Seòmar agus comataidhean

Why did you decide on six months instead of three months or a year, for example? Is there a specific reason?

One issue that has not come up at the meeting but is in the implementation plan and is important is the information management review and the need to improve the quality of digital storage and retrieval processes. That is perhaps not the most exciting issue that has been raised but it is critical. The Government’s response has five bullet points that list the steps that should be taken on it. Will you talk to us about the philosophy behind why that is important to the process?

Good morning, and welcome to the third meeting in 2022 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. This morning, we will take evidence from the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Covid Recovery on progress in delivering the actions in the Scottish Government’s implementation plan from June 2021, which is part of its response to the findings of three recent harassment investigations, and an updated complaints procedure for handling formal complaints by civil servants regarding the behaviour of a minister or former minister.

The Deputy First Minister is accompanied, from the Scottish Government, by Lesley Fraser, director general corporate; and Ian Mitchell, deputy director for propriety and ethics.

Today’s scrutiny falls within the public administration element of the committee’s remit. The evidence session will therefore focus on the lessons that have been learned, the actions that have been taken and the progress that has been made by the Scottish Government in response to the findings of the three investigations that concluded last year, rather than on revisiting the events that led up to them. We have about 90 minutes for the discussion.

I welcome the Deputy First Minister and his officials to the meeting. I thank him for advance sight of his opening statement, and I ask him to put those remarks on the record.

I have a final question before I bring in colleagues around the table. You wish to have the process in place—more or less, but not fully—by the end of this year. Why will it take such a long time? I realise that culture might not change, but surely processes can change a bit more quickly than that.

The schematic diagram to which you referred says that, for example, building

“complaint investigation capability, to ensure confidence of those participating”

and

“Staff training on grievance policy and best practice refresh”

will not be achieved until December this year, so there are still a number of steps to be taken. There are other issues to be addressed beyond December, such as a

“Review of the processes in use, including Propriety & Ethics”.

Do you envisage that the process will not end as such and that it will be about continuous development?

Culture was mentioned often in your statement. You said:

“we are determined to build a culture in Government in which concerns are addressed early and in which all those who are involved ... have confidence and can engage constructively and fairly in the process.”

What difficulties were there prior to the new process? What changes have been made?

I am sure that colleagues will want to explore in more detail some of the issues that we have touched on. I open up the session to Liz Smith, to be followed by Daniel Johnson.

I will bring in Daniel Johnson.

The procedure will consist of potentially five stages. The first is named “Initial contact and assessment”, the second is named “Investigation” and the third is named “Decision”. Should the decision find against the minister in question, there will be a fourth stage named “Employer Action” and a potential fifth stage named “Appeal”. Given that there would undoubtedly be stress on both sides in such a process, what steps will be taken to ensure that a robust process is carried out timeously? Although each case will be different, what sort of timescale is envisaged for completion of the process?

For our second evidence session, which will focus on the Welsh fiscal framework, we have been joined by Dr Ed Poole and Guto Ifan from Cardiff University. I welcome them both to our meeting. Members have received a written submission from our witnesses.

We will move straight to questions. I remind members and witnesses that our broadcasting team will operate their microphones, so you should pause for a few seconds before speaking to ensure that you are heard. We have about an hour for this session.

I will start by asking about the three separate block grant adjustments for income tax that are a critical element of the Welsh fiscal framework. I understand that they insulate the Welsh Government from UK-wide factors that disproportionately affect one part of income distribution, thereby allowing a fair system to operate in Wales despite its markedly weaker tax base.

We have your submission, but for the record and for people who are listening in, will you talk us through how the system works to benefit Wales?