���˿���

Thank you. Since the other witnesses do not want to comment on that point, my questions are finished for now.

I accept that.

Ms Walker, I did not ask you to respond to any of those questions, but you are more than welcome to. However, my first question for you follows on from what Liz Smith was asking about; indeed, you might already have answered it. You say in your submission that

“Prior to the ... pandemic, the Scottish Government had been considering methods of improving the tax policy-making process and the legislative processes for taxes”

and that you would like to see that worked through. Are you talking purely about a finance bill, or is there a bit more to it than that?

I have another question that is aimed at you, although Mr Robertson might want to come in, too. The voluntary sector has asked for multiyear funding, as it does every year, and a bit more predictability, which Mr Robertson mentioned. In practice—you are looking at the practical side of this—is it possible for any Government, whether a Westminster Government, the Scottish Government or even local government to make such a commitment and to adopt a multiyear approach, rather than the annual process that we have at the moment?

Thank you. Again, I have a question that is primarily for Polly Tolley, unless either of the other two witnesses want to come in. Another of COSLA’s suggestions was that ring fencing should be removed and that we should give local authorities more flexibility in how they spend money. I know that that is an issue for citizens advice bureaux, because some of them get funding from local authorities and some do not. From a citizens advice point of view as well as from a wider point of view, do you have a view on whether we should make more decisions centrally in Parliament or leave more decisions to local government?

On empty property rates, which the convener asked about, my recollection is that properties were sitting empty for quite a long time while their owners appeared to hope or expect that the property value would go up and they would make money that way, so it did not matter whether they put someone into the property. The convener might remember the example of the post office building in George Square—a beautiful building, right in the centre of Glasgow, which sat empty for ages. Is that issue not why we brought in the empty property rates? Is there a risk that development would be slowed further if we did not have those provisions?

Your submission—and, I think, the submission from Scottish Chambers of Commerce—talks about matching UK tax rates, cutting property taxes, LBTT incentives and so on. There might be arguments for all those moves, but if the Scottish Government and the Parliament take in less money from those taxes, we might have to, say, cut funding to the NHS or local government. At a time when everyone is struggling and the NHS is clearly under pressure, can you justify cutting any taxes, given such knock-on effects?

That is helpful.

Your submission says that the

“Scottish Government should undertake and publish a full assessment of Scottish tax powers and their potential to prevent and reduce child poverty.”

Will you expand on what you mean?

I have three questions that I want to ask.

On the issue of vaccination certificates, I suppose that their usefulness depends on how robust the underlying information is in the NHS system. Constituents have contacted me who have had one jag in Scotland and the second jag in England, Germany or some other country, which causes a problem in terms of the vaccination certificate. Similarly, I had both my jags in Easterhouse in Glasgow, but the NHS system says that I have had only one jag, so I cannot get a certificate. NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde tell me that that is a national problem, not just a Glasgow issue. My question is: how robust are our records?

Thank you for that—I shall continue phoning that number, as I have been doing.

I have another question—it is still on vaccination, I suppose. I have a moral dilemma as to whether I should take a third, or booster, vaccine when half the people around the world have not yet had any vaccine. That strikes me as a bit greedy on my part. Where are we with boosters? Should we be holding back a bit so that the rest of the world can get some?

Thank you for that answer also.

My third and final point is on a completely different subject. We have heard suggestions from the airline industry and the wider tourism industry that they hope to go back to the same level that they were at pre-pandemic. However, we also have the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—coming up, and we have climate change concerns. Does the Government feel that we should be aiming to get the airline industry back to 100 per cent of where it was—I think that it is currently at 20 or 25 per cent—or should we be aiming at something in between for the benefit of tackling climate change?