that will see a new top grade of employee, presumably directors, who will have their earnings potentially increased by between 16 and 18 per cent? If the organisation is looking for efficiency savings, why is the organisation introducing that top band?

I completely agree with your opening comment that any attack on a war memorial is cruel, offensive and deeply disrespectful. We do not want such attacks to take place in any part of Scotland.

You have talked a lot about creating a deterrent, but to what extent do we also need education? I would be interested to know the extent to which the attacks on war memorials have been organised and politically motivated, as opposed to people who should know better having done something really stupid. What is the balance between those two groups? Do we need education, as well as a deterrent, to prevent such attacks from happening?

I repeat that any attacks on war memorials are deeply disrespectful. They are a scourge and we should do everything that we can to eradicate them.

When it comes to the balance between deterrence and education, your mention of community payback orders was, I thought, really interesting. Some might point out that we have war memorials to remember the sacrifice made by so many generations of our countrymen and women, who did their duty to this country in protecting our freedom. However, your bill on the desecration of war memorials could take away people’s freedoms for up to 10 years. Some might feel uncomfortable about that, when we think of those who fought for our freedom, and perhaps we should be focusing more on community payback orders. At the end of the day, our veterans and the people who have fought for this country have done it a huge service, and such orders would be a more appropriate sentence for the most severe attacks on war memorials than a custodial sentence of up to 10 years.

Thank you.

Thank you for that thorough answer. When do you expect the report to be published?