What evidence would make structural reform credible?

I keep coming back to the same question: where is the published model-by-model cost? I have read the consultation pack twice and I cannot find it. If it is not in the source material, members are being asked to vote on a summary, not on evidence.

Same with revenue risk. The pack assumes supporter behaviour stays roughly constant under any reform option. That is a big assumption and it is not stress-tested anywhere I can see.

Posting a sourced comparison from the regional submissions. The financial framing is not consistent across submissions. Will add a link.