Official Report 310KB pdf
Item 3 is an update on our work programme. Are there any comments? Have any issues been missed from the paper that we should consider?
According to the paper, we have to agree today whether we wish to appoint an external adviser for our budget scrutiny.
I will come to that. Are there any other comments on the work programme?
It is already a very crowded work programme, so we should exercise caution in how we approach it. Paragraph 5 says that
Thank you for that information. I was not aware of the statement on the gathering.
I am reliably informed.
If there are no other points on the work programme, we can look specifically at the issue of the budget adviser. My recommendation on this occasion is that we do not seek to appoint a budget adviser, partly because we are one of the committees that receive additional support from the financial scrutiny unit in SPICe. We will probably receive as much advice on the budget from that unit as we require. However, I am open to other thoughts on the matter.
That is a vote of confidence for SPICe, as far as I am concerned.
There do not seem to be any dissenting voices, so on this occasion we—
I think that we should have an external budget adviser, as we had before. Peter Wood served us well in the past, although I do not insist that he should be the budget adviser. Certainly when I was convener of the Finance Committee, we were anxious to see that all subject committees had an external budget adviser. Given that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has said that the cuts are the deepest since 1948, that they cover a four-year horizon and that we have already seen cuts of 30 and 40 per cent over the past three years in the two principal agencies that we cover, I think that we should have an external budget adviser. Of course, the work of the adviser should be supplemented by the financial scrutiny unit, as usual. However, I think that an external perspective is always helpful.
I think that that is right. At the moment, it is not clear whether the budget timetable will follow precisely the dates set out in the work programme but, in so far as we can predict the timings, I think that it would be helpful to have an expert adviser. They have certainly been helpful in previous years and, given my suspicions that this budget process will not be any easier than previous processes, I think that it would probably be good to do the same again.
I will not go to the wall on this. I am not convinced that we get that much value out of budget advisers, but that is just my personal view of the quality of some of the advisers I have had on previous committees. If the committee in general is content to have a budget adviser—
I would like to be able to choose from a wider range of people, if that is possible. It is always good to get a fresh pair of eyes.
If we put out the call and get a range of CVs, do we still have to appoint an adviser?
No.
Okay.
We will seek CVs for a potential budget adviser and then decide nearer the time whether anyone fits the bill.
Next
Energy Inquiry