Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning, Mr Ross. A fair few of the questions that I might have dwelt on have already been asked, but perhaps I can help out Mr Mason a little bit with regard to costs.

On the alcohol side of the equation, the alcohol and drinks industry is already committed to significant expenditure on combating alcohol harm and on community alcohol partnerships, and there is also money that it puts into self-regulation and so on. Have you had any discussions with that industry about how money that is already being spent could be repurposed for such a programme, or how, say, some of the revenues from minimum unit pricing—which, according to the Fraser of Allander Institute, are approximately £32 million a year—could be used to meet some of the costs of what I think is a worthwhile bill?

Regardless of what happens next with parliamentary time or Government support for the bill, the bill has raised awareness of the need for rehab and the scale of Scotland’s alcohol and drug deaths. It has also led to more data and transparency around that data. How much further do you think we have to go before we have an accurate picture of the trends and the costs? I know that some of them will always be unknown, but one of the unintended consequences of the proposed legislation is that we are starting to compile that data, which is useful to public policy more generally.

If the bill is passed, until the systems are in place, will it make it more difficult for the Scottish Government in the short to medium term to cut budgets as it has in the past, because there will be an increased focus on this area?

Finally, on the problem of alcohol misuse, in its submission, SHAAP called for

“a new robust national needs assessment to be carried out”,

followed by

“a full calculation ... to estimate the costs of upscaling provision to meet the currently unmet need”

in relation to alcohol dependence. Do you sense that there is agreement to extend the scope of the bill to cover all people with alcohol-use disorder, as SHAAP has suggested, or would you want to look at that further down the line?

Thank you very much.

Given that we are again talking about preventative spending, it would probably be good to see on what basis it was assessed and whether any progress has been made.

Jumping forward to last autumn, Audit Scotland took up a similar position, in which it said that there is still

“no evidence of large-scale change on the ground”

and that the Government

“does not know what additional funding is required to support reform”.

You have put £30 million in the budget this year for invest to save. Can you give the Auditor General some assurance that you are working towards getting an actual figure that you will work towards to leverage in the reforms that ultimately might meet the initial objectives of the act?

Finally, finally—sorry, convener—you identified the concept of the single authority model in relation to health boards and councils. Is that a lesson that you should roll out through Government more widely, given that you say that it is quite difficult for you as the minister in charge to drive reform? Do you need to consider coherence in relation to the number of public bodies that are out there?

I go back to the social justice portfolio and, in particular, the two benefits that the convener identified: adult disability payment, the figure for which is £100 million lower than you anticipated, and child disability payment, the figure for which is £70 million more than you anticipated. I think that you said that you would follow up on that point when you write to the committee.

Is the relationship between those benefits affected by the ways in which they are promoted? In 2023, there was a big push in relation to them in billboard, radio and television advertising. Is there a causal link between the promotional work that you do and the take-up of those benefits?

Will you also look into the breakdown of child disability payment between payments in relation to neurodiversity and payments in relation to other disabilities? It may well be that the change is an effect of the child and adolescent mental health services waiting list going down, as there are more diagnoses in one column as a result of people being put forward. I am interested in knowing whether the change is a result of catching up on delays in waiting lists or whether it is a structural trend in the Scottish budget, particularly in relation to child disability payment. It would be helpful if you would undertake to look into that.

In relation to the social security programme, there have been £11.3 million of savings, which you identify as being

“driven by staff cost savings.”

It is not clear whether that has happened through reductions in posts or some other mechanism. Have you managed to ascertain what drove that?

We discussed the money that is being held back in the local government portfolio and that is being rolled forward in the health portfolio. Through your conversations with local government and health boards, you will be aware that, this year, there is a real in-year problem in relation to integration joint boards, with some not making the cost savings that they anticipated, others potentially having to look at reserves and others scratching their heads in disbelief as to how they will roll the money forward into next year. Is there anything that you can do in year to look at the specific health boards, such as those in Aberdeenshire and Edinburgh, that seem to be grappling with a real issue in relation to their IJB liabilities?

You are patting yourself on the back and saying that you have managed to balance the budget yet again, but what conversation would you have been having with us today if you did not have the £2 billion that your crystal ball correctly said was going to come? You criticised your political opponents. The Scottish Conservatives suggested tax cuts, which you said would lead to public expenditure cuts, but that is not necessarily axiomatic. What conversation would you be having with us today if you had not got that £2 billion?