Chamber and committees

Sure.

The report mentions the omicron variant of Covid and the war in Ukraine, and it is suggested that those would have an impact on taxpayers’ ability to meet their tax liabilities. Will you elaborate on that, please?

Yes, it poses some wider questions—including, again, some policy questions.

We will move straight to questions. I invite our deputy convener, Sharon Dowey, to ask the first question.

Although it is not in the written report, the £550,000 increase in grant aid to the Crofting Commission, which has been provided for by the Scottish Government, was alluded to earlier on, and Pat Kenny said that it was, in part, to address an enhancement of staffing capacity.

I have two lines of questioning. First, could you describe in more detail what those job roles are and whether the enhancement was about filling vacancies or increasing capacity? Have there been particular logjams, where the commission has not dealt with things as speedily as it might have? Is the enhancement of staffing capacity an attempt to address that?

Secondly, are other, non-staffing costs being met through that increased level of grant aid that has been provided for?

Thank you. There will be public interest in the proportionate increases in the salary levels from the regulatory team that is, I presume, working on the front line and those who are in strategic senior management positions. There will also be an interest in the net outcome from the new structure compared to what it was under the previous structure.

My final point is to pick up on something that you spoke about earlier. Some of the new commissioners were elected and some were appointed. I am interested in understanding what training and development they have been given. In answer to Colin Beattie’s earlier questions, you talked about the role of the public bodies unit and there is an expectation that training will be provided. In our report, we identified that we would want to understand what quality of training is being provided to a new cohort of commissioners.

It strikes me that a lot of the six-page report reflects on the recommendations and lessons that were put at the point of the previous section 22 report on the Crofting Commission and, indeed, on this committee’s conclusions. I just wonder whether it would not have served transparency a little better if you had listed the 41 recommendations and given some kind of tracking of how they had been progressed, so that we had a sense of that. I do not know whether you alluded to that as being part of the internal audit but, as far as the published document that is before us is concerned, that is not captured. I wonder whether you would consider that.

Okay. Maybe it is just me, but I thought that, for completeness, given the scale and breadth of the recommendations—seven on financial sustainability and the other 34 on governance and transparency—it might have been useful to capture those details in the document that is before us, but I hear what you say.

Craig Hoy has some questions.

Good morning, and welcome to the Public Audit Committee’s fourth meeting in 2023.

The first item is consideration of whether to take agenda item 3 in private. Do members agree to take item 3 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

I hear that but, just from my simple perspective, are you saying that there has been a reduction in the size of the senior management team but that it is costing more money?