Chamber and committees

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the fourth meeting in 2026 of the Public Service Reform Committee.

Agenda item 1 is a decision on taking business in private. Does the committee agree to take item 3 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you, cabinet secretary. I also thank you for the detailed 45-page public service reform strategy update document that we received in the past few days. It is safe to say that it read like a corporate governance framework to monitor reform in the workstreams, rather than a document that this committee, public services themselves or the wider public would use to find out what any of it means in practice. I hope that you will take on board that important point. It is not the job of this committee to scrutinise the details of that document—doing so would involve us in doublespeak for the next five years. What we want to look at is public service reform on the ground and what that means in practice.

In that light, I note that a 0.5 per cent workforce reduction is estimated each year from this year for the next three years. How do we arrive at 0.5 per cent?

That is very welcome.

I ask, therefore, that you have that conversation not only with Ms Constance but with all the other cabinet secretaries who have reform agendas in their remit, so that the committee does not necessarily go to each individual cabinet secretary and minister to ask for updates, but has a single point of contact—you, cabinet secretary—who stresses the importance of our seeing what the modelling looks like and what the initial iterations are.

I use the word “iterations” because things will change as you consult trade unions, bodies and everyone else, but we want to be clear about the direction of travel and the progress that is being made, and data is incredibly important in relation to that.

What is actually more important than any of the numbers that I have been trying to get from you is how we measure outcomes and progress.

A lot is made of the national performance framework, which I am very supportive of. I will stick with the NHS for the time being and note that the NPF does not monitor things such as waiting times, the number of operations that take place, what is happening with regard to social care, how quickly care packages are put in place or how many people can live independently in the community rather than presenting to the acute sector and staying there for a prolonged period of time. How can and how will we measure outcomes? Sticking with the NHS and social care, outcomes can involve things such as someone receiving more timely care, treatment and support so that they have a better quality experience, or someone not having to go to a service because of the use of preventative spend. Of course, it can also involve cash savings that can be reinvested elsewhere. This committee will want to track all of that in great detail over the next five years. How do we get that data in a meaningful and consistent fashion from you and the Government more generally?

Thanks for that. However, I still have concerns, based on my previous understanding of the NPF.

When public bodies design and develop policies, they must ensure that they “pay due regard to”—I think that that is the term that is used in legislation—their obligations and duties under the NPF. My understanding is that they do not have a statutory duty to comply with it, so things are monitored more generally. However, with regard to public service reform, this committee will want to consider data on the ground, rather than more general outcomes from the NPF. Can I get a reassurance that there will be a dashboard of indicators that will be meaningful to members of the public and this committee when we seek to monitor the situation?

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the third meeting in 2026 of the Public Service Reform Committee. I hope that you have all had a good and positive recess, and I welcome everyone back.

Our first item of business is a decision on taking business in private. Do members agree to take items 2, 3 and 5 in private?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you, everyone. That concludes agenda item 1. We will return to public session for agenda item 4, but for the moment, we will move into private.

10:15

Meeting suspended.

11:30

On resuming—

There is so much to consider with public service reform. The heft and range of Tuesday’s announcements regarding public service reform were substantial, and we will come on to all of that in a moment. However, first, are there any concrete examples of where public service reform has been done successfully, even on a small scale, since the police and fire service reform that Mr Boyle spoke about? Can you give us some confidence that the Government has delivered successful public service reform in the past 10 or so years?

That is helpful. It is an example of positive reform, with some significant caveats.

I want to give a running order of bids that I have for supplementaries. This is our first full evidence session, and we are just feeling our way as a new committee, but I am conscious of the time. The Auditor General has to leave around half past 12, and I am keen for him to be here for as many of the questions as possible.

We have had bids for supplementaries from Alex Kerr, Michelle Campbell and Lorna Slater in that order, and Max Bannerman is supposed to be next. I am in members’ hands. Please be brief. This is the first evidence session, so I am not going to squeeze anyone out—that is not my intention—but I am mindful of the time.