Seòmar agus comataidhean

Okay. Obviously, there will be set-up costs, but there is also the need to build in on-going annual funding.

I suppose that my other question alludes to the convener’s opening question. Given some of the constraints on the Scottish Government, have you ever thought of volunteering the Scottish Parliament to place itself on a fixed budget, similar to the Scottish Government’s position?

Some businesses have stated that that is a factor. Two companies that I have mentioned today have made that clear.

I want to pick up on a theme that the convener raised, which is housing, where there is a really difficult and challenging operating environment. Obviously, we have seen the issue with Stewart Milne Homes, but also Merchant Homes Partnership has gone into liquidation, Harbour Homes is stopping the development of affordable housing, and Springfield Properties has already stopped the development of affordable housing and build to rent and is now selling some of its land bank. In the main, all those organisations cite challenging trading conditions, with inflation, a higher cost base, buyer uncertainty and so on.

That presents a challenge when it comes to the commitment to build 110,000 affordable homes by 2032. In the light of that, how confident are you about that commitment now and, being realistic, do you fully anticipate that it will need to slip?

I will be very quick, as most of the topics that I wanted to cover have come up already.

If the panel can bear it, I have one more little question about commissioners and office-holders. You have mentioned that your figures are heavily caveated, given the continued uncertainties around and the associated costs of new commissioners. Assuming that all the proposed commissioners are put in place, have you estimated what impact that will have on the budget? I appreciate that that information is not the budget bid, but have you done that work?

Politically, I am as capable as anyone of complaining about the nature of a fixed budget for the Scottish Government, but, from a financial perspective, it brings discipline, because it requires hard choices to be made. To pick up on the convener’s opening comments, I suppose that I want to explore with you whether you have ever considered advising that your budget be made on a fixed basis.

You have made a very compelling argument against fixed budgets.

My final question concerns the cleaning budget. You have noted the increase, but the budget submission says:

“The contract price increase for the 2023-24 budget was omitted.”

I was not clear about that, but having read it out, I think that I understand what it means. We did not have the base price—that is now clear.

I am just checking my notes, but I do not think that I have anything else to ask. Everything else has been covered.

One of the other areas of interest, which might already have been brought to your attention, is the use of the ScotWind money to fund day-to-day revenue expenditure. Professor Bell said:

“The ScotWind money can be thought of as equivalent to a sovereign wealth fund, and a sovereign wealth fund should be used to support future generations, because it is a sort of one-off payment.”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 9 January 2024; c 14.]

What thinking did the Scottish Government give to that use of that money and the breaching, if you like, of the sovereign wealth fund principle? I know that we have often commented on what appears to be the UK Government’s arbitrary waste of money gained from oil that could have been used to the benefit of future generations. I would appreciate hearing more about the thinking that led you to consider, despite that, still spending it on day-to-day revenue.

Just to put something on the record, at last week’s Education, Children and Young People Committee, Minister Graeme Dey pointed out that

“The starting point for colleges next year will be slightly better—only slightly better, I stress—than the finishing point for this year.”—[Official Report, Education, Children and Young People Committee, 10 January 2024; c 30.]

My first question, which is a kind of rapid-fire one, picks up on a point that you have just made, cabinet secretary. Have the Opposition parties put forward budget proposals this year for what they would like to be cut in what is a very difficult budget, as you have set out?

I will move on to public sector reform. I have seen the phases that have been set out, but I am aware that the committee did not receive an accompanying financial strategy, which the former Deputy First Minister committed to in March 2023. Is the intention to provide an updated financial strategy at an appropriate point, once the early scoping phases are out of the way? If so, what timescales are you working to?

You have stated that you require all Scottish Government portfolios to set out savings and reform plans. If I were cynical, which, of course, I am, I would suggest that turkeys do not tend to vote for Christmas, so asking those bodies—I think that there are 129 rather than 131, convener—to consider tightening up reform themselves, or even suggesting that they do not need to exist, seems optimistic.

The problem is that, when you create a body, it takes on a life of its own and develops a vested interest. This is a question that I asked the former Deputy First Minister. It is my experience that turkeys do not vote for Christmas so, although public bodies might suggest some tinkering reforms, they will be unwilling—for very obvious reasons—to make the scope and scale of reforms that are really needed for you to achieve some savings. I would appreciate your thoughts on that. That is my final question, convener.