Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes. In relation to last year’s budget, the on-going inflation-related pressures meant that we had to make in-year savings, so there were no opportunities for in-year flexibility. Of course, through this budget process and as we go forward, we will continue to consider industry representations, as we did last week. We have committed to further engagement with the industry on that basis.

The UK Government has not committed to providing rates relief beyond this year, so there will be a cliff-edge moment. It will be interesting to see what plans there are to provide continued support to the industry. We are looking to provide long-term sustainable support by considering the option of long-term rates reform that will assist the sector, as opposed to a one-off support package or a package for only a couple of years.

As I said, we are spending £5 billion across the Government to support the economy. Unlike the UK Government, we have taken the decision to prioritise public services. We cannot have a strong economy without a strong society. The two are mutually dependent, so it is incredibly important that we have strong public services at a time when our NHS is recovering from the pandemic and that we have a healthy workforce that is available to our businesses and employers. We have looked to strike a balance between making difficult decisions in order to find savings and investing in public services, including by giving our NHS a real-terms increase in funding.

However, I recognise that this is a challenging time for our business community and for others, not just because of this budget but because of 13 and a half years of UK Government austerity, which has meant that the resilience of the economy and our public sector is much reduced. We are doing what we can to ensure that our public services and our wider economy are supported. That is why we are making investments in the likes of the Techscaler network. We are looking to implement the recommendations in the “Pathways: A New Approach for Women in Entrepreneurship” report from Mark Logan and Ana Stewart in order to see greater diversity in entrepreneurship and more women start and scale up businesses. We are investing increased amounts in green energy in order to establish a supply chain that is rooted in Scotland. We are making decisions that, I hope, will lead to the transformation and further growth of our economy.

I thank Murdo Fraser for that personal slight. As I am sure the Deputy First Minister will attest, I have argued in Cabinet and in the budget rounds for investment in areas of priority that will lead to economic activity, growth and transformation. I believe that we have achieved that.

Of course, it is a challenging budget, but that is the case across the board. There is no area where we find an easy situation or a situation of plenty. As I said, that is down to the fact that we have endured 13 and a half years of UK Government austerity and have had a 1.2 per cent real-terms cut to our block grant in this year’s budget. We have to make difficult choices, including on taxation, to try to ameliorate that. It should not be for the Scottish Government to continue to mitigate the mistakes that have been made and the trouble that has been caused by UK Government decisions. We should look to seize the opportunities that are available to us. Sadly, we do not have that luxury at present.

Of course, I recognise and am sad about the survey from the Scottish Licensed Trade Association that was published this morning. That is precisely why the First Minister made it an early priority to establish the new deal for business. It will take time to rebuild our relationship with the business community. That has been one of my top priorities since coming into office, and I do not take it for granted. I will work to regain and re-earn that trust during my time in office, and I will ensure that the relationship between business and the Government is strong. We want to give sight of policy decisions as early as possible, support the business community to have the best possible trading landscape in which to operate—which is why we have provided the rates relief package—and ensure that its representations on issues that matter to it are heard.

Of course, we will not agree on everything; we will disagree. That is the nature of the relationship between business and the Government. However, when there is disagreement, I want to at least ensure that the business community understands why we are taking decisions and that we continue to advocate for it and on its behalf in relation to decisions that are taken for us by the UK Government.

Obviously, we take that into consideration whenever we take a decision on tax, and the Scottish Fiscal Commission assesses likely behavioural changes. We do everything that we can to make sure that there is a balance. Of course, there will be the potential for behavioural change, but I have not seen evidence of that. There is anecdotal evidence, but there is no direct evidence. Our decisions have allowed us to ensure that we have opportunities to invest in our public services. The premise of Mr Fraser’s first question was that a larger budget is available to the Scottish Government. The whole reason for that is down to the tax decisions that we have taken.

The discussions that I had last week with the hospitality industry pointed to much wider challenges with recruitment, including the direct impact of Brexit, with the loss of access to labour—people moving away from and people not coming to work in Scotland—and the stringent UK Government immigration system, which does not support the needs of the Scottish economy. I am willing to work with people in the industry. I gave a commitment to, in my representations to the UK Government ahead of its budget, provide evidence of how they are struggling to recruit internationally, and I will continue to work with them in that regard.

In relation to migration within the UK, for every year of the past 20 years, there has been net inward migration from the rest of the UK into Scotland. I am not complacent about that, but it points to the fact that Scotland is, indeed, a very attractive place to live, work and do business.

I thank Kevin Stewart for that question, which comes from his having quite a bit of experience in this sector. He will be aware, having started this process, of the work that is being done in the Government to advance the rights of the neurodiverse and the advocacy that is available for people with neurodivergent conditions through the new champion who is coming through, as well as work in other areas. He makes a sensible suggestion and one that I am more than happy to consider.

I see from my constituency casework the challenges for families with children with neurodivergence. Also, as the children grow older, as Mr Stewart points out, they face challenges in getting access to the employment market, even though, in the majority of cases, they have a substantial amount to offer, if very minor adjustments to the workplace could be made. That is where ensuring not only that the best kept secret in Whitehall—the access to work scheme—is better promoted but that other elements of Scottish Government support are tailored to ensure that we are taking full advantage of the economic potential that better support and access to work for people with neurodivergence can have.

In collaboration with officials and me, yes.

I do not think that it would be fair to say that they are doing less. They are prioritising the funding that they have in areas that will maximise the economic opportunities before them. As Colin Cook has set out, their ability to invest the money that they have available to them will have to be balanced with the numbers in the workforce available to them and whether the numbers that they have at present are conducive to their spending against that. These are balances to be struck and decisions to be taken by the enterprise agencies. As Mr Cook has set out, we will continue to work with them to ensure that they are doing that as efficiently as possible while also recognising the NSET priorities.

I think it entirely fair for an advisory board that will look at the bank’s performance to wait for the bank to be established before it can be functional. However, work is on-going to establish the advisory board that will provide additional assurance measures, beyond those that are already in place for a non-departmental public body and a public limited company, to ensure that we have confidence—which I do; I have no reason not to—in the bank’s decisions and performance.

That process is on-going.