Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will turn to council tax. Before we get into a wider conversation about that, I note the interim steps that the Government has taken. I welcome the fact that councils now have the ability to double council tax on second homes, alongside the existing powers on empty properties. However, when the policy was announced, the Government said that it would also explore moving beyond that. In Wales, councils can levy 300 per cent council tax on second and empty homes. The consultation on council tax for second and empty homes in Scotland, which took place in the spring of 2023, showed very strong support for empowering councils here with a similar option to the one that councils in Wales have, but that would require primary legislation.

Is it the Scottish Government’s intention to introduce such legislation during the remainder of this parliamentary session? If so, what would be the legislative vehicle for that? I am not aware of an obvious choice, but I can see the matter being within the scope of a couple of options.

That would be helpful. Thank you.

I take the point that the corporate body is not the employer of MSP staff, but, at the same time, clearly MSPs cannot pay them any more than is within our staff cost provision. I also acknowledge Jackson Carlaw’s point that not all MSPs fully utilise that provision as it is.

However, the core of the objection from the MSP staff unions—the three that wrote to the corporate body—is that the move to using AWE represents a cut. Further, AWE is not directly linked to the cost of living. It relates to the earnings of other workers outside the Parliament rather than directly to the cost of rent, food, energy bills and so on for the staff who work here. Did you take that into consideration when you looked at the basket of measures? I accept that, in any individual year, any individual measure can be deeply flawed, but that was perhaps an advantage of using the basket approach. Did you take into account the fact that AWE does not directly reflect the cost of living? It does so indirectly, but not in the same way as a direct inflation measure such as CPI.

That would be useful.

Finally, alongside the draft budget, the Government published a memorandum on borrowing policy that includes a section on the first phase of due diligence around the issuing of Scottish Government bonds. A list of conclusions is included, rather than any detail on what that first phase threw up. Is there any more detailed documentation on that in the public domain? If there is, I was unable to find it. If not, could the details of that first phase of due diligence be published? What is in the borrowing memorandum document is very high level.

Were the Scottish Government to move ahead with issuing bonds, it would be a significant step and one that would require significant parliamentary scrutiny. At the moment, there is not enough on the public record to allow effective scrutiny to begin. I recognise that it is only the first phase of due diligence, but I do not think that what is there is sufficient for transparency.

That is a welcome clarification. I do not mean this as a criticism of Councillor Hagmann, but, having met her and COSLA on several occasions recently and discussed issues related to this, I was not aware that she, on behalf of the joint working group, is trying to identify points of potential agreement between the parties. It is useful to hear the clarification, given that most of the parties’ finance spokespersons are in this room, that that is one of the purposes of the discussions and that they feed back up to the joint working group.

For absolute clarity, given what you said about the lead-up to the election, is it not your expectation that any substantial reform will take place ahead of the election? There may be reforms around the edges, such as the one that we mentioned on second and empty homes, but it sounds like you are saying that there will not be progress, or even agreement, on this side of the election about things that have been raised before, such as revaluation.

Just to clarify, are you saying that, timescale and context aside, given the consideration that took place last year, the Government recognises that there is potential value to that policy? Should the right circumstances come about—the right economic context and wider UK tax context—is there potential to introduce that policy in recognition of its value?

That would be really helpful. This might be something for the letter, but can you confirm whether there is a timescale attached to that hub? I think that it is exactly what is required.

I accept that there is an element of tension—after all, universities, unlike colleges, are independent institutions—but can you confirm that it is the Scottish Government’s view that it is an unacceptable level of risk for an institution to be existentially dependent on tuition fees from students from any particular nation?

The local authority has written to the Scottish Government. I apologise, but I cannot remember whether the letter was directed to you or to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government.

Thank you.