By David Scott
18 February 2010
Clearer and more detailed information is needed about the cost of proposed laws and policies, according to leading public finance officers in Scotland.
In a submission to an influential committee of MSPs, CIPFA in Scotland warned of a lack of transparency. It advised that new legislation and policies should routinely be accompanied by detailed statements about expected outcomes and clear quantified statements of expected costs, income and savings.
‘Good financial management should in fact begin with the Scottish Parliament, where all legislation should be fully costed,’ CIPFA stated.
‘It should also be a powerful influence on the culture of all other public bodies in Scotland.’
The institute’s evidence has been submitted to the Parliament’s standards, procedures and public appointments committee, which is conducting an inquiry into the transparency and scrutiny of financial resolutions and amendments.
In the submission, the head of CIPFA in Scotland, Angela Scott, pointed out that although the committee’s focus was on a specific issue, it touched upon and raised much wider issues, specifically the need to make better and more transparent decisions and to establish a culture of good financial management.
She added: ‘The key test is whether expenditure arising from a Bill will in fact be “significant”. There is, however, no formal definition in either standing orders or supporting guidance of what is significant. It is therefore not clear what the basis of the clerk’s advice should be, or what the basis of the presiding officer’s decision is.
‘Consequently, there is an inadvertent lack of transparency associated with the process because of the absence of a prescribed process.’
The submission looked at processes in other parts of the UK and found little difference. It concluded that ‘what may have been intended as a simpler system… has inadvertently resulted in a lack of clarity and transparency’.
18 February 2010
Clearer and more detailed information is needed about the cost of proposed laws and policies, according to leading public finance officers in Scotland.
In a submission to an influential committee of MSPs, CIPFA in Scotland warned of a lack of transparency. It advised that new legislation and policies should routinely be accompanied by detailed statements about expected outcomes and clear quantified statements of expected costs, income and savings.
‘Good financial management should in fact begin with the Scottish Parliament, where all legislation should be fully costed,’ CIPFA stated.
‘It should also be a powerful influence on the culture of all other public bodies in Scotland.’
The institute’s evidence has been submitted to the Parliament’s standards, procedures and public appointments committee, which is conducting an inquiry into the transparency and scrutiny of financial resolutions and amendments.
In the submission, the head of CIPFA in Scotland, Angela Scott, pointed out that although the committee’s focus was on a specific issue, it touched upon and raised much wider issues, specifically the need to make better and more transparent decisions and to establish a culture of good financial management.
She added: ‘The key test is whether expenditure arising from a Bill will in fact be “significant”. There is, however, no formal definition in either standing orders or supporting guidance of what is significant. It is therefore not clear what the basis of the clerk’s advice should be, or what the basis of the presiding officer’s decision is.
‘Consequently, there is an inadvertent lack of transparency associated with the process because of the absence of a prescribed process.’
The submission looked at processes in other parts of the UK and found little difference. It concluded that ‘what may have been intended as a simpler system… has inadvertently resulted in a lack of clarity and transparency’.
