Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes.

I have to fess up and say that I find the thread of John Mason’s questions very interesting—I do not know whether that is good news or not.

As I have been listening to all the questions, I have been thinking that, in general, the fulsome reports that have been provided are a very good thing. However, in our job of scrutiny as a committee, we are trying to manage and get oversight of different things. We have the initial, up-front estimates and then we have any revisions, where we are able to factor in actual spend plus the new estimates, then we have a final sum-up position, and then Daniel Johnson comes in and says, “Aye, but what about the year to date?”

When was the last time you thought about how you present these reports to the Finance and Public Administration Committee so that we are able to ask some of those questions? I appreciate that, with some of these questions, we are not really comparing eggs with eggs; we are throwing in bananas as well. It is about considering best practice in presenting public accounts. When was the last time that you reviewed what you do against what happens elsewhere? I fully accept that there are additional complexities around the fiscal framework, but do you routinely review what you are doing and ask whether you are acting from the point of view of giving maximum transparency, to enable the sort of questions that have come out today?

The committee can discuss that afterwards. It is reasonable for this committee to expect to get complex reports that include a summing up that the public might find accessible; there are enough of us here who would be comfortable reading something like that.

You were asked earlier about in-year budget pot switching—realignment, if you like. You commented on the fiscal framework. That ties in with the existing estimating processes. In your role as someone who sits above those processes, and given those variants, when did you last assess how effective your estimating processes are? What, if any, weaknesses have you highlighted and how will you address those? Because of the realignment, this must be about more than the fiscal framework. As the convener commented at the start, it is also connected to estimating.

There is a general question, which you do not have to answer now but which may be of interest to the committee, about how the on-going processes across directorates can be as efficient as possible. I was involved in that sort of thing in another life. There is a habitual scrabble towards deadlines and any review of how effective or efficient processes are can drop to the bottom of the pile. That is just how the world operates.

From the point of view of public expenditure and efficiency, I want to see built-in review processes that are overseen from a finance perspective. That continuous improvement should be properly built in, rather than being something that we would like to see. You do not need to answer that. It may be that the committee is not interested in that.

There is a rule in the committees that the longer the time before asking a question, the higher the probability that it has already been asked. I will just pick up on a couple of things.

First, Gordon McGuinness made a point about the local community. Both Cliff Bowen and Pat Rafferty will be across this point, too. There are still pockets of the local community, particularly in Grangemouth, who, despite the good work that has been done by Ineos—even going back to BP days, never mind Ineos—in the community, feel that they have been left behind. I should also mention the very good work that goes on in a number of parties to pull things together.

What gaps should be plugged to ensure that the local community in Grangemouth can share in the bright vision that Cliff Bowen in particular has set out for the future, as part of a just transition?

I invite the three of you to give us some thoughts about that.

You have described some good initiatives, but I am less clear about the extent to which ensuring that women and girls are, from now on, at the heart of a just transition is a fundamental SDS policy, which is slightly different to just having good stuff going on. Is that at the heart of the just transition?

Thank you for that. I want to pick up on what Ronnie Palin said about the skills perspective. I know that a lot of work is going on to make sure that girls in particular can participate. Surely part of the just transition has to be that more than half the population has skin in the game. How do you ensure that women and girls are at the just transition party? What is the latest position on your active development of that?

You have given me a lot of information. I know that other members want to come in, and I sense that Liz and perhaps Hisashi want to come in as well.

Thinking about the very important chemical cluster and SMEs around Grangemouth, how do we make this real for them? Part of the problem is that, although they are there, it might be difficult for them to get oven-ready, if you like, in order to be able to go on to procurement frameworks. It is about that linkage of working at both ends of the conundrum. The witnesses may want to pick up on some of the earlier themes, but I am interested in exploring that. Perhaps Liz wants to go first.

I want to ask about targeting young people. I appreciate that the Forth Ports bid is at its very early stages, but I am interested in knowing more about how you will be able to drive down—if, indeed, you intend to do that—to actively target young people in job creation, which is another issue that Grangemouth, as a centre, struggles with.

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for attending.

We have already alighted on a theme—from the inside looking out, particularly with reference to Grangemouth town. The people who live there often refer to the economy as a “DIDO economy”—drive in, drive out. That is the feeling.

Stuart, you have already touched on some of the active consideration that you gave to your bid, and I want to put some meat on the bones of that. When do you think that Grangemouth, as a community, will start to see some of the activity that has meaning to people there? I suppose that that also links in with what Liz was saying about frameworks for SMEs. A considerable amount of work is needed to change what is a good, thrusting sentiment about that involvement into actual meaningful engagement. I would appreciate some meat on the bones of that.