Seòmar agus comataidhean

The committee has encountered challenges in finding any strategic approach to public sector reform. Keir Greenaway is right. It is clear that what you talked about is happening everywhere. Every organisation is having to react rather than taking a strategic approach.

We took evidence from the permanent secretary, who said that he did not understand, or was not aware of, the current Government’s approach to public sector reform. The resource spending review was dropped, but it seems to be back on the table. Do the witnesses—Audit Scotland and Martin Booth in particular—have clarity about where the approach is headed, given what they have heard from the Deputy First Minister?

On that point—I am also reflecting on what we heard in the previous evidence session—we have long-term targets around reducing child poverty, climate change et cetera, but it feels like the budget is much more short term and that it does not consider the long-term priorities that the Government has set out, or how we will reach the targets. The implementation gap has been much commented on. It would be interesting to hear colleagues’ comments and views on the rhetoric and political language and whether they see the priorities reflected in what comes forward.

That was not the case in the 1990s, when China had double-digit growth rates, which is what the First Minister’s comparison was with. That is what would be required to raise the level of income in this country to the level that the First Minister has suggested.

Since the budget was announced, the cuts to housing programmes have been commented on. The Fraser of Allander Institute has highlighted that in its work. The affordable housing supply programme is being cut by more than 30 per cent in real terms, on top of a cut of more than 10 per cent last year. The housing support and homelessness budget is down by 5 per cent, and the local government capital budget is down by more than 20 per cent, which is happening at a time when cities are declaring housing emergencies. Dr Sousa, could you pick up on the broader impact of that?

Do you want to respond, Dr Sousa?

That is not what the cabinet secretary said; she told the Social Justice and Social Security Committee that the fund had

“run its course as a concept.”

It was as though she was saying that it was a failed concept, so there was not a choice. Is that your view? Did the parental employability support fund fail as a concept?

Yesterday, the First Minister made a speech about the economy and the different choices that he would want to make. He said that if he could marshal £2 billion of capital funding annually—£20 billion over 10 years—he could deliver growth levels similar to those that China experienced in the 1990s. Professor Bell, do you think that that is realistic?

The point about college infrastructure is a strong one. We could draw a contrast with the university sector, which has the ability to raise finance. Over the longer term, the Scottish Government has drawn the college sector much closer to it. The Government’s regulations and the way that the sector is run result in less flexibility in raising money.

To come back on the convener’s point, I do not think that there has to be a zero-sum game in that regard. There might be alternatives for the college sector to look at different forms of revenue raising and flexibility in the way that it works. We should not just be saying that the overall capital budget should be cut.

Essentially, it comes down to a class issue. Many people who go to colleges are from lower-working-class backgrounds and they have a much poorer experience, in terms of the physical environment, than people who go to university. Traditionally, those people are from more affluent backgrounds, and they are in brand-new buildings. Over the past decade, there has been huge investment in universities across the country, but colleges have not replicated that. There is a fundamental unfairness in that.

I will stick with the issue of the public sector workforce. I am interested in how Government policy informs what you have done and the numbers that you have produced. The resource spending review, which was a major piece of work back in May 2022, said that the Government would aim to return the total size of the devolved public sector workforce to around pre-Covid levels by 2026-27.

We were promised that there would be more detail about that in last year’s budget, but John Swinney did not provide that and said that it was up to public bodies to do so. On 16 May, I asked the permanent secretary about the status of that policy, but he said:

“I do not think that that has been publicly stated”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 16 May 2023; c 36.]

He did not know what the status of that was. On 13 June, Shona Robison told this committee that it was

“A bit of a blunt tool”—[Official Report, Finance and Public Administration Committee, 13 June 2023; c 27.]

and said that she was abandoning RSR, but, in recent days, we have heard much more language about a big decrease in the public sector workforce. What is your understanding of Scottish Government policy and how has it informed your predictions and assumptions?

When would that be?