Seòmar agus comataidhean

If I may, I will focus on the revenue side of the budget. Professor Roy, you said earlier that most of the data that you require to estimate revenues is RTI data that comes from HMRC, but when we are looking for fiscal sustainability in the long term, we need more data than that, particularly data on the labour market. You said that you have concerns about the fact that a lot of data on the labour market is missing. Could you tell us a bit more about those concerns? Trends such as the number of people in work, as opposed to the number of those who are out of work, whether through unemployment or inactivity, really matter for the future. The projections for ensuring fiscal sustainability are very dependent on our having that data, some of which we do not appear to have. Could you say a bit more about that?

Can I dig a bit deeper into why the data is not there? Obviously, having it is critical for longer-term planning.

Thank you.

That is where the whole issue of universality comes in. We should be talking about these issues. I have done so many times. Can I finish my point? I am conscious of the time.

When it comes to incentives to ensure that more people are going back into the workforce so that we can raise tax revenue—we are obviously becoming more economically productive—is the Government not concerned that, as a result of our welfare system, which is less penetrating in terms of the questions that are asked of people and which does not use the face-to-face inquiries that are used down south, we are encouraging more people to stay on benefits instead of going back into work?

Thank you for your detailed answer. The key point is that the economic forecasters, not least the Scottish Fiscal Commission, are warning strongly about the difficulties with the fiscal sustainability of the social security budget because it is increasing at a faster rate than in other parts of the United Kingdom. The question is whether the evidence that the Scottish Government has about the effectiveness of its policy making is enough to ensure that its policies are the right policies.

There is evidence to suggest that the Scottish child payment is effective enough, but, when it comes to the adult disability payment and some of the other disability payments, there seems to be a lack of evidence. It is all very well to talk about having a more beneficent system that is based on fairness and so on—we all signed up to that. However, we also signed up to a welfare system that delivers to those who are most in need. At the moment, we seem to be increasing social security benefits at quite a rate, and there are questions about whether all of that money is going to those who are most in need and whether the policy is having the unintended consequence of preventing some people from going back into the labour market. That concerns us all, I think, from a fiscal sustainability angle, and I would be interested to learn what work the Scottish Government is doing to address that very serious concern.

I will concentrate on the sustainability of the social security budget. At the start of the meeting, the convener flagged up the cabinet secretary’s statistics, which say that the social security payment budget is going up from £6.8 billion in 2025-26 to £8.8 billion in 2029-30. That is almost a 30 per cent increase in four years. Given that you say that the Scottish child payment is effective delivery of social security payments, what work is the Scottish Government doing on the effectiveness of other aspects of the social security budget? I am asking particularly about adult disability payments, which are ballooning out of control.

Does that mean that, within the vague trends that we have, it is very difficult to predict whether policies that try to reduce the amount of economic inactivity will be able to get that right? Is that one of the major problems?

I will ask about universalism. Mr Pybus, as you are well aware, there is a massive issue around the principle of universalism. It is very nice to say that, in theory, we want to pay out benefits to people universally. As the Government describes it, it is vitally important to our social contract with the people of Scotland that we try to provide benefits across the board. However, if you look at what the medium-term financial strategy told us yesterday, and particularly at what the Scottish Fiscal Commission is telling the Finance and Public Administration Committee, we cannot afford it all. That is the bottom line.

When it comes to supporting those who are most in need, do you think that the principle of universalism is the right approach, or do you think we have to be a bit more careful and try to target those who are in considerable need first?

I am not asking about the policy role; I am asking about some of the evidence that SCoSS has provided, but I will leave it there. I just think that we could benefit from SCoSS’s experience if it could tell us what we should be looking at.

I ask the question because you have considerable experience of dealing with the broad issues in the social security system and you have had considerable success in doing that. It is incumbent on this committee and others to listen to that experience. When it comes to advising the Government about the facts that it will have to interrogate before presenting its policy, it is very important that it is given guidance on where it can make the biggest difference, especially to people in poverty. That might involve some difficult decisions, particularly, as I say, against the backdrop that the Scottish Fiscal Commission is providing. I am just interested to know whether—