���˿���

Thank you for those answers.

We know that tax is complex, but the public out there are trying to make sense of what is going on with the Scottish Government’s finances. The key takeaway from the report seems to be that the Scottish Government might claim that the tax decisions that it makes are raising huge amounts of cash, to the tune of £1.7 billion in a single year, which is more than what people would normally pay in tax if Scotland followed the rest of the UK’s tax bands and rates. That gives the impression that there is more money sloshing around the Scottish treasury to spend on public services for example, but the reality is that, for every £1.70 raised, 61p is available to the Government. There is a huge disparity in what people think the Government is raising from people paying more tax—and people will have a view on that—and the reality is that people are not getting back what they are paying into the system.

Your report seems to highlight some worrying reasons for that: people in Scotland have weaker earnings; we have lower economic growth; there are behavioural changes in response to increased taxes; and, as we know from this week, some sectors are dying before our eyes, such as the oil and gas sector in the north-east. All of that is having an effect on the Scottish economy.

What does the Scottish Government need to do to restore public trust and confidence in the statistics that it is using?

That is interesting, because on 13 November, the current First Minister said to Parliament:

“We have maintained our manifesto commitments in relation to taxation.”—[Official Report, 13 November 2025; c 19.]

Those commitments were to

“freeze income tax rates and bands”

for the duration of the parliamentary session, and to

“increase thresholds by a maximum of inflation”.

In your judgment, was the First Minister being accurate and transparent in making that statement?

Thank you. I will let others come in, convener.

Thank you, convener. This is one question in two parts. The first part is about the fiscal framework. In your view, is it fit for purpose? Secondly, there has, of late, been much conversation about whether people in Scotland pay more or less tax than people other parts of the UK, and it has been very difficult to get a straight, honest answer about that. It depends on whom you ask. We are trying to get to the bottom of it, being as neutral and politically independent as we can be, so that we, as an audit committee, have facts rather than conjecture. I still cannot answer that question, and I wonder whether you can.

We will ask them. Thank you.

Thank you for that comprehensive answer, which was very helpful but also very concerning. You mentioned beds in corridors, cleanliness issues, safety issues and staffing at dangerous levels. It is hard to believe that we are talking about the health service of a first-world country; the conditions that you have described make it sound like the health service of a third-world country.

However, I am keen not to scapegoat the staff in the hospitals, who, I am sure, are working in difficult conditions. Is there any evidence that none of this is the fault of the hard-working nursing and caring staff, the cleaners and the caterers—the people who deliver the services in such tough conditions? Is the problem higher up the chain?

Good morning and thank you for your evidence so far. I have been listening to the session and I read your report with great interest, particularly as a member who has covered the region of Ayrshire and Arran for some nine years now. These issues are not new to anybody who lives in the constituencies that I represent.

I am extremely concerned by the outcomes of your report on a whole range of levels. The most important one that I am worried about is not necessarily the financially precarious position of the board but what it means for patients and people. Ultimately, the health board is not a business. I know that we are using audit language here and talking about operating losses, but we are also talking about health outcomes. What effect does operating at such a loss have operationally on the board’s ability to deliver quality healthcare to the people of Ayrshire and Arran?

Surely it costs what it costs. I am confused by the language around saying that it is spending more than it should. If people are unwell, they are unwell and they need to be treated. I do not understand this countrywide approach that we are taking to the NHS—the suggestion is almost that it is living beyond its means. That seems outrageous.

What is it doing wrong? Where are the gaps here? What is it spending money on that it should not? I cannot work it out.

I have just spotted some figures in your traffic-light system. The 12-week out-patient target is 95 per cent. The Scottish average is 61 per cent, which is shocking anyway, but in March 2024 it was around 61 per cent in NHS Ayrshire and Arran. Over the summer—in July and August—that number dropped to 35 per cent. That basically means that one in three patients were seen within the target. I have a genuine concern that people are dying while waiting for treatment. Is this costing lives?