Chamber and committees

I have a couple of questions that go back to several points that have been made in passing. First, Auditor General, you mentioned the census programme board, but is that the programme board for Scotland only?

We will put the points to NRS when it comes before us. Willie Coffey joins us remotely and has a number of questions to put.

I invite Craig Hoy to ask some questions.

We cannot hear you at the moment, Mr Samson. We will try to fix that. I am afraid that you might have to start again. [Interruption.] No, we are still not able to hear you.

Craig, do you want to press on with a supplementary, or do you want to move to your next question? Perhaps the Auditor General wants to come back in.

Maybe I am misreading the situation, but is not it odd that the directly elected commissioners do not shape the budget of the Crofting Commission, or were excluded from the process? Mr Barron, I know that you said that that was the normal state of affairs, but why would that be? I do not understand that.

I also picked up the suggestion that there ought to be an accountable officer who would be a deputy to Mr Barron. Is that part of the plan?

That would be helpful.

I have just a couple more questions. When he gave evidence to the committee on the section 22 report, the Auditor General for Scotland said that there is an “Improvement Plan”—which I believe had a capital I and capital P. Can you give us an insight into where you are on that journey?

My final question is on an issue that, again, we reflected on in the evidence session with the Auditor General. I think that a report with recommendations was produced by consultants in 2016. It appears that some of the recommendations that have come from the Deloitte audit echo issues that were raised then. The question that lingers in my mind—forgive me for missing the first part of the meeting—is this: what confidence can we, as the Public Audit Committee of the Parliament, have that things will be different this time, and that the improvement plan will be implemented and some fundamental issues addressed and solved?

Mr Barron described the situation as being not untypical of what happens in other parts of the public sector. When I read and understand what has happened, I see a high degree of turbulence. The former convener left and the one before that left under extraordinary circumstances that I have not quite got to the bottom of. There was, of course, also a vote of no confidence or a call for your resignation. Those instances are not necessarily recognisable as typical of how things have been in other parts of the public sector.

We are asking these questions not because we want you to fail but because we want you to succeed. It is extremely important that the crofting communities and the crofting way of life be sustained, sustainable and successful. You have a key part to play in that, so I wish you well.

I presume that there is a continuing relationship with the auditors from Deloitte so that they can help you and work with you through the improvement plan to ensure that things get on to a sustainable track that will lead to the support that the crofting communities need.

On that note, I will not bring in Gordon Beattie, and we will finish there. Caroline Lamb’s point is absolutely correct, and workforce planning is one of the things that the committee concerns itself with on a regular basis. If there are staff shortages or other staff issues, we are keen to learn about those and encourage organisations to address them and keep them as a priority. As Willie Coffey said, staff’s efforts have been monumental and they will continue to need to be as we look to the future.

I thank everybody who joined us to give evidence—Mary Morgan, Carolyn Low and Gordon Beattie from NSS and Caroline Lamb and Richard McCallum from the NHS and the Government directorate.

I now close the public part of the meeting.