Chamber and committees

I am. You are obviously going to proffer the positives, but we have to be just as interested in the areas in which we are utterly blindsided. I want to be able to challenge you on those areas and understand why we are still in that position.

I know that we have discussed this before, and I am not trying to create an industry around data gathering. I know how complex and time consuming that is, including the checking of it; I understand that. I totally accept what you are saying about Techscaler; the evidence is apparent to me, and I can see that you have been behind that, Deputy First Minister. However, in so many other areas, it is almost as though it does not occur to the Government that we might want to be able to slice and dice the data to proffer different perspectives, which is utterly fundamental.

I care so passionately about that not just because of inequalities. It is actually about economic contribution, which I suspect is why you care so passionately about it, too. In the face of chronic labour shortages, we cannot afford to be complacent.

I will return to a theme that I suspect will not surprise you: the representation of women. I know that that is important to you, too, Deputy First Minister. In your update yesterday, we heard ample evidence of that in some of the stats that you mentioned about the Techscaler programme and the work that you have done with Ana Stewart.

In readiness for this meeting, I revisited information about the national strategy for economic transformation—NSET—which retriggered my frustration that I have found it impossible to find disaggregated data that shows exactly what the position is for a whole variety of measures, specifically for women. I wonder why we are still at that stage, because the record will show that I have asked that question not just of you but of other people. Why it is so difficult?

I will try not to ask too many questions, because it has been a long session for you, cabinet secretary. First, I want to check what your approach is to the involvement of other political parties in the forthcoming budget. What approaches—if any—have you had thus far to try to influence your thinking?

I move to my next wee point. You know that, in relation to last year’s budget, I was quite critical about any plans to use ScotWind funding for other types of spend.

I know that you cannot give spoilers about the budget, but I seek some reassurance that ScotWind funding can continue to be used for the purpose for which it was originally set out—that is, to support growth in a very important sector. Will you give us a steer on that?

That is what I have seen them doing. The Royal Scottish National Orchestra in particular has been very successful with its music for films and so on. It has really started to differentiate itself.

That leads me to my next comment, which is about local government. You have mentioned this a couple of times but, in your previous appearance here, you noted that the Scottish Government is keen to codify the local government fiscal framework. You mentioned some of the considerations, such as transparency. I want to check where you are with that codification.

I have a question about trading standards and public administration. We have ended up getting quite embroiled in talking about public sector head count and accountability, but one benefit—as I have talked about in earlier commentary—stems from having shared services. We know that the trading standards service in Scotland is at quite a critical juncture. The service is administered through all 32 local authorities, which has led to it becoming very fragmented. It is an example of a service that might be more efficient and more effective, from a provisioning of service point of view, if another model were created.

Once we get past the public sector focus on the civil service, will that sort of issue be looked at sympathetically? I think that the intention of leaving the service to local authorities was probably a good one, but it is no longer functioning as it should, because it is so disparate and fragmented.

I have a teeny last question. Last week, I had quite an interesting exchange in the chamber with Angus Robertson, the culture secretary. I was asking a question about the assessment of the fiscal sustainability of our performing arts companies. We had a good discussion about how important they are, what value they add, and so on.

It appears that there is some differentiation between the performing arts companies in relation to how focused they are on their fiscal sustainability and understanding the gross value added that they bring into the wider community. It is too late for this budget cycle, but that made me think about how consciously we look at those organisations from a fiscal and financial perspective, rather than just saying nice things about them because they do nice things for our community. The culture secretary was very open to that point. There is a bit of a silo because they go through culture, and nobody looks at them. Those organisations have to be sustainable, and they are very grateful for the support that they get from Government, but do you have any reflections on how actively that scrutiny goes on in the Scottish Government?

Yes. Can you walk us through how that is working?

In Grangemouth specifically. Grangemouth is part of my constituency.