���˿���

Colleagues may wish to pursue that further.

The committee has raised a number of issues about taxation. For example, we asked when the Scottish Government plans to publish a discussion paper about tax and spending choices. The response that we got was that the rationale for that document has changed and the United Kingdom Government’s mini budget has gradually been unwound. What is the rationale? Is it because of volatility at the moment, or are there other factors to consider?

ACS is also a social enterprise. The cross-party group on the circular economy is going to visit it. I asked the company about ex-offenders and was told that the level of productivity is excellent. The company would not mind at all if the whole workforce was made up of ex-offenders because they are able to deliver the product that is required.

I have a question about the private finance initiative and public-private partnerships, which placed a significant annual financial burden on the Scottish Government when it came into office in 2007. I understand that interest rates going up has had a significant impact. What impact are increased payments having on the Scottish Government and local authorities?

Before the rise in inflation, my local authority had to pay about £16 million or £17 million for schools that were completed in 2007. Those payments go up to 2037, but I understand that they have increased significantly because many of them are tied into current interest rates as opposed to rates that are fixed over a period of time. So that we can consider the implications of that across the public sector, any information on the issue would be helpful.

On employability, I was intrigued by the comments about the Dundee pathfinder project. We will want to look at that further.

You will be aware that the UK Government is talking about when it will raise the pension age from 67 to 68, and about bringing that forward from 2044 to 2034, which will, of course, increase the workforce. I do not know how many people aged 67 to 68 will want to remain in the workforce, but that is when the state pension age will change.

In terms of employability, yesterday I was at ACS Clothing in Motherwell. I do not know how familiar you are with that facility. It is a circular economy facility—it is the largest clothing recycling facility in Europe and it puts clothes back into the marketplace. It employs 150 people, and 16 per cent of its workforce have disabilities. It also has a very high proportion of refugees and ex-offenders working there. It takes a lot of people from the margins, and it pays well. It is very high tech and has a very low carbon footprint and so on—a lot of very good things are happening there. My point is about trying to learn from some of that best practice and seeing how it can be expanded around Scotland.

There has been a great deal of focus on the national care service in recent days and weeks. This committee hopes to scrutinise an updated financial memorandum towards the beginning of next month, if not the end of this month. Concerns about how much of next year’s budget will be allocated to the national care service have been raised—including by members of this committee—in the chamber and beyond. Can you enlighten us a wee bit on that?

John Mason has continued his Richard Lyle impression, even at the committee.

Section 1 agreed to.

Schedule 1 agreed to.

Section 2 agreed to.

Schedule 2 agreed to.

Section 3 agreed to.

Schedule 3 agreed to.

Sections 4 to 11 agreed to.

Long title agreed to.

Could we say that you are moving the accounting into next year but that the projects are still continuing, or are there are actually delays to existing projects?

Thanks very much. There was a very positive and productive meeting with my local college—Ayrshire College—just last Friday.

I open the discussion to colleagues around the table, starting with Daniel Johnson.

Thank you, minister. I will begin with some questions and then open the session to colleagues around the table.

The committee received submissions from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and from some local authorities that have concerns about the impact on local authority housing. For example, Clackmannanshire Council said:

“Local Authorities pay LBTT and ADS on the same basis as private sector developers and land speculators”,

but noted that,

“no additional grant is available to meet the cost of this tax.”

It went on to state:

“This is in contrast to the full exemption from both LBTT and ADS that is available to Registered Social Landlords.”

Why is that exemption in place for registered social landlords, but not for local authorities?

I can understand your position, but it is somewhat disappointing. Local authorities are concerned that the change is going to impact on them now. As you know, Clackmannanshire Council is the smallest mainland local authority, and yet it says:

“The increase in ADS from 4% to 6% will add a further £50,000 to the cost of our house purchase programme this year and an estimated £204,000 in 2023/24.”

That is not insignificant, as I am sure you can appreciate. The council’s submission goes on to talk about the unfairness of the change and says that it will put “additional pressure on rents” at a time when the cost of living is high.

When are you likely to produce the review? One of the committee’s concerns is that the Scottish Government often tells us that it is going to produce reviews or reforms, and yet the months pass by and we do not see them. To be fair, we get the same from the United Kingdom Government. When will we get a potential change that would benefit local authority tenants?