Chamber and committees

I cannot go further than to say that these matters will be considered on a project-by-project basis. However, the Government fully intends to deploy £6.3 billion of capital expenditure and the point that I am making is, in a sense, a marginal point in relation to the totality of that programme. We will work to deploy £6.3 billion of capital expenditure in the next financial year, so business organisations can look at that and see how it is distributed across the range of portfolio areas and the plans that have been set out in the budget document. They can take some confidence that the Government will invest heavily in the country’s capital estate, but certain projects might not proceed as originally timetabled, although they will be at the margins of the programme.

The discussions with the UK Government on the fiscal framework have, in essence, taken account of the transactional work around the evidence review that is being prepared. I have not had further discussions with the UK Government about the fiscal framework review, beyond that—if my memory serves me right. We have set out some of the issues that we have in relation to the scope of our financial powers and responsibilities, and we will engage with the United Kingdom Government on those points.

We can stay here all afternoon, convener. Liz Smith is not accepting the point that I am making, which is the point that the First Minister was making. The budget parameters were set by the UK Government in autumn 2021, when inflation was flat as a pancake. By the time the financial year started, inflation was galloping like a racehorse and the UK Government had not revised its financial estimates. That is the problem.

Are you asking at what moment it will come?

It depends on whether that arises out of an additional allocation to the Department of Health and Social Care, from which there would be a consequential. For example, no consequentials arise out of the announcements that were made by the UK Government yesterday on the management of NHS pressures, because, as I understand it, the funding came from existing, committed DHSC resources. If there were to be a cash injection from the Treasury into the DHSC to meet the costs of a pay deal—as I understand it, the DHSC cannot offer any more, because it does not have the money to do so—that could give rise to a consequential. However, we are in the realms of many uncertainties and unpredictabilities as we rehearse this question.

We could take forward a range of options in connection with taxation. The Government looks at these questions and sets out its tax position to Parliament when that exercise is concluded. There are of course many other ways in which we could structure our tax system and the option exists for the Government to consider those points.

The work on public sector reform is an on-going priority, and a variety of public sector organisations will change the way in which they deliver public services to ensure that they can be as effective and sustainable as possible. Through the budget process, we are actively engaging with all public bodies to ensure that steps are being taken to maximise efficiency. As I set out to the Parliament, there are enormous pressures on our public finances and enormous pressures through the demand on public organisations and agencies, so we have to ensure that we have in place appropriate and sustainable methods of delivery in all organisations.

That work is, in essence, an on-going task as part of the work in which we deliver the budget priorities. It is being undertaken in a range of areas, but I will give some examples that the First Minister cited yesterday in the briefing that she gave on the health service. She talked about the way in which organisations such as NHS 24 and the Scottish Ambulance Service are changing their operational practices—and have already changed them—to ensure that they can handle more cases in more demanding circumstances than has been the case up until now.

I assure the committee that the question of public service delivery and the reform agenda is an implicit part of that. Indeed, in my budget statement, I said that there would be significant emphasis on the principles—established through the Christie commission—that emphasised early intervention and prevention and that those would be at the heart of the work that we take forward to deliver person-centred public services. That work was also the subject of a lot of detail that was set out in autumn last year in “Covid Recovery Strategy: For a fairer future”, in which, by joint agreement with local government, we set out how we would move towards person-centred public services. Those plans were openly shared as part of that process.

Convener, the question comes down to the sustainability of the budget challenge, and I was very open with Parliament about the scale of the challenge that we face. I set out a number of factors that would have to be considered as part of implementing the budget. The budget contains significant fiscal pressure that public bodies will have to wrestle with. Public bodies will have to change the way that they operate in this financial year to ensure the sustainability of their public services. Those changes will become apparent as organisations take decisions in order to live within the resources that have been made available to them. However, I assure the committee that that work is actively under way and that it has been for a considerable time.

I had better not give the committee a number off the top of my head, so I had better write to it about that point. Do you have a particular level in mind that you would—

We will give you that figure.