Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will let John Mason ask a question in a minute.

One of the issues is the process: we get the autumn statement and then we have three weeks for the Scottish Government to produce a budget. The Scottish Government has to wait for the Scottish Fiscal Commission to come out with its forecasts, because that is what the budget is based on. The SFC comes up with the forecasts and says how much is going to be available. The Government then starts divvying up the pot. It also has to haggle with Ross Greer and his colleagues, because there is a two-party agreement at that stage, and then it has to put it all together. That is the background and, to a large extent because of that, one of the things that the budget document lacks—as it always does—is the reasons why the decisions have been made. I do not think that it would improve transparency if we were to get the equivalent of “War and Peace” on every budget line—it would be more than the 125 pages that it is already—but it would be useful if we had more of an explanation in the document about why one decision was being made, as opposed to a different decision. That is something that we can press for.

Time is against us, so I want our guests to have a wee think about any final comment that they want to make after John Mason has asked his question and before we wind up the session.

For example, if you had an underspend on paper of £150 million, that is less than one day’s revenue for the Scottish Government; it is a nonsense. That is the money that you have available in order to move things forward. It is always 100 per cent committed, in my understanding.

Yes. You said that resource funding will rise by 8 per cent by 2028-29 but, in the figures on page 5, in the second line, there seems to be a 4.2 per cent rise rather than an 8 per cent rise. I just wonder why that is, or have I got it wrong?

Before you ask another question, John, I see that Claire Murdoch wants to come in.

It is not about commenting on policy choices; it is about showing which policy choices are available, and then it is up to politicians to decide whether to take one or other forward—I can see that.

I will open up the session to questions from members.

Sorry, but you are talking about 0.4 per cent of income tax revenues, which is £82 million.

About 90 per cent comes from the UK Government.

Thank you. I now open up the meeting to members’ questions.

Good morning, and welcome to the 34th meeting in 2023 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee.

The first item on our agenda is an evidence session with the Scottish Fiscal Commission to discuss the Scottish Budget 2024-25 and the commission’s December 2023 economic and fiscal forecasts, which were both published yesterday. We are joined by witnesses from the Scottish Fiscal Commission: Professor Graeme Roy, who is the chair and Professor David Ulph, who is a commissioner. Claire Murdoch, who joins us online, is head of fiscal sustainability and public funding. She is joining us remotely, sadly, due to Covid. However, I am glad that she is able to participate in the meeting. Welcome, everyone. I invite Professor Roy to make a brief opening statement.

It is always worth flying these kites, but Graeme Roy is switched on, even when such questions are coming in his direction.