Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thanks for joining us this morning, Jackson. Following on from that thread, is the public sector bold enough, culturally, to do what needs to be done, bearing in mind the vested interests that you set out in your earlier evidence?

Oh—sorry, David. Do come in.

You make a fair comment. We use the term “Parliament”, and rightly so, but I am wondering where the leadership will come from. We will produce a report and I am sure that it will be a good report, but what will come out of it? Where should the leadership come from?

When we have discussed the issue with our witnesses, they have looked at their own area in a silo, in effect, and it has been quite hard to get them to step out of their particular interest and look at the entire landscape. The commissioner landscape is a fundamental part of what we are trying to make sense of. So, my question is: where will the leadership come from, or, rather, where should it come from?

We heard some good examples last week from Lynda Towers that fleshed out gaps in rights.

I want to pick up on something—

Is that to say, “I couldn’t possibly comment”?

Thank you for that.

I move on to a comment that the former Deputy First Minister made on this area some time back. When she was asked about the role of the SPCB, she noted that there was a ministerial control framework for appointing commissioners and said that

“Introducing a best value assurance process ... could be a viable option for the SPCB”.

Do you have any thoughts on that?

I come to my last wee question. I have asked something similar previously, going back to the issues over the top-slice on funding and the figures that have been quoted. Is it possible to make the budget for commissioners fixed in the way that the Scottish Parliament’s budget is fixed, as a potential mechanism for controlling costs?

Thank you for that clarification. That is very helpful, Claire.

Unsurprisingly, I will ask a couple of questions about the financial memorandum—I have snuck in in disguise from the Finance and Public Administration Committee. A number of witnesses have expressed concerns about the financial memorandum and, specifically, the fact that there is limited extra resource for Gaelic and none for Scots. I fully accept the fiscal challenges that we have, but does that fact worry you at all, Deputy First Minister? I appreciate that you are relatively new in role, but will you want to have a further look at that?

If all public bodies need to “have regard to” Gaelic and Scots, to what extent is that reflected in the FM?

I do not want to take over the role of the finance committee, which will examine the FM, but I have a follow-on question. Public bodies must have regard to Gaelic and Scots under the bill. Will that pull in other public bodies to expend some effort in some capacity? To what extent are you certain that all that potential, in terms of having regard to, is reflected thus far in the FM?