Seòmar agus comataidhean

Is that really the case with capital, though? We have a very under-delivered programme that already has huge backlogs, and you are pausing all new developments to try to bring the backlog of programmes in the capital development plan forward.

Mr Doak, I want to bring you back to my original question. That was a bit of a segue and we went back and forward, but it was about the capacity or potential. Do you have a sense of the scale of potential growth in the area?

That is useful. It feels like there is a reasonable amount of consensus. The question seems to be more about classification and use cases rather than price point.

On differentiation, there are lots of different products. Some of the virgin aggregates that we are talking about, whether it be red chips or others that are specific to the geology of Scotland, have a greater export value and it is worth shipping them long distances to neighbouring areas. There is an aggregate that we can export that has a higher price or value. Is there any case for saying that we should intervene more directly to protect those export or long-distance markets versus something that is more localised?

I know that that is partly about the price elasticity in transport. However, should we make the differentiation more pronounced? Should we say that Scottish red chip has a high price point and it is something that we can use, but the bill should differentiate between some of those classifications? Putting aside how difficult that would be, do you think there is a case to say that there should be more direct differentiation in the bill?

So the issue for you is more about demand rather than the supply side of your business.

We saw some excellent sand last week.

I suppose that our questions relate to the pipeline of work. We have heard ministers—you included—talk about a 10 per cent cut, as you have called it, in capital expenditure, but it seems to have resulted in a 100 per cent cut in capital projects going forward in the NHS or in a full pause while you wait for further clarity. It would be very useful to get an idea of how much of that relates to legacy spend that has already been committed and therefore has to be coped with.

Perhaps I can contrast that a little bit with your approach to net zero and just transition. Capital spend in the NHS has gone up by £235 million, while the net zero and just transition portfolio is seeing a net decrease of £217.9 million. Is that a decision that ministers have taken, or is that just the reality of where the projects find themselves?

On that visit, we also heard that it is about distance, because much of the carbon impact comes from transport. Mr Sharma, will you respond to that point about the balance between where you source the material versus the kind of material? How is your local authority balancing that in considering its carbon impact?

I genuinely am not. What I am asking you is whether you are telling the universities to cut the number of students or to cut the amount of money per student. That is not about additional money. I am asking you about the process that you are undertaking with the universities via the Scottish Funding Council.

I am also asking about the competent operation of the system. At the moment, people are applying for university courses and are being offered a conditional or an unconditional place. The difference is that the teaching budget is to be cut significantly, and the universities that are offering conditional and unconditional places do not know how many places they can offer. That is not usual.

That is not what I am saying.