Chamber and committees

Would an example of that be the fact that, when the Government faced a shortfall in the recent budget, it took a scythe to housing and employability schemes, even though addressing those two areas is vital in eradicating poverty? Is that an example of the knee-jerk response that you are talking about?

I want to briefly raise two more issues before I close. Inward migration is often seen as a panacea, but the OECD has pointed out one fundamental flaw in that, which is that the migrant population is ageing. Also, in the countries from where we would draw skilled talent, wage growth means that wages are catching up with wages here. There is also the moral dimension as to whether we should be recruiting qualified doctors from developing countries where they are needed.

Migration might help to sustain us over a period, but, if we look forward a decade or so, there could then be a change in the underlying migration patterns. Are we leaning too heavily on migration as the solution to our structural demographic problem?

Another issue is people working longer into their retirement. Anecdotally, people seem, post-Covid, to want to retire and scale back earlier. The graph of productivity by age is sort of humped, with those in the middle—say, those from 40 to 50—probably the most productive, because as you get older, you have skills obsolescence, a lack of reskilling and so on. What more can we do to ensure that those who are older maintain their productivity, so that, even if they are not working longer when they get into their 50s and 60s, they are perhaps still as productive as those in their 40s?

Good morning, Mr Boyle, and welcome to the committee.

We have talked about trying to be transparent and to put complex data and reports into more simplified language. You called for greater transparency in relation to budgetary information, to improve the effectiveness of the budget process. What would that greater transparency look like to a layman and how would you bring it about?

In your submission—I think that you have also made this point elsewhere—you said:

“the Scottish Government does not know where it can flex its budget easily to accommodate short-term fluctuations or longer-term commitments. A better understanding of its cost base would help develop its Spending Reviews”.

When I ran a private sector business, I had a detailed understanding of the cost base, because every pound spent unnecessarily was a pound less in profit. Why would the Government not have a detailed understanding of its cost base?

One critical driver of productivity on a per capita basis is encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship. We know that people who are involved in that are most impactful in terms of their productivity when they are around 45—I think that that is the average age. What more could we do through public policy, be that through tax or other incentives, to get people in that age bracket to start thinking that, rather than work for somebody, they should go out there, take risks and become the entrepreneurs who will drive economic growth?

You have warned in reports about the long-term sustainability of the Scottish public finances, as have other bodies in front of this and other committees. However, some of the underlying trends—largely in the public sector workforce and social security—and recent experiences do not suggest that the Government is taking them seriously. For example, since 2016, there has been a 71 per cent rise in the civil service workforce. The number of senior civil servants at grades C1, C2 and C3 has tripled.

Those are recent trends, and there is no sign that the Scottish Government is turning the ship around. It says that it has had great success in reducing the size of the contingent workforce, but they seem to be leaving through the back door and potentially coming in through the front door as full-time civil servants. Is the Government taking those warnings seriously, or is it simply discounting them and saying that you are all wrong and that it is on a sustainable path?

Use of artificial intelligence, robotics and other technology can also drive productivity. Yesterday, when I was looking at a graph that showed countries that have significant demographic issues and ageing populations—I could not find Scotland or the UK on it—Korea was far up at the top in relation to its use of robotics, which is another way to generate economic growth. Where are Scotland and the UK with using that alternative route to prosperity by bringing in the robots?

Good morning, Professor Roy. I read your report at the weekend and it hardly cheered me up. I was not full of beans afterwards. The picture is quite depressing, not just for us but for quite a number of Western economies. How can we make the labour market more productive in Scotland? Also, how can we effectively increase productivity on a per capita basis?

In that respect, it strikes me that there are three or four different key triggers: lifelong learning; skills; and people working longer, both into their older age and in terms of hours. Indeed, there is a debate taking place in Scotland about the length of the working week, and we have heard the discussion about scaling the public sector working week back from five days to four. What potential impact could Scotland working fewer hours have on our productivity?

Finally, you will have seen in the submissions from the Chartered Institute of Taxation and the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland recommendations or calls for us to move to a system where we have a fiscal bill or a finance bill. My colleague Stephen Kerr said that a finance bill

“would consolidate tax and spending proposals into a single legislative package, providing a clearer, more coherent narrative of how revenue generation aligns with expenditure.”

From your perspective, based on your experience at Westminster and here, would that assist us in some way in tracking how the money is being spent and how tax aligns with expenditure?