I will move to the main point that I want to ask about. What direction do you think that you can take the Scottish Fiscal Commission in? There is quite a difference between you and, indeed, Ms Riccomini, and the two outgoing professors, who are very much from an academic background. Your background is considerably different. Your CV is, of course, excellent; you were very much involved in the establishment of Revenue Scotland, which is, I would think, a really significant thing on anyone’s career path, and you also have lots of experience in the Scottish Government, where you were a director. What do you think that your imprint will be on the Scottish Fiscal Commission?

I have one last question, because I know that colleagues are keen to come in, and it is on the issue of communication, which I have already touched on this morning. The OECD has said that relative to, for example, its Dutch equivalent and one or two others, the Scottish Fiscal Commission, although doing an excellent job at all levels, could do more to broaden its impact on the Scottish media and the wider public. I know that that is pushing a lot uphill, because I am not convinced that the majority of people in Scotland are necessarily interested in the fine points of the commission’s deliberations, but what can you do to enable the Scottish Fiscal Commission to have a bigger impact with stakeholders as well as with the wider public in Scotland?

Thank you very much. That has concluded questions from the committee. Are there any points you wish to make? Is there anything that you feel we should know that we do not already?

Thank you very much for that—and for your attendance today, which we really appreciate.

We will have a short break to allow for a changeover of witnesses.

I understand that the devolved Administrations were not advised of the change of date, let alone consulted. You have excellent relationships with other devolved Administrations, such as the Welsh Government. What advantages might that provide to the Scottish Fiscal Commission in the work that you will do if you are appointed?

Item 2 is to take evidence from two panels of witnesses on responding to long-term fiscal pressures, as part of our pre-budget scrutiny 2026-27. We are joined by Richard Robinson, senior manager, Audit Scotland; and João Sousa, deputy director and senior knowledge exchange fellow at the Fraser of Allander Institute. I welcome you both. We have your submissions, so we will move straight to questions.

I will begin by asking Mr Sousa about one of the things that you said in your submission. It is quite interesting, and it relates to a point that I put to the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government last week. You said that, under the medium-term financial strategy,

“No area of spending is assumed to fall in real terms—all areas are presumed to grow in line with inflation except those areas which are likely to grow more than that”,

such as the national health service, social security, pay and local government. Basically, you are saying that the MTFS assumes that there is no prioritisation, because everything is prioritised. Let me have your further thoughts on that.

Mr Sousa, you said that the statement that

“the devolved workforce will fall by 0.5% a year”

and

“this will have no effect on frontline services ... seems implausible in the absence of some pretty heroic improvements in productivity”.

Half a per cent a year doesnae seem that heroic, really. I know that we are talking about not just 0.5 per cent but 0.5 per cent over and above what productivity would be anyway. Will you talk us through how we can deliver that 0.5 per cent?

Without referring directly to them, you have alluded to compulsory redundancies, which I have raised many times in the committee. You went on to say:

“There is no reason to suspect that the people retiring or leaving the Scottish public sector will be doing so in the roles that need eliminated—a real plan, looking at the hard choices of what needs and does not need to be done, and how the skills for that match up with the ones available in the redeployment pool is what is necessary, and it seems to be missing from the FSDP.”

Mr Sousa, in respect of people who are economically inactive, you have talked about the need for a person-centred approach and for Scotland to emphasise skills in order to broaden the tax base. You have also talked about how, for example, there are real problems with capital formation, especially in net terms. Can you talk to us a wee bit more about that?

You go on to say:

“UK capital spending remains lower, barely above replacement level, and so does Scotland’s. Every year we invest less than peer countries, the gap in capital stock grows, which then results in the large gap in productivity we see today.”

Yes. Basically, there is a concern that some of the figures that we may be using are considerably out of date. You also talk about how the whole capital spending is forecast to create a gap of about £2.1 billion in capital investment, highlighting the importance of the prioritisation of capital spending towards the Scottish Government’s priorities in the Scottish spending review 2025.

A lot of little projects might be a good idea then, it seems. Just one last thing from me and it is on transparency. I will stick with you, Mr Sousa. You have said:

“One of our main gripes with these documents is the lack of detail and access provided to external parties such as us to scrutinise the underlying assumptions.”