Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is a helpful comment. It is a disappointing situation. Five years ago, when Jeane Freeman was in charge and this work started, there was going to be a very different system. I think that the Government has lost its way, particularly on the 20m rule and those with variable conditions.

However, if we presume that the regulations will be passed by the Scottish National Party and Green Government with a review taking place in 2022-23, will it be possible for any recommendations that are made—for example, to change 20m to 50m—to be implemented in the current session of Parliament, or will it realistically be another five or six years before we see any change? Given your experience of how long things take, do you believe that we could do it in a four-year period, or is that overoptimistic?

I have three questions to ask. The first one is for Richard Gass or Judith Paterson, but feel free to jump in if you wish. It goes back to the issue of case law. We have had quite a lot of debate about this over the past number of years because, clearly, a lot of case law has built up over the past 15 or 20 years. Is it your understanding that the new agency and the new tribunals will be following that case law, or is the situation still unclear?

Is it possible that we could transfer safely and make changes at the same time? If that is not possible, will it be possible to make any changes that will come out of the independent review in the current session of Parliament, or are we realistically looking to the next session? I will start with Bill Scott on that.

I will start with an open question. Many of you have been on the journey of watching the regulations and the primary legislation going through over the past five years. One concern that I have is that we have not seen enough changes, particularly in relation to variable conditions and the higher rate of the mobility component. If we could make changes in relation to variability and mobility, what difference would that make to the people who you represent? I will start with Keith Park.

Ed Pybus raises an interesting point. Ultimately, decisions on these matters are made in the Supreme Court. It will be interesting to see how it interprets two different sets of regulations, but that may be a matter for the legal eagles.

I am interested in Judith Paterson’s point about the safe transfer, which we all want to happen. That has overridden the commission’s view that we should not have any changes. Will you expand on how you came to that decision? Was it a result of consultation with the third sector or was it a pragmatic view that the commission came to?

Suzie Burt, how has the relationship been for you, as somebody who has recently started a charity?

I add my thanks for all the work that our witnesses have done. As someone who has worked in the third sector, I acknowledge the pressure that a lot of them are under.

Paul Bradley, going back to last year and the funding that came from the Scottish and UK Governments, I got quite a lot of feedback over the last summer that a lot of the money went to the big charities—the headline charities, which I will not name—while a lot of smaller charities that do more work on the ground struggled to get that money. Is that just whingeing on the part of the small charities or is there any truth behind that? Going forward, how we can get the money to the people who are doing the work, rather than those who might shout loudest?

I have two quick questions. My question to Ian Bruce is similar to one that I put to the other panel. Looking at lessons learned from last year, do you think, from talking with the people you are involved with, that the money that came from the Scottish Government and the UK Government got down to the charities that were dealing with the most need on the ground? Did you hear any stories about funding being blocked by the larger charities or not getting to the people who were actually doing the work?

The issue of reserves and how they are held is an interesting one.

I would like to quickly address the theme of the future reform of how charities are regulated, as we have Martin Tyson here. The Government has announced that legislation to reform OSCR and its practice will be introduced this session. As someone who is a trustee of lots of small charities, the system seems to be heavy on paperwork. Martin Tyson, are you conscious that small charities often have to fill in the same amount of paperwork as the large charities? How do we get around that? Perhaps Paul Bradford and others could tell us what reforms they would like to see, from the charities’ perspective.

My final question is for Paul Bradley. As we come out of this pandemic—hopefully we will do so at some point—do you think that a lot of smaller and medium-sized charities will start merging? Will there be a redefining of the sector because of what has happened in the past two years or will the landscape look fairly similar three years from now?