Seòmar agus comataidhean

I would expect that that is because more people are using the service. If I am not mistaken, operators make a claim on the funding based on usage. I can double-check that. However, if that is an indication of more people who are eligible for concessionary travel travelling more on buses, I suppose that I would say that that would be a positive thing. I can check the specifics on that for you.

I do not have any information on the smaller number—the £1 million or so. The bigger number comes back to the point that Mr Hoy made about the invest-to-save scheme. As I said earlier in relation to the uptake of the £30 million scheme, it is only one part of what is happening. It is tackling a specific challenge of portfolios perhaps not taking up opportunities because of the way in which the budget process has traditionally worked. The scheme is a mechanism to alleviate that problem. Because it is a different way of doing business, it is not necessarily something that the portfolios would have been looking for, and so it was perhaps always going to be a bit of a challenge to get everything right in the first year.

I can do that. However, what I will say is that, although we certainly look at this in the abstract from a policy perspective, the nuts and bolts—the reality—of how this works is that there are year-end requirements to deploy the funds, and whether they are deployed is based to a large extent on where they can best be deployed or how they can be deployed, rather than where, in a perfect world, we might think that we want them to be deployed.

Good morning.

As we approach the end of the financial year, the Scottish Government is, once again, on track to balance its budget. That demonstrates our robust in-year financial management practices. The spring budget revision allocates £600 million of additional funding to support our vital public services. More than £100 million is provided to the health service, while the economy and Gaelic, housing, transport, and education and skills portfolios all receive additional funding to support services.

In line with our robust practices, we continue to set aside contingency funding, which is required annually, to support any year-end audit adjustments as well as to guard against any final changes in 2025-26 forecasts. Those funding additions are offset by a reduction in social security benefit expenditure, £100 million of forecast European structural funds income and slippage in capital projects, as well as a £350 million technical adjustment relating to police and fire pensions.

The funding position has also been updated to reflect the latest forecasts and figures. Planned capital borrowing and ScotWind utilisation have been revised down and align to the position that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government set out in the 2026-27 Scottish budget. There remain wider financial challenges that have required to be navigated in recent years. As part of the 2025-26 budget, we had to consider carefully how best to support the 2026-27 budget, with a £150 million underspend assumption.

11:00

The technical, Whitehall and internal transfers are presented in the document in the usual way. The supporting document to the spring budget revision and the finance update prepared by my officials provide further background on the net changes as well as updates on information that was requested by the committee.

I am happy to answer any questions that the committee may have.

Are you asking why it is not a round number?

I have a couple of points to make. First, these numbers originally come from the Scottish Fiscal Commission, which makes its assessment of what we need to put in the budget. That is the right way to do it—there is the independent assessment, and then we work within that.

Secondly, the numbers are big, but, in the context of the whole social security budget, it is about 3 per cent. However, you are right that, in relation to that specific benefit, it is a significant number in absolute terms, and, as you say, it is demand led. I am sure that there are many and various factors that drive that demand, and Social Security Scotland will respond to the applications and the demand side of the process.

On your comment about being stricter, it is important to recognise that certain numbers are quoted in this regard—it is not my portfolio, so I am not across all the detail of it—but a lot of the original assessment was based on individuals who were transferred from the UK system, who had already been through various checks. Therefore, when people talk about a very small number being changed following on from that, it is important to recognise that those individuals had already been through the UK process.

Social Security Scotland prides itself on its dignity and fairness approach, but I am conscious that it is looking after public money, so all of that needs to be treated in the round.

I do not have all the detail on that, but I can get back to you if there are specifics that you want more information on. Clearly, there will be big projects in there, and for capital projects you make the projection of what you will spend and then, when you are in year, a period of time later, there will be variables that could affect that projection.

There will be things that will speed up and things that will slow down. There will always be movement, and, again, that is in the context of a significant capital budget overall.

The offshore wind spending will be partnered up with private sector investment, and it is not always possible to have a complete assessment of that in advance of when the budget is laid. As a result, funding might not be deployed at the rate that we thought it would be, depending on other factors that are outside our control.

I would not know. I would need to check whether ADP tapers out eventually; I am not sure whether it does or not. However, Mr Mason is right that, if people are exiting, then it is because they will no longer be eligible for the benefit, for whatever reason. They may have got better, which is a good thing.

Officials will keep me right on the technicalities. AME funding comes from the UK Government as non-cash to support pensions and other such things that are funded by it. Again, we cannot access that money to spend it. The UK Government manages and funds those things.