Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a brief question for Stephen Sinclair, because he spoke about counterfactuals. All three witnesses have spoken about last week’s evidence regarding the need for better data. One suggestion that we heard from last week’s witnesses was about the need for a study comparing the experience in Scotland with that in other parts of the UK, which might help with some of the counterfactuals.

I made a point last week about Maryhill, which I represent. I would like to know how the lived experience of families in poverty in Maryhill compares with that of families in Merseyside. That would help us to analyse the difference that the Scottish child payment has or has not made and to look at any actions that are meant to tackle child poverty in Merseyside. Does Stephen Sinclair have a view on whether a comparative study would be helpful?

To try to paraphrase your answer, you are almost saying that we should give the chief entrepreneur a bit of breathing space to do what he is doing, because the success will be seen in the medium to long term. You mentioned 10 years, and I note that you also said that you would not be in your post in 10 years’ time.

However, how do we evaluate in the short term? Sometimes, short-term evaluations and targets can be a bit artificial, and we move on to the next thing rather than sticking with something for the long term. How do we do short-term evaluation in a meaningful way, so that the committee can scrutinise it? Are you indicating that the Government is thinking that that two-year post could be a four, six or 10-year post? I am conscious that the two-year appointment will lapse this summer.

I have another question, although I am happy not to ask it, convener. I am not sure what the timescale is.

It is about the city region and growth deals that are now in place across the whole of Scotland. A few years ago, that was never the intention; it was only certain areas of Scotland that were to get additional attention, but now it is the case that, if an area does not have a growth deal or a city region deal, something is going wrong, and such deals cover the whole country.

How are we ensuring that the scale of investment that is required is boosting economic performance in the way that we would like? How are we ensuring that the investment is strategic? Are the deals delivering against ambitions? That is a very general question, which is just to give the committee a starting position in case we do some work on that area in the future.

You mentioned Professor Logan, who is the chief entrepreneurial adviser to the Scottish Government. I believe that it was you who appointed him, in July 2022, for a two-year post. I understand that he is leading on the start-up nation agenda. There was a £1.3 million fund for pre-start-up pathways and a £1.6 million fund for ecosystems in October last year, which I think impacted 62 businesses in total. You also recently announced £5 million of support for start-up businesses. I just wanted to put that on the record.

How do we evaluate, in a respectful manner, how successful the chief entrepreneurial adviser has been, not as an individual, but as a position for Government?

I want to check something. I know that the position of chief entrepreneur is an individual appointment—they are a human being—so you would not announce something to this committee but, more generally, I am not sure that you have actually said whether the office is a long-term endeavour. You have been silent on that so far, cabinet secretary.

It does.

My follow-up question relates to the climate change people’s panel. Its members were not big on long-winded policies and strategies—they wanted policy to be short, simple and easy to understand. That is similar to what the First Minister has said about having more concrete actions and fewer lengthy strategies.

What the people’s panel has said, therefore, chimes with the First Minister’s intention in that regard. In the light of that, what consideration have you given to adopting policy in that way to make it as easy as possible for all of us to do what we need to do to meet our climate change commitments? I am thinking of bite-sized chunks and policies that are easy to action, rather than referencing strategies and policy documents with long-winded narratives. People with busy lives want the answers or options put in front of them in bite-sized chunks that they can act on. That was a call from the people’s panel. Are you considering that?

When additional duties, responsibilities and accountabilities are placed on public bodies, the answer that we get from the Government all the time is that existing resources will suffice to cover those. Saying that is, therefore, not an unexpected step, but how will the Scottish Government ensure that the body is sufficiently funded going forward? What monitoring process is in place to make sure that there will be no additional burdens? We have been given reassurances that there will not be, but will there be on-going monitoring of the funds of the organisation and would it approach the Government if it felt that it needed additional resource?

Like Jackie Dunbar, I have been listening intently. I am wondering whether the relationship with enforcement is not so much about the amount of the fine as about having effective enforcement in the first place. If someone throws something out of a car window knowing that they could be fined £80, they are pretty unlikely to do it. Likewise at £500. However, if they throw something out of the window thinking that they will not be detected, the size of the fine might not be the underlying deterrent. The deterrent is that you may be caught and a fine may be levied. What is your consideration of that point?

This is really just for clarity. I am sure that you are not suggesting that we should employ more police officers simply to have a force for detecting people throwing litter out of car windows. There may be other uses for police resources.