Chamber and committees

Thank you, Naomi and Julie, for your opening statements and for the written submission.

Julie, you started talking about my first question already. It is about the aspects that have been good in Scotland Excel and the challenges that you have faced, particularly regarding collaboration.

The Scottish Government is looking to implement vast public service reform, so, given the experiences that you have had, what are the main takeaways that need to be addressed at this point? Obviously, the Scottish Government wants to go at pace but there have not yet been firm proposals for what public service reform will look like. What are your thoughts about what needs to be addressed right now, given the frustrations that could lie ahead, so that we manage to deliver public service reform well?

Naomi, do you want to add anything to what Julie said?

Thank you for those replies. I will now ask about procurement. What opportunities are there to enable public services to move towards a more preventative approach with early intervention? I suppose that relates to what Naomi Mason said about the importance of having infrastructure in place. What are the sticking points that prevent that approach from being taken in a better way with regard to achieving better deliverables? Naomi mentioned the funding structures in her answer, but is there anything else that would be important?

Thank you very much.

09:45

I am going to eat a little into a thread that I keep hearing about in the narrative that we have heard so far. It is about the words “granular” and “silos”, and, obviously, the budget in portfolios for public bodies. I note a registered interest as a nurse in the NHS and as a local councillor in Renfrewshire.

I want to understand from a budgetary perspective the changes that the Government is focused on making, such as combining delivery services with regulatory and oversight bodies. Do you understand the concern about the level of conflict that that could potentially mean in terms of demands on budget?

In the feedback that we have heard today, you have said that some decisions have been made at a granular level. I understand that that is because the aim is to build the foundations of the changes, and then, over the years after that point, achieve positive change. However, if such decisions are taken in a siloed way, which is how it has been done in the past, that can cause miscommunication. There is the potential for people to have vested interests, because they look to protect their own instead of embracing public sector reform and changes. What impact might it have on the budget if there is change in the communication and language around how an organisation works, but, actually, there is no real change? It would not be the first time that that has happened.

I am concerned about how the changes will take place as PSR develops. Do you recognise the concerns about how the delivery on the ground of the ambitions around—I will just make sure that I get the correct wording—invest to save, prevention and digital spend will impact the focuses of the budget?

Just to press you slightly further, do you have a timeframe in your mind for the ambition to achieve that aim for the budgetary processes? Are you expecting something in this budget to provide a foundation point for that change and shift to happen?

I appreciate what you have said about the budget being the Deputy First Minister’s responsibility but, in the work that you are focused on around that, what can we potentially expect to be the focus, going into the budget?

On the different note of managing fiscal challenges while seeking better outcomes for people, do you understand the hesitancy and concern about being able to achieve that balance and deliver on both? You have just mentioned how PSR can support budgets. In your role as cabinet secretary, how do you see that balance developing in the Government, and how do you see it delivering within the budget towards the outcome of managing the fiscal challenges? I appreciate that some of it is about hope, the drive for it, leadership towards it and determination for it, and that you do not necessarily have the outcome at this second in time, but how are you looking at the balance of the fiscal challenges and seeking better outcomes for people?

I do apologise. Murdo Fraser has just asked about the regional aspect of this, but the fact is that previous regionalised models have tended to be city heavy. Do you have any thoughts on what the Government should be thinking about when it comes to considering regionalisation? As you have said, you are in the unique position of having two options, but do we need to take a positive approach to this and create regions that might not have a city attached to them and, in fact, flex in the opposite direction? I am interested to hear your views on that.

I will change direction, because I appreciate that time is ticking on. Data sharing is a key aspect of public service reform, and there seems to be a lot of concern about how we can do that better, quicker and more effectively. Could each of you give an example of what could be done to improve data sharing? What is your one ask? What is the thing that really matters, which you feel would make a difference and allow that collaborative approach and shared communications to produce much more effective outcomes?

Neither am I, so you are in good company.