Chamber and committees

I am asking the question because, although Mr Quayle answered the question about some detail of the possible timescales, there is a big question about the on-going co-design of the policies. It is clear from the evidence that we have taken so far that local authorities are not at all confident that the extent of the co-design is either certain or, in terms of the timescales, very clear. I will ask again: why do you have 10 out of 10 confidence in the financial memorandum?

If you are making the point that your confidence in the financial memorandum is 10 out of 10, why is it that the witnesses from whom we have taken evidence say that theirs is at four or five? Why is there that discrepancy? What has gone wrong there?

I will follow on from Michelle Thomson’s line of questioning, which is important. Standing orders say that a financial memorandum must set out the

“best estimates of the costs, savings, and changes to revenues to which the provisions of the Bill would give rise, and an indication of the margins of uncertainty in such estimates. The Financial Memorandum must also include best estimates of the timescales over which such costs, savings, and changes to revenues would be expected to arise.”

You have put it on record this morning that you think that this financial memorandum is 10 out of 10 when it comes to confidence. In relation to the timescales that you are setting out, are you absolutely confident that that is correct?

Minister, you rightly mentioned in your opening statement how the uplift in the teachers’ pay settlement is a very important and understandable commitment in the financial landscape that you have to deal with. For clarification, do the figures in the table in section A.2.1 in the guide to the autumn budget revision—the section entitled “Gross Funding Changes”—relate to the 2022-23 budget commitments?

Yes, indeed. Overall, we welcome that commitment, but you are right that it has led to some very difficult decisions, with the potential for more difficult decisions coming down the line on commitments in future budgets. Obviously, this is a very large part of the budgetary negotiations. Do you feel that that pressure will be there for the foreseeable future?

Are you in a position to tell us about that reprofiling?

Sorry, do they not understand that this is a framework bill?

I am sorry—I do not have it in front of me. I cannot remember what the actual number was, but it was for the Scottish Funding Council. There was a reduction in the money being paid over to it.

I have two other points for clarification, if I may. First of all, money is being taken away from the Scottish Funding Council. Why was that decision made, and where is that money being reallocated to?

If teachers and non-teaching staff have had that uplift, what are the implications for the next budget with regard to those pay settlements?