Chamber and committees

Thank you. Councillor Heddle has indicated that he would like to come in before we finish.

Professor Fothergill, you also commented on issues around uncertainty and the introduction of the new scheme. Do you want to comment on that?

The main item of business is an evidence session on the Subsidy Control Bill, which is United Kingdom Parliament legislation. The UK Parliament is seeking the consent of the Scottish Parliament, as the bill has an impact on devolved matters and the executive competence of the Scottish ministers. The bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 30 June 2021. Provisions in the bill apply to all of the UK. The bill is continuing its passage through Westminster and I understand that it is scheduled for its second reading in the House of Lords next Wednesday.

The purpose of the bill is to establish a domestic subsidy control regime for the UK following exit from the European Union, and to provide a legal framework for public authorities to make subsidy decisions. The Scottish Government lodged a legislative consent memorandum on 21 October, which has been referred to this committee to consider and report on. The Scottish Government does not recommend to the Scottish Parliament that it give consent to the bill in its current form. The purpose of today’s session is for us to hear views on the provisions of the bill and its impact in Scotland, before taking evidence from the Scottish Government next week.

I welcome our witnesses and thank them for joining us. We have with us Professor David Bell, chair of the steering group for the consultation on the replacement to the European structural and investment funds in Scotland; Professor Steven Fothergill from Sheffield Hallam University; Councillor Steven Heddle, environment and economy spokesperson with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities; and George Peretz QC from Monckton Chambers. As always, I ask members and witnesses to keep questions and answers as concise as possible.

I will start the questions. I thank the witnesses for the written submissions that we have received. The submissions talk about the opportunities in the bill and the need for the bill to be introduced, but say that it seems to create a tension. With the opportunities, there might be inflexibility and the need for authorities to have a degree of certainty. Mr Peretz’s submission says that the changes will give us more flexibility and speed and other advantages but, at the same time, it will be a challenge for authorities, which might be risk averse. There is a degree of uncertainty as to how the system will work compared to the European Union subsidy regime that we had previously.

I ask Mr Peretz to go first and to talk about where he sees some of the opportunities and where the tensions and difficulties lie. How will the subsidy regime operate and what will it mean for those trying to work within it?

Thank you. I will move on to Maggie Chapman, who has questions about consultation. I understand that Councillor Heddle would like to come in; I am sure that Ms Chapman will invite you to speak.

Thank you. I will bring in Colin MacDonald. I am sorry—I meant Gordon MacDonald

Thank you. Mr Beattie, I am afraid that we must make progress. Jamie Halcro Johnston is interested in asking his questions, so we will move on to him.

The witnesses were initially advised that we would conclude by 11. However, three members still wish to come in, so I hope that they are content to remain with us for a bit longer.

I will now bring in Alexander Burnett, who will be followed by Colin Beattie. I know that it is unfortunate for members to speak later in the meeting, but I ask members to be concise in their questions. That would be helpful.

Finally, do you have a view on the question that Gordon MacDonald asked of Mr Peretz on the asymmetry of power when it comes to making complaints to the CMA? I think that Mr Peretz said that the UK Government would argue that it will take forward issues in the best interests of the UK as a whole. However, the concern is that it would focus on English subsidies and that there will be no equivalent power for Scotland or Wales to make representations if they are unhappy with awards that are made in England. The defence of the UK Government appears to be that it will act in the interests of the UK, so nobody should be concerned. Is that the correct understanding of the situation?

Thank you. Mr Peretz wishes to come in. Councillor Heddle mentioned the ability to veto. Could you comment on that? I know that you have previously commented on the issue of asymmetric power.

Thank you. That is helpful.

I would like to thank all the witnesses for providing their time and expertise, which are much appreciated.