Seòmar agus comataidhean

The cabinet secretary misses the fact that decisions that are made at Scotland level have consequences. What I am trying to get at here is that, if you invest less in business, you will have less money to invest in public services; in fact, if you invest less in those areas, you will require more investment in public services. You are talking about a long-term strategy, and you have talked very well today about Government targets. However, by cutting those particular agencies, you are giving yourself less opportunity to create the wealth that will generate enough tax take to put into public services. Again, where is the long-term strategy in the budget?

Outcomes are all that matter. I will leave it there.

The reality on the ground is that, because of decisions that the Scottish Government has made, the further education sector is screaming for more investment. The university sector now has to cut 1,200 places for Scottish students. Coming on the back of the Withers review, as well, how on earth does that help the Scottish economy? It is surely a false economy. If we are not creating equal opportunities for our Scottish students, how on earth will we continue to support a wellbeing economy?

Thank you. I will go down a similar route on the third sector. The choices that the Government is making and the squeeze on council budgets are giving our councils almost impossible decisions to make. For example, in my area I have been speaking to two third sector mental health organisations that are no longer funded and will therefore have to shut down. The people whom they support will still have to get treatment, which means that they will join an NHS queue.

That funding might have come out of the budget in the council’s ledger, but it will still come out of the Scottish Government’s budget in another portfolio. Do you acknowledge that those kinds of cuts are a false economy? I say to you again that it is short-term gain for long-term pain, and there is no real cross-portfolio working to tackle such issues.

Good morning, cabinet secretary. You will be aware of my interest in longer-term strategies and the prevention agenda. Following on from some of the earlier questions, I want to dig a little bit into the cost to enterprise agencies and the SNIB and the fact that there is no allocation to the flexible workforce development fund. That will, inevitably, lead to less investment and less support to establish and grow companies, which, in the long term, will lead to a reduced tax take and less money in future budgets. Where is the long-term economic strategy in the current budget?

I think that the councils would disagree with your analysis. The decisions that the Scottish Government has made continue to make Scotland the unhealthiest nation in Europe. We also continue to see huge reductions in our programme for international student assessment scores. That is the reality. When will the budget address those elements, which are a huge drain on our economy?

Thank you, convener and thank you, panel. It strikes me that the issue is not so much the LEZ itself as the way in which it has been introduced. What I am hearing with regard to the night-time economy is that the issue is not just that the clientele are unable to get in and out of the city as a result of public transport not being available at that time of the night and taxis not being available any more, but that workers themselves are struggling to get in. Can you confirm that workers cannot get into and out of work at that time of the night any more?

I have a couple of quick questions. I think that Leon Thompson mentioned the Scottish Government’s new deal for business. How would you assess progress against the commitments at the moment?

I am happy with that, convener.

Can you explain the contradictions that there might be between the Verity house agreement and the new deal for business?