Chamber and committees

That is a little bit disappointing, because, when you were at the committee previously, I got the impression that the RTI information would be the big answer and would give you a lot more clarity. Has it disappointed you a bit?

Fair enough. Thanks, convener.

I just want to touch on some of the minor taxes, although I accept that their impact is much less. Someone commented that house prices are unpredictable and had risen more than was anticipated. Was that just purely because of the inflation factor?

The bigger question is about social security. We now understand that the Scottish Government is generally nicer than the UK Government and so is more generous in handing out social security. Is that built into the system now? You seem to have slightly underestimated how much was going to be paid out each year.

We have covered quite a lot of ground already. On the timeframe, five years seems quite short, Mr Melhuish. Even seven years seems quite short. Clyde Gateway, which is in my constituency, is looking at a 10-year timescale for filling up a development.

What are the risks on the timescale? Is it that nobody will be interested to start with because it is too short, or is there a danger that people walk away after the five years?

I will ask you my other question then come back to the Unite folk. I think that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has said that the impact will be less than £5 million in lost LBTT. Therefore, it is not commenting further because that is a relatively small amount compared with the whole Scottish tax take. That £5 million of lost LBTT is fairly definite, whereas any money coming in is fairly uncertain. Does it concern you that, if we go ahead with the scheme, public services will have to face a cut to match that?

That does not necessarily reflect the economy or anything like that; it is much more to do with just individuals.

The final thing that I want to touch on is the fact that the total number of taxpayers has increased by 5.1 per cent, if I understood that correctly. Perhaps linked to that, the immigration numbers were higher than expected, with immigration from the rest of the world rather than from the European Union. Can you say anything about that?

The letter that you sent before the start of the inquiry said:

“The Scottish Government takes the view that the present blended system of payment, comprising fee per item, capitation, allowance and direct reimbursement payment should remain.”

I note that Mr Notman used the word “radical”, but the dentists have suggested that that is just tweaking the system and that they would like something more radical. One suggestion is to move them on to a system that is more like that for general practitioners. When I speak to GPs, I find that they are not entirely happy with the system but they seem to be a bit happier than dentists are. Would that be an option?

Paragraph 9 on page 5 says “tackling misinformation”. Could we add “and disinformation”? We looked at both, one being perhaps unintentional and the other intentional.