Seòmar agus comataidhean

On that point, Mr Henderson, you mention in your submission special purpose vehicles, which there has been quite a discussion about. You say that they are currently a concern. The Government is aware of the potential risks around the use of SPVs, but it would be useful to hear a bit more of your thinking. You only allude to it in your submission.

Why is that the case? I am entirely happy for you to refer to either of your officials on that. I know that I have asked the question before.

We focus on what we measure and, by continuing not to measure or collect the data, we end up with a skewed picture. I read the update the other day, and I got quite excited when I saw a bit about a case study on women, but then it drifted off into some other irrelevant stuff. It looked as though it was a bit of a sop: a case of saying, “We had better stick something in here”, rather than a systemic approach.

In fairness, I concede that that is the case in relation to not only data about women but disaggregated data in general, and there could be other areas in which it could be vital. We have had a conversation about the different enterprise agencies, and we know that having the data in different areas gives different insights, which are so important. It is a general frustration. We know, for example, that the measure for the gender pay gap excludes part-time workers, yet the vast majority of them are likely to be women. It is also about income tax receipts, income inequality, entrepreneurial early-stage activity and three-year survival rates. I want to know how those are for women. So, why not have that data?

I understand that clearly. The work that Ana Stewart is doing is fantastic.

That takes us back to a point that the Deputy First Minister made about where you get insights. Women’s Enterprise Scotland commissioned some work, which I think the Scottish Government was behind, that studied female business leaders experiencing burnout. A key finding was about the lack of access to capital for women entrepreneurs over a long period of time. That survey started being about one thing but gave a critical insight into something that we know is an issue. We always need to have that lens because we cannot afford to let so many of our population not contribute to our economy when we have such a compelling mission as set out in the NSET.

I am. You are obviously going to proffer the positives, but we have to be just as interested in the areas in which we are utterly blindsided. I want to be able to challenge you on those areas and understand why we are still in that position.

I know that we have discussed this before, and I am not trying to create an industry around data gathering. I know how complex and time consuming that is, including the checking of it; I understand that. I totally accept what you are saying about Techscaler; the evidence is apparent to me, and I can see that you have been behind that, Deputy First Minister. However, in so many other areas, it is almost as though it does not occur to the Government that we might want to be able to slice and dice the data to proffer different perspectives, which is utterly fundamental.

I care so passionately about that not just because of inequalities. It is actually about economic contribution, which I suspect is why you care so passionately about it, too. In the face of chronic labour shortages, we cannot afford to be complacent.

I will return to a theme that I suspect will not surprise you: the representation of women. I know that that is important to you, too, Deputy First Minister. In your update yesterday, we heard ample evidence of that in some of the stats that you mentioned about the Techscaler programme and the work that you have done with Ana Stewart.

In readiness for this meeting, I revisited information about the national strategy for economic transformation—NSET—which retriggered my frustration that I have found it impossible to find disaggregated data that shows exactly what the position is for a whole variety of measures, specifically for women. I wonder why we are still at that stage, because the record will show that I have asked that question not just of you but of other people. Why it is so difficult?

I will try not to ask too many questions, because it has been a long session for you, cabinet secretary. First, I want to check what your approach is to the involvement of other political parties in the forthcoming budget. What approaches—if any—have you had thus far to try to influence your thinking?

I move to my next wee point. You know that, in relation to last year’s budget, I was quite critical about any plans to use ScotWind funding for other types of spend.

I know that you cannot give spoilers about the budget, but I seek some reassurance that ScotWind funding can continue to be used for the purpose for which it was originally set out—that is, to support growth in a very important sector. Will you give us a steer on that?

That is what I have seen them doing. The Royal Scottish National Orchestra in particular has been very successful with its music for films and so on. It has really started to differentiate itself.

That leads me to my next comment, which is about local government. You have mentioned this a couple of times but, in your previous appearance here, you noted that the Scottish Government is keen to codify the local government fiscal framework. You mentioned some of the considerations, such as transparency. I want to check where you are with that codification.

I have a question about trading standards and public administration. We have ended up getting quite embroiled in talking about public sector head count and accountability, but one benefit—as I have talked about in earlier commentary—stems from having shared services. We know that the trading standards service in Scotland is at quite a critical juncture. The service is administered through all 32 local authorities, which has led to it becoming very fragmented. It is an example of a service that might be more efficient and more effective, from a provisioning of service point of view, if another model were created.

Once we get past the public sector focus on the civil service, will that sort of issue be looked at sympathetically? I think that the intention of leaving the service to local authorities was probably a good one, but it is no longer functioning as it should, because it is so disparate and fragmented.