Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have quick question on something that has come up a number of times in a variety of these sessions about the budget process. I fully accept what you are saying—I think that most people would agree that it is somewhat inefficient. Do you collect any data about that? When I say “inefficient”, I mean these late changes at the 11th hour, where you think you that have spend, you allocate it and then you need to move it from budget pots or whatever—there is a whole variety of things.

Do you have any sense of the additional cost of doing that in terms of hours accrued, because that is a hard figure? You must be collecting days spread throughout all the departments that are working on it. Do you have any sense of that—apart from loss of hair?

Good morning. I have a couple of questions for Professor Heald.

I have to say that your comments on accountability were music to my ears, as I have raised the issue a number of times with different committee witnesses, not least Mr Gove, who recently appeared before us on behalf of the UK Government. I asked him specifically how Audit Scotland would be liaised with to check on spend that had been provided by the UK Government. I have to say that he was less than certain in his response, which I think—I am paraphrasing—was, “However they want.” Therefore, I think that you have touched on a very important area.

That said, the other important area is how, in efficiency terms, we attribute a cost to the bidding war that you have alluded to. Do you have any sense of the cost to English local councils of, as you describe it,

“bidding for UK-controlled resources in the way that has become dysfunctional in England”?

Can you furnish us with any figures on that?

Thank you. There is a bit more detail that it would be useful to have about how things are working specifically. I am aware that there has been a lot of reworking of the determination of the loan book at UK Government level. It has been through a number of iterations, and there is some sleight of hand there in accounting terms, which I am aware of, too. That is probably a technical term that I should not have used.

In some respects that does not matter. What interests me is why we should care. In other words, what, specifically, has this got to do with the Scottish budget? Why are we having this technical change of £298.7 million appearing for us—given that it is a loan book—while we do not have student loans in Scotland? That is what I do not understand.

So it really is just a technical thing. It is not—

In asking this question, I acknowledge that the year-end processes are complex at this level across this number of budget lines. That is taken as a given. We get a lot of commentary that the way in which the fiscal framework works is inefficient, and that means that there is a cost to the public purse. I suppose that is what I am driving at: the constant changes—stuff coming in from left field—are incurring a cost, and that is inefficient for public sector expenditure. That is the reason why I am asking this, rather than any other reason.

To go back to the point about trying to apportion some amount to the loss as a result of that bidding, it strikes me that that might be a useful exercise, because I am concerned that it is happening more frequently.

I want to pick up on another point. You may be suggesting where the differences lie between funding from the UK Government to the Scottish Government and from the Scottish Government to councils, in that the Scottish Government, with its universal policies, is not subjecting local councils to bidding. It is simply saying, “This is a pot of money that has to be spent in the same way.” To go back to Liz Smith’s point, we are not actually comparing like with like, are we?

I suppose that that is what I wanted to explore. I apologise for using the term “sleight of hand”—what I meant was that, in my understanding, there is an accounting mechanism to reflect that the loans are not truly loans in a traditional sense, and the public accounting of them is slightly different.

Notwithstanding that, I still do not understand the direct relevance to the Scottish budget of that treatment, which has been applied across the board. I would also like to know how, specifically, it is being applied to the Scottish budget. Are those real numbers, in a technical sense? Are they really based on Scottish loans or are they an apportionment based on population share? In other words, is the number that we are discussing real, and what does it really mean for us?

I get that. I have a last wee question, because I am aware that my colleague wants to come back in and explore this area.

With regard to the loans themselves, I note what you are saying about the historical situation in Scotland; that applies to Scottish loans simply because they run over 30 years, as I understand it. It does not have any relationship to Scottish students who, for example, studied in England and have now come back and become Scottish taxpayers. I am assuming that it is simply a picture of the loan book at a point in time when those loans were taken out.

Thank you for all that—it is helpful. I have a last wee quick question, which I hope that you can answer quite quickly. How confident are you in your ability to bring down the bill for contractors? I am thinking specifically about your budgeting for keeping the show on the road. From my experience in a previous life, I know that that is always extremely difficult, because IT bought-in costs are always going up and it is difficult to keep people.

A quick answer is fine.

I hear what you are saying about the transition—it is very clear. It would be helpful for me to understand what applications and coding skills you are talking about. I guess that your ability to grow people, particularly when you get into complex bug fixing, is an essential part of keeping the show on the road, but is there a bespoke application? What sort of coding skills are required?