Seòmar agus comataidhean

A good example is the post-16 education space. At the moment, you have the senior phase of school, colleges and universities, particularly through the flexible arrangements for access to university, which quite often target the same young people to try to persuade them either to complete the senior phase of school, go to college or embark on a university course. A lot of work has been done with the Withers review on how we deliver a system that works better for young people.

There is more to be done in that space. We could utilise the funding that goes into that space more effectively, but those will be decisions for a future Scottish Government. I am putting down my reflections, including those on my daughter’s experience. We can draw only on what we see and experience, but there is a need for us to look at that landscape.

09:00

As you have touched on, we must also look at the profiling of any additional funding. The additional funding for 2026-27—£545 million, I think—is not recurring.

All of that, but there are still those who say that it was the wrong way to go.

If there is to be, as I think there should be, a real boldness when it comes to change, I just hope that not every detail of every change will be resisted at every stage as it goes through Parliament.

We have to take into account that the recurring money, £380 million, comes in in 2028-29. It would not be wise to utilise that funding in 2026-27 for front-line services in case it goes off a cliff. However, as I have said before, on the utilisation of ScotWind to smooth through the very challenging year of 2027-28, the priority would be to unpick that, as we have done previously. Those decisions will be for the next Scottish Government, but there is an opportunity to unwind some of that ScotWind funding and smooth the spending review period through to 2028-29. I suspect that parties will write manifestos on their priorities for existing spend and any additional spend, but, as I said, there is an opportunity to unwind some of that ScotWind money and smooth the spending review period.

In 2028-29, there is a better outlook—at the moment, anyway—on additional funding and what was already in the system. A number of key pressures could easily benefit from some of those resources. It will be for the next Scottish Government to decide what the priorities should be for social care, which you mentioned, convener. I hasten to add that we have to wait for the main estimates in May for that to be confirmed.

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, we are in a period of global instability, with rising costs of living and pressure on public services. Everything is going to cost more, from police cars on the road to ambulances to local government services. We have to bear in mind that the cost of everything is going to go up.

First of all, I think that it is important for the Government, as it has done, to set out the level of ambition and the fact that this needs to be done across the whole of the public sector. That takes us into the quite tricky territory of trying to define front-line and back-office roles, and we need to do that in partnership with the staff side as far as possible.

The question, then, is how bold the next Scottish Government is going to be with regard to changing the delivery landscape. My sense is that there will be boldness in that respect, because we do need to think about that landscape and what it should look like for a country of our size. By that, I mean going beyond looking at how many of the 133 public bodies should or should not exist to questions such as who is doing what and where, and whether there is an opportunity to deliver services in a more integrated and joined-up way. After all, we know that supporting families early saves money; indeed, we see great examples of that already happening.

We have a risk register, and the global situation is clearly a key risk. The impact on interest rates, inflation and materials will be monitored. Obviously, we are concerned. We do not know how long the actual conflict will go on for, but there will be a tail of impact well beyond the cessation of the conflict. The situation will be monitored as part of our risk register.

We are keen to work with the bodies that are overseeing local government pensions—the Scottish Government is not one of them—to align priorities and make investment in Scottish infrastructure an explicit aim of the pension schemes. In itself, it would be a bit of a change to have that as an explicit aim and to have a percentage aim. There are some very good signals coming, and the event that I will attend later this month will show that we are trying to align and increase collaboration across the pension schemes.

The Scottish National Investment Bank has an important role in that, and engaging with those stakeholders to progress collaboration opportunities is important. We have had some co-investment already. The Strathclyde Pension Fund has already co-invested with SNIB. SNIB previously invested £60 million alongside pension funds, including £45 million from the Strathclyde Pension Fund, in the mid-market rent sector, which is very important in delivering more in that space. SNIB has also partnered with Strathclyde Pension Fund—by investing £20 million alongside Strathclyde Pension Fund’s £25 million—to launch a £67 million venture fund, which is managed by Par Equity, to support innovative technology companies with high-growth potential in Scotland. There is a history here.

I would like to see change—this is the reason why we are attending the event later this month—in that there could be more collaboration, and those funds could have a more explicit aim to invest in Scotland, whether it is in infrastructure or in business growth. We will see what comes out of the event.

Good morning, everyone. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the spending review and infrastructure delivery pipeline. I am grateful for the committee’s engagement so far on those publications as part of the budget scrutiny process. Alongside the 2026-27 budget that was introduced on 13 January, there are a range of other important fiscal publications.

