Chamber and committees

Over what period is that?

Does the Scottish Government not have the power to add organisations to the list of those that participate?

That would be interesting to know, because it is in everybody’s interests that we get the maximum out of this. It seems to me that a large part of the public sector does not seem to be involved.

Are all the audited bodies audited on the basis of three invoices a year?

On the back of Sharon Dowey’s questions, how have the delayed audits and changed deadlines impacted on cash flow? Where do they place you?

Substantially?

Okay. That sounds like a good idea.

I note that paragraph 59 on page 14, which relates to price reductions obtained from audit companies, says:

“the price reductions secured in the last two appointment rounds were not sustainable.”

Presumably, we knew that they were not sustainable at the time. Why were they given?

I turn to the national fraud initiative, which you have already touched on. You mentioned some of the savings that have been achieved over a period. To what extent do you examine the benefits and outcomes of the initiative to ensure that we get value for money and that the value of the savings generated continues to merit the time and effort that is invested in it, both in Scotland and across the UK? I recall that a number of bodies—housing associations and suchlike—do not take part in the initiative. Has any move been made to bring them in? Obviously, the more organisations that are part of the initiative, the more effective and cost-effective it will be.

That would be interesting.

Paragraph 75 on page 15 says:

“Other operating costs are ... (9.3%) higher in the ... 2024/25 budget compared to the approved 2023/24 budget.”

Given that we do not have the actuals for 2023-24, do you have any comment on how we are performing in comparison with the budget?