Seòmar agus comataidhean

Right—okay. Sounds good.

Maybe there is too much optimism about when things can be delivered. If they cannot be delivered by a certain date, people should perhaps err on the side of caution instead of being overoptimistic. If you say that something is going to be delivered in May and it is delivered in April, people are happy; however, if you say that it is going to be delivered in March and it is delivered in April, they are unhappy. Perhaps there is an issue with optimism bias in that respect.

I know that colleagues are keen to come in, but I have one last question. You touched on the issue of spending in your statement, and you talked about it with regard to delivery discipline. There are still issues with that. Ensuring that we are not comparing apples with oranges across portfolios when the budget document comes out is an issue that has been raised with the finance secretary on a number of occasions, and a wee bit more work has to be done on that. Indeed, things that I have raised in previous years were still in the last document, so I want to emphasise that a wee bit.

We are in a situation in which we pass the budget and then, a week later, we get the spring revisions for the previous year. Often, the changes are quite significant, but there are also changes that are repeated year after year. As a committee, we argue with cabinet secretaries about the policy intention and the delivery intention. Are you working with ministers to ensure not only that spending budgets are aligned as tightly as possible, but that we do not have that groundhog day situation every year?

Good morning, and welcome to the 22nd meeting in 2025 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. We have received apologies from Ross Greer, who is, once again, battling through amendments to the Housing (Scotland) Bill. However, he hopes to be with us fully once more post-recess.

Our first agenda item is an evidence session with Joe Griffin, the permanent secretary to the Scottish Government, on issues relating to public administration in the Government. Mr Griffin is joined by Scottish Government officials Lesley Fraser, director general corporate; Gregor Irwin, director general economy; and Richard McCallum, director of public spending. I welcome you all to the meeting, and I invite Mr Griffin to make a short opening statement. Good morning, Mr Griffin.

Craig Hoy has a brief question.

Thank you very much for that.

We will have a five-minute break before we move into private session, to allow our witnesses and broadcasting and official report staff to leave.

You will be aware that this committee has been carrying out an investigation into the cost-effectiveness of public inquiries, given their monumental costs and the many years that they seem to take. In the past week, we have seen demands for public inquiries into grooming and ferries from some Opposition politicians. No doubt, there will be plenty of others as we progress.

We will produce a report in the autumn, and there is an area that I want to ask you about. We have had compelling evidence that the current situation, whereby a specific budget can be severely impacted, is proving detrimental to services. The opportunity cost to the police or national health service of having a big chunk of its budget dedicated to an inquiry over a number of years means, quite frankly, that the people who would expect to benefit from those services are impacted, as the NHS and the police have made quite clear. Would you be sympathetic to the creation of a budget for public inquiries—regardless of what the inquiry is, how long it takes or what it costs—that is separate from the budgets of the organisations that are involved in the inquiries?

You were strategy and external affairs director prior to taking up your current post, and you will know a lot of your colleagues and the Government well, which is obviously why you are now in the post. Are you able to determine which departments are doing best, which—if any—are performing sub-optimally and, if so, how those will be improved?

You can call them directorates if you want.

I am sorry to interrupt, but you have got to look at what you want to achieve first, and surely you then have to say the optimal number of people who would be needed to achieve that.

Good morning, and welcome to the 21st meeting in 2025 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. The first item on our agenda is an evidence-taking session on the cost-effectiveness of Scottish public inquiries.

I welcome to the meeting John Sturrock KC and John Campbell KC. We have received apologies from Craig Hoy, who will be a few minutes late because of traffic.

I thank both witnesses for their short, sharp and helpful submissions to the committee’s call for views, and I will move straight to questions, kicking off with Mr Sturrock, methinks. In answer to the second question on the transparency of public inquiries in our call for views, you said that there is

“insufficient transparency and scrutiny in particular around control over timescales and costs.”

How can that be improved?