Seòmar agus comataidhean

There is a tension between the powers, the capabilities and the long-term stretch targets on eradicating poverty. We have universal agreement about that goal, but I worry that some of the statements undermine the credibility of institutions and lose the public’s trust.

Kids in Scotland are a year behind those in the rest of the UK in mathematics education. Would closing that gap not be a better goal? Would it not be more practical to say that we, as a set of institutions and a group of people, should do that? Would that not help us to achieve the other ends on eradicating poverty? Would it not be more intelligible to the public for us to be clearer about something that is doable and clearly within the Parliament’s responsibilities? Education has been fully devolved for the past 25 years, so there is no good reason why kids in Scotland should be a year behind those in the rest of the UK in maths education, is there?

If I can interrupt, your submission says that it was the Government’s choice to increase spending outwith the block grant allocation by £1 billion in other areas of the budget. That is a choice that the Government has made. You are very critical of the Government in your helpful submission, but now, in evidence, we are hearing that the circumstances are different. You are telling us that there are choices to be made, and that the Government is not making the strategic choices. It has not put any proposals on the table, and we are nine weeks out. Is that not the case?

One of the recurring themes that the committee has heard about over recent months, particularly from the cabinet secretary, has been the challenge of meeting the public sector pay bill. Compared to the rest of the country, a significantly higher proportion of the working public in Scotland works in public services and we have a higher wage level already. Therefore, one of the key issues that the cabinet secretary is grappling with is that a 5 per cent increase on our pay bill is significantly higher than a 5 per cent increase on the pay bill of the rest of the country. I will put this question to all the witnesses: where do you see the trade-offs between pay rises and head count? Teacher numbers has been used as an example. Is that a choice that councils are having to make or that you anticipate that you will have to make?

You have been in post for two and a half years, so this will be your third time in this process. Is that right? Or the second time, perhaps? Let us say the third time.

The convener touched on some of the other issues regarding council tax reform, including revaluation, extra bands, changes to the reduction schemes and so on, which you cover in your submission. That work is on-going, and you have said that you want to see that accelerated in the coming months. We are nine weeks out from the budget, so will any of that be done in time?

It is fair to say that we have not met that aspiration, have we?.

There are no proposals on the table, so you do not aspire to get this done in nine weeks, do you? That would be—

I am thinking about the framework as a decision-making tool. Is it not the case that, in the absence of economic growth, there will be fewer resources as demand grows? If we do not grow the amount of finance that is available to the public sector through economic growth, we will have less available because of climate change, technological change, demographic change and increasing pressure on our public services. Does the framework therefore not become a tool to prioritise cuts? Rather than saying what works, it becomes a question of what does not work. Is it an effective tool to determine what does not work?

You are an optimist, but could we be a little more pragmatic about it? We are trying to understand the restrictions on the budget and how that will work. Realistically, I do not think that anyone on the panel would say that they think that we will have a fiscal framework in nine weeks’ time. Could we have hands up for that?

I hope so.