Seòmar agus comataidhean

Let me end on a point of consensus: yes. The points that you make are legitimate. Doing it is sometimes a little more complex. Think of some of the reforms that we took forward—I am sure that there will be debate around these matters—such as the formation of Police Scotland, which has been a success with regard to the more effective use of resources and the solving of serious crime, although I accept that it has not been without its challenges. It was difficult and took a long time. It is only after a time that you begin to see some of the benefits roll out from a painful process.

I am up for structural public service reform, but, sometimes, when you get into the weeds of the changes that need to be made, opposition begins to grow. You have people asking, “What about this?” and people with vested interests saying, “This will be to the detriment of A, B and C.” You have my absolute assurance that I am keen to push to the maximum the opportunities for public sector reform, and that includes how organisations deliver their services, how they work together, the landscape and how we get that to make more sense, not in a detrimental way but in a way that is more effective. On that point, you will not get any pushback from me. My only point is that making it happen is sometimes more complex.

We hope to complete it as soon as possible. I can come back to the committee with firmer timeframes, but we want to conclude it as quickly as we can.

To be clear, in his letter to the NZET Committee, Neil Gray stated that officials were preparing to undertake due diligence, drawing upon the value-for-money assessment that was completed earlier this year, and to provide that committee and the Public Audit Committee with further information on that when the assessment was complete.

We have made our expectations clear to Ferguson’s, and I have been pretty clear with the committee about what those expectations are. Those two committees in particular will get that updated information, which I hope they will find helpful.

The shorter-term figures from NRS, which are important, show that we are still seeing net in-migration to Scotland from the rest of the UK, but you are absolutely right that—

The latest inward investment figures show that Scotland is second only to London and the south-east in attracting inward investment. That is testament to Scottish Development International and the work that it does in being very effective in bringing inward investment to Scotland, as well as to the skills of the workforce. Investors will look at a whole range of issues in a country. They will look at our strengths, including the key pillars of our economy; the sectors that we are known for; and our universities and the skill sets there. The fact that we, as a country, continue to do well on inward investment gives a perspective. There are always improvements to be made, but the fact that investors make those decisions to come to Scotland tells a very strong story.

I accept that the Scottish Government has made active choices around where to invest in social security spend. A good example is the Scottish child payment. I hope that everyone would agree, particularly when you think of the cost of living crisis that we are going through, that the fact that that has lifted 50,000 children out of poverty in families that would otherwise be struggling even more than they are shows that we made the right investment.

Of course, deciding to invest in social security supports that go beyond the block grant adjustment means that we have to raise that money somehow. The key pillars of spend are social security, the national health service and health more generally—and, of course, local government. All of those have been impacted by inflation and by the need to pay for inflation-busting pay deals. None of that is resented, but it has had an impact on the budget.

A lot of headwinds—not just social security spend—are impacting on the budget, and they are all coming at the same time, putting on pressure beyond that which was budgeted for when the last budget was set. We have tried to manage that in a way that focuses on how we keep people’s heads above water in a cost of living crisis, so we have prioritised spend on things that are absolutely critical. That has meant making difficult decisions elsewhere.

The local government budget rose by 3 per cent in real terms, but it will not feel like that, because inflation was running at 11 per cent at its peak and we did not have an 11 per cent inflation-proofed budget to be able to pass on that funding to local government or health. Although we have tried to protect the health budget in the decisions that we have made, the 11 per cent inflation rate has had an impact on health as well.

There is no getting away from those very difficult challenges. We have tried to make the best choices with the resources that we have available in a very difficult context, and those choices are pretty clear for everyone to see.

Yes, it has lifted 90,000 children out of poverty. I was underselling its impact, convener, so thank you for the correction.

Clearly, there is a lot in that. In the MTFS, we talked about the need to focus on seizing opportunities in areas in which Scotland has a competitive advantage; supporting entrepreneurs, start-ups and scale-ups; and helping businesses to raise productivity. Boosting labour market participation was also discussed, and one of the important things in the programme for government in that area was our enhanced childcare offer.

The university sector has a hugely important role in all of that. We need to listen to that sector—that is the first thing—and make sure that we are maintaining Scotland’s competitive advantage.

You are right: it is a two-way street. Sometimes we have been successful not just in retaining key research and development opportunities and businesses but in attracting some to Scotland. However, that has not always been the case. In such instances, we need to pay attention to what attracted the companies elsewhere and what we can do to try to avoid that happening in the future.

There are huge opportunities for us. For example, we have invested £42 million in our national Techscalar network to support the next generation of Scottish start-ups over five years. CodeBase, which I visited recently, was awarded the contract, and it will act as the service provider for Techscalar. It is very excited about the opportunities for Scotland in that sector.

However, we must not be complacent, and I would not want anybody on the committee to think that we are being complacent in any way, because it is a very competitive world and Scotland needs to compete on the global stage. We need to make sure that, where we deploy public money to lever in private finance, that is done in a strategic way. We cannot pay for everything, and we need to use our public investment wisely in order to lever in private investment to Scotland, particularly in those key sectors.

Let me be clear: the process was limited. Nobody will put bells and whistles on it and say otherwise, but, given the headwinds that we face in the immediate financial term, the agreements that we got were important ones to get. They will help, particularly with next year’s budget.

Your point about population growth is important. Of course—you have heard me say this today, and I will say it in other forums—having control over migration, for example, would be hugely important in enabling us to attract folk with the right skills to live and work here and to contribute in Scotland. If we had those levers, I have no doubt that we would be able to use them to great effect, but that is a debate about the powers of this Parliament, which is a wider debate than we were ever going to be able to reconcile through the negotiation on the fiscal framework. We had to deal with what was in front of us, and we have probably got the best deal that we could have got in the circumstances.

Not yet, but, interestingly, Michael Marra was on a Convention of Scottish Local Authorities political panel last Friday for which there was, of course, a local government audience. Local government has the same challenges as every other part of the public sector. I made an offer to those from all the parties on the panel. I told them that my door is open for me to hear any constructive suggestions for different choices. I said that we will set out very clearly our choices but that, if others want to make particular choices and provide suggestions on where the money could be redirected from, they could do so.

There might be some attempt to make out that the position that we are in with the Scottish budget is a particular, peculiar Scottish problem. I can say categorically that it is not. Having sat in the room with the Welsh and the Northern Irish, I know that we are in exactly the same position. If anything, we have levers at our disposal that they do not. The Northern Irish do not have politicians to be able to articulate some of those issues, so they are in a particularly difficult position. We stand absolutely together in saying that the ability of devolved Administrations to manage the headwinds as a result of the constraints that we have is exactly the same whether we are in Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. We made that point collectively to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

There are no easy answers. There is no obvious tool sitting there that we have not deployed; we are deploying all the tools that we have. As I said, my door is open. If there are parties that want to have a genuine, serious discussion about the choices that we have to make, I am very much up for that.