Chamber and committees

Whose decision would it be to make that simpler? Would it be for Social Security Scotland to change its procedures?

Yes, because it would not apply at all if somebody is either not already getting a benefit or if the entitlement is going up; it applies only if the entitlement is coming down—I get that. However, it is early days.

There was a suggestion that there could be some disadvantage if people have short-term assistance in that it does not automatically mean that they would get carers support payments, for example. Do you see any downsides with regard to STA, or is it positive?

I am sorry to interrupt, but are you saying that that is not happening at the moment? I understood that the STA would just be taken off the backdated payment.

Okay, thank you.

I have a couple of questions on some of the assumptions and details. I do not quite understand the point that, if somebody has retired or has otherwise left the service, the costs might be higher in their case than the costs for somebody who is still in the police service. Will you explain what happens there?

Right. The SPF makes the point that

“it seems grossly unfair that those in higher ranks who are also higher earners are having their financial costs paid ... yet the federated ranking officers are having to pay for their defence either personally or through their professional subscriptions.”

Is there an inconsistency there?

Would it be part of the medium-term financial strategy, or is it a completely separate thing?

Okay. Perhaps you could just clarify something for me. One of the phrases that is used a few times is “balanced pathway scenario”. I am sure that everybody else understands it, but I do not. Will you clarify what a balanced pathway scenario is? Is it a CCC term?

Are you saying that the figure is not based on ownership, but on an estimate of where the expenditure would come from?

That is what I was wondering, because a lot of private owners would not be able to afford very much investment.

A lot of the report is looking at additional investment. However, we are already spending quite a lot on, for example, agriculture, with the replacement for the common agricultural policy. How does that interact here? Is that a factor? That money is already going out, but we can tweak it a bit as to how it is used.