The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 2063 contributions
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
We have these tinkering discussions between the autumn and spring budget revisions every year because that is a function of having yearly budgets, and I am always struck by the fact that a lot of what we discuss is just for information and we do not get anywhere near looking at the aggregate picture or the real issues. I am thinking about that because of the convener’s opening discussion about reassigning money to the delivery point. My working assumption is that the Scottish Government does that so that it can retain control, because the only way to retain control of a fixed budget is to have reassignment. Is that correct?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
I have a gentle challenge. Although there may be a shift in the future, there is still ring-fenced funding for local government so that the Government can ensure that its priorities are met. I may have asked this question last year, but why do you not attribute the same discipline to yourselves in respect of, say, the housing budget—I use that example because of the multi-factor economic benefits, although it may be a bad example because of the issue of capital, which we may get to—by fixing that as n per cent of the overall budget?
The problem with “tinkering”, as I describe it, is that it always involves short-termism. If you do not set aside a certain percentage and say that it will always be spent on something that we know gives economic benefits, you are perpetuating the status quo of tinkering. Notwithstanding that, I fully accept that annual budgets are a function of a fixed budget and the role of the Treasury. However, every year I hear about the constant tinkering of moving budget moneys from pot to pot, which has an insidious impact on long-term strategic planning that is aligned with economic growth.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
That risk is not a surprise to me, and I suspect that it is not a surprise to you, either. I am therefore surprised that we are in this position. An assessment of risk—not just a treatment of what funds come back—must surely have been part and parcel of the decision on which budget pot those contributions went into. Is that a matter of catching up with what is still a relatively immature system of Whitehall fiscal transfers? Is there something more?
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
Ms Johnson, I do not know whether you have any final comments.
Finance and Public Administration Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 11 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
You probably heard me express concern about timescales to the earlier panel. I do not know the exact date, but it is proposed that the stage 1 debate on the bill be held in the chamber in December. When we come back in the new year, we will have 12 working weeks—not 11 as I said earlier—in which to deal with a multitude of other legislation. After the stage 1 debate, the bill will come back to the committee for stage 2, before returning to the chamber for stage 3.
First, based on your knowledge and experience to date, how realistic is it that the required work can be completed within that timescale?
Secondly, what must be put in place for that to happen? What would be your top ask to get the bill into the condition that we might like it to be in? I fully accept your comments about the levy not being fair, which is what we have heard from contributors across the board.
Anna Gardiner looked at me first, so you can go first.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
Thank you so much for joining us. We have jumped right in with the heavy brogues, to use a Scottish phrase. I will just take things back up a level for the record, given that people will be watching this session and poring over the words that you use.
Sarah Ronald mentioned productivity growth, but that is an outcome, we hope, of using AI. I have a question for all the witnesses. What is your sense, in terms of your businesses, of the areas where you think that AI could add economic value? There is a whole range of areas, but automation and supply chains are examples. I would like to get on the record a sense of that from you before we continue. Sarah, could you go first?
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
It is the same in politics. [Laughter.]
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
Last word to Seth.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
And institutional memory, as well.
Economy and Fair Work Committee
Meeting date: 5 November 2025
Michelle Thomson
I have a final question. What is your attitude and risk appetite for generative AI, or rather the black box nature of it? We have been talking about pretty early-doors usage of AI, but we all know that there will be challenges with generative AI and the basis of statistical probability versus genuine cognition. In your businesses, is the attitude you are taking, “We will deal with that when we start to smell it, but we are not at that point yet”, or is it something that you are already actively considering?