Seòmar agus comataidhean

Although I accept the date point, in every single one of the Government’s budgets, when it has done anything on tax, the accusation has been the same. The HMRC information covers the period in which Opposition MSPs have been saying that the behavioural change will be enormous, but HMRC is saying that that has not actually played out in the detail.

Things are already different. Things are already different in the nature of our engagement—

Wellbeing is still very much a focus, and that is not because I get emotional about it. However, if you read out my job title at the beginning of the meeting and included everything that used to be in it, that would form an opening statement in itself. There was an opportunity to have very clear job titles, particularly as there are many different areas in my brief.

On obstacles, I have asked the team to look at examples of good practice and to try to replicate those across every experience that businesses or workers have with any form of government or public body. For example, two investments were made the week before last, in Sumitomo and Haventus. I am not sure about the extent to which this is appreciated, but I am very struck by the fact that those businesses can go anywhere in the world. They can choose any jurisdiction to invest in in a global economy. So why invest in Scotland? They can speak for themselves, but the feedback that we got was that they found a receptive public sector, a willingness to work with them, and an ease in getting answers and going through processes. I would like to see that replicated in every experience that external investors have when they choose where to invest and, indeed, when Scottish businesses are trying to grow and develop.

I know that the new deal for business group has reconvened the regulatory review group, which is chaired by Russel Griggs. That is looking at how every portfolio of Government—from public health to the environment to education—interacts with the economy and businesses’ experiences, basically. That is my mission. You asked about what making the economy grow and removing hurdles means. My point is that we should make the positive experiences consistent right across every experience that a business or an inward investor has.

—as though NSET should not be embedded right across Government. It should be. There is no part of Government that does not have a relationship with the economy.

If this is our ultimate master plan for what we want to do with the economy, then it would deeply concern me if you reduced it to a budget line. What would that mean, for example, for technological innovations in the NHS? Are they not linked with exciting economic opportunities? What would it mean for the transport budget, when investment in transport systems has a clear impact on productivity, which is one of NSET’s aims? You cannot tackle child poverty without investing in employability, which is also one of NSET’s aims. Therefore, it would be extremely short-sighted—and I would be very disappointed—if NSET became about trading blows over what the budget is. It is actually about whether we are achieving our aims throughout the entirety of what Government can do.

—and I have just said that I would like NSET to be embedded right across the board. I can talk to you about the economy budget, but, by choice, I am not going to give you a figure for the NSET budget. It is utterly irrational to reduce the Government’s overall plan to just one budget line, as if you have to then ignore employability, investment in technology and all the other things that are happening in the economy. The Opposition frequently suggests that there is not a cross-Government approach to the economy, yet your question is directly asking me to create more silos and more separation between different parts of the Government.

This year’s budget has shown that, even with a difficult budget settlement, we have absolutely prioritised the Scottish National Investment Bank because we know the work that it has been doing in the economy.

There were £174 million of financial transactions in this year’s budget, as well as £2.8 million of resource. The cut to financial transactions has been more than 60 per cent. Ultimately, those must be repaid, because they are not a form of straightforward grant funding from the UK Government. The two areas that benefited most from financial transactions were housing and the Scottish National Investment Bank. We have done our level best to protect those areas, but both of them have had challenging settlements.

The Scottish National Investment Bank is on a journey. It always aimed to become self-resourcing and is still on that journey. The bank is going through Financial Conduct Authority processes, which gives an opportunity to attract other private investment. Lastly, if and when that is needed, the bank will also receive additional investment from the Scottish Government for particular shared objectives, such as the ScotWind process.

I will continue to engage with VisitScotland on its strategy, but I think that it has a very important role to play beyond just marketing.

Over the years, I have been very involved with campaigns on information that needs to be shared with visitors—often, before they arrive. For example, on account of a number of road fatalities, I have been very involved in a “Keep left” campaign, trying to remind drivers who might not be familiar with doing so to drive on the left. My first point is that VisitScotland has a hugely important role to play in that regard.

Secondly, how does VisitScotland ensure that areas in tourism hotspots—where there is quite serious congestion in a few different locations—are not overwhelmed? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of acres that visitors could go to instead.

Thirdly, before visitors come, there is a need to be prepared, with accommodation, transport and so on.

VisitScotland should work with content, whether that is user-generated or its own, but it needs to go beyond just marketing.

I ask Fran Pacitti to come in on the specifics of any sale process, if that is okay.

We continue to review these things, but it would still be the Government’s preference to return the airport to private ownership. We do operate airports through HIAL, and I know that they are essential to my region. There is a reason why the Government does that, and I think that it does it really well. I do not think that Prestwick fits into that HIAL model; its model is completely different, and therefore, our preference would still be to return it to private ownership.

I do not know whether Fran Pacitti wishes to add anything about the Government’s reasons for doing so.

We come back to the fact that the Scottish Government has no certainty over any part of our budget. That has created some of the challenges. I do not know of any part of the public sector that would not like to have a multiyear budget settlement. The Scottish Government would love that—it would bite off the UK Government’s hand to have a multiyear budget settlement. I do not know when the last time—