Chamber and committees

Thanks very much.

I share some of your concerns. The committee could perhaps look at the overall picture at some point.

Is pay one of those factors? There are various figures in the papers. For example, 6.7 per cent was mentioned, but I think that that is an overall figure. The cleaning budget is up by only 3.9 per cent; I presume that the cleaners will be given a bit more than 3.9 per cent. You might be negotiating; I do not know, so I do not know what you can say in public, but can you give us any indication of the pay increases for next year?

I accept that. I do not know whether you can tell us anything privately or send us any private information about that, or whether you can at least keep us updated as things move forward. I assume that there will be a major impact on the budget and on your contingency funds if you have to settle for slightly more—or even slightly less—than you expect.

That is helpful. Thank you.

If I understand it correctly, I think that you assumed that the uptake by MSPs of the staff allowance was 95 per cent, but you now assume that it was 93 per cent. Can you give a wee bit of explanation of that?

I accept that—some people will go to 100 per cent, I take it.

On saving money, can you give us an idea of practical things that we might be doing? For example, are we cutting the temperature in this building?

I gather that the only plans for a new tax or a replacement tax relate to the aggregates levy, which is due to be devolved at some point. Is that the only new tax that is being looked at? What about a revamp of or a replacement for council tax—what is the timescale for that?

Which Prime Minister?

As I understand it, you are looking for a 4.8 per cent cash increase this year. Some parts of the public sector have been given a flat-cash settlement. If the Parliament was to offer you a flat-cash settlement, what would that mean in practice?

I understand that and I am not really arguing with it, but other parts of the public sector are under the same pressures. We have discussed commissioners at some length. For clarity, who should take an overview of commissioners? Is it this committee? I accept your point that it is not the corporate body’s responsibility to say no, and I am sure that all the individual commissioners are doing and will do good work, but somebody needs to look at the overall picture and say that the money is not going into front-line services but into commissioners. Who should take that overall view?