The Scottish spending review outlines resource spending plans for 2028-29 and capital plans for 2029-30, and is the first combined resource and capital spending review since 2011. The infrastructure delivery pipeline sets out the projects and programmes that will be supported through those spending decisions, providing a clear view of the investments that will underpin long-term resilience and economic growth. I hope that the United Kingdom Government continues to commit to regular spending reviews so that future Scottish Governments can also bring forward multiyear plans.

We face an extremely challenging fiscal landscape. At the time of publication, our resource block grant was forecast to increase by an average of only 0.5 per cent per year in real terms, while our capital block grant was forecast to fall by 0.3 per cent in real terms over the spending review period. Current events in the middle east may have a significant impact on prices and the economy. The Office for Budget Responsibility forecast last week did not reflect that, but there are real risks for inflation and growth, which could affect public sector costs and funding in Scotland.

As I have said before, we have very limited levers for managing budget volatility. That underlines the need for greater fiscal flexibilities, which I am keen should be pursued as part of the next fiscal framework review. Nonetheless, we have developed multiyear plans that are based firmly on our core priorities of eradicating child poverty, growing the economy, tackling climate change and ensuring sustainable, high-quality public services.

In preparing the spending review, we have considered the views of external commentators and stakeholders, including those of the committee, and we have aligned our spending review with that of the UK Government. We have clearly outlined how our spending supports our priorities and integrated public service reform.

I know that the committee will want to discuss the level of detail that is provided in the spending review, and we carefully considered the merits of providing more granular plans. Although I appreciate the view that figures at levels 3 or 4 across all portfolios could further support multiyear planning, I have to balance that with the flexibility required to respond to volatility over a multiyear period. For that reason, although we have provided more detailed plans in the largest spending areas, most portfolio budgets are published at level 2. I note that that goes further than the UK spending review, which provided plans at departmental level.

08:45

For the first time, the spending review includes detailed portfolio efficiency and reform plans that set out how portfolios will deliver around £1.5 billion of cumulative savings over the period, through reform, productivity and efficiency, while protecting front-line services. These plans provide a clear portfolio-by-portfolio account of the actions that are being taken to deliver the ambitions of the fiscal sustainability delivery plan and the public service reform strategy, and they represent a step change in transparency. The increased level of detail has been welcomed by the Scottish Fiscal Commission, the Institute for Fiscal Studies and other stakeholders, which have recognised the clearer articulation of how savings will be achieved. We will build on that work, focusing on delivery, monitoring and assurance, and we will report publicly on progress as plans mature to ensure that they remain credible, achievable and aligned with our wider reform agenda.

The infrastructure delivery pipeline builds on our strong track record of delivery and sets out more than £11 billion of investment that will drive Scotland’s growth and development. It sets out that we will continue to explore revenue finance models to support the delivery of our infrastructure plans as we seek to make the most of public funding. With limited capital budgets, it is important that we look at all funding options.

Later this month, I will attend a Scottish local government pension scheme event to set out the Government’s ambitions for investment in net zero and discuss collaboration with pension schemes. The investment outlined in the pipeline will support productivity and help to deliver long-term resilience in crucial areas such as housing, energy, transport and digital connectivity. It includes supporting the delivery of affordable homes, investing in renewing our rail fleet and ferry vessels, progressing A9 dualling and investing across the national health service estate.

To support effective scrutiny of the delivery of our planned infrastructure investment, I have published details of expected costs and timescales of the projects and programmes in the IDP. The Government will report twice a year on progress to deliver these investments.

These documents, which were published alongside the Scottish budget, represent a more integrated approach to our short and medium-term planning. I hope that they will support the committee in its scrutiny. I thank you for your time and engagement with the multiyear spending publications. I look forward to discussing them in more detail.

The creation of frameworks and programmes of work can help. That will not be possible in all areas, because there will be stand-alone projects that do not form part of a programme of work. However, if there is certainty regarding a pipeline of investment in housing or primary care, for example, consultancy costs can be brought down by doing things once and a framework can be created that does not have to be constantly revisited. When we have a line of sight on big investments, we can do things slightly differently. In relation to stand-alone projects, the difficulty is that, understandably, the public sector is under constant pressure to dot every i and cross every t, which costs money.

I do not know whether Richard—

Yes.