Chamber and committees

I do not have an declarable interests. However, I draw the commission’s attention to my voluntary entry in the register of members’ interests.

I am sure that we will come back to that and keep an eye on it.

I am sorry to dwell more on the negative than on the positive, but the other area of the annual report that struck me was the section a couple of pages later that refers to professional training for audit and included the pass-rate statistics. In 2018-19, the pass rate was 85.7 per cent; in 2019-20 it was down to 84 per cent; in 2020-21 it had gone down to 79 per cent. I think there was a previous suggestion that the variation might have been due to the introduction of a new exam a couple of years ago. Why is the pattern like that? What are you doing to address it? Do you have insight into why the pattern has been going in that direction?

One of the things that struck me from the report was on page 20, on internal and external quality assurance review. The conclusion that was drawn that

“only four of the 11 financial audits we reviewed achieved our target standard of quality. Of the remainder, three were graded ‘improvements required’ and four were graded ‘significant improvements required’”.

The commentary also refers to “mixed results”. Will you give us more details of those mixed results? What are the particular areas for improvement, what is their seriousness, and what is the work plan to address them?

That is an extremely well-made point.

The legacy paper mentions the defensiveness of some of the accountable officers who have come before the committee. I hope that we see a change in approach from people who are brought before the committee to give evidence.

We have a job to do. We are here to serve the interests of Parliament and the people, and we will do whatever is required in order to do that. However, it is important that we have oversight of what happens in the future, not just oversight of an issue, or, sometimes, a crisis that has arisen. We need to have a longer-term reach.

The next item that we have to consider is the legacy paper, which was circulated in advance of the meeting.

I place on record our thanks to the session 5 Public Audit and Post-legislative Scrutiny Committee for its legacy report. I am conscious of the fact that two members of the committee in this session were members of that committee and that they played a part in putting together the legacy paper. It is clear that the legacy paper will be an important part of the consideration that we need to give to our work programme.

I invite any member of the committee who has any comments on, or who wishes to add anything in connection with, the legacy paper to indicate that they want to speak.

The next item on the agenda is the election of the deputy convener. Parliament has agreed that only members of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party are eligible for nomination for that position. I understand that that party has nominated Sharon Dowey for the post.

Sharon Dowey was chosen as deputy convener.

Congratulations on your election as the deputy convener of the Public Audit Committee, Sharon.

Again, that is a well-made point. There will be new funding instruments to support agriculture and replace EU structural funds, the European social fund and so on. Some of the details still remain to be seen, but I absolutely think that it should be the committee’s job to scrutinise how that funding is being applied and whether reforms or improvements could be made. It is important that we understand that a huge change is taking place as a result of the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union and what that means for the landscape that people face.

I thank members for their contributions. It is important that we got some of those points on the record in public session. As previously agreed, we will discuss our work programme in private. I think that we are all clear that the legacy paper from the session 5 committee will form an important starting point for us in considering what our work programme will be in the short-term and medium-term future.

I look forward to a constructive and productive working relationship with members, and I bring the public session of the meeting to a close.

There is a clear sense that we will be in very challenging times, especially for the public sector, and that organisations, from the national health service to the court system, will be under incredible strain. The Auditor General for Scotland has identified the importance of understanding the pressures that there will be to ensure that, despite those pressures, good governance, proper working practices, workforce planning and investments that are made are effective. We will return to that.

I was struck, too, by the sense that the previous committee understood that we are not dealing with people who come before us on a case-by-case basis. There are often common themes that run through things and systemic failures that need to be tackled. It is important that we, too, have the broader understanding that we are sometimes dealing with pretty fundamental failings in the way that organisations are approaching their remits and that those failings can be common across the public sector. We need to understand that there are, at times, common themes that we need to pursue, and we need to ensure that lessons are learned not just by the single organisation before us but throughout the public sector.

The recommendation that we consider international experience is really important. I am keen that we pursue that when we discuss the work programme.

I do not have any declarable interests. However, for the record, I draw people’s attention to my voluntary entry in the register of members’ interests, which includes financial support given to my local Labour Party by Unite the union, the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, Unison, the Communication Workers Union, the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen and the Transport Salaried Staffs Association.