Chamber and committees

We need to get rid of some of that perception, too.

Yes, I am talking about the local authority in this case.

Let us be brutally honest: cost is always going to be an issue, particularly in these tough times. However, what you do not want is additional cost as a result of some of the bureaucracy that you have described. You also do not want additional costs arising from procuring products that, at the end of the day, might not be the best ones.

Let me give you an example of where I was coming from when I talked about things being in the hands of solicitors and accountants rather than the end users. One of the most interesting things that I found was that the folks who were the most canny and who knew what they wanted were the school cooks. You could see in the system exactly what they were going for and what they were choosing to miss out; they knew what was best in following the guidance at that point. What you saw at points, though, was that the framework for procuring certain foodstuffs did not match the needs of the school cooks, who I think knew best, because others were involved in the procurement who should, quite frankly, have probably kept their noses out. Is that something that you and your members have found?

I think that we get the point. Basically, what you are saying is that some of the regulation does not make sense at the moment, because the product is not available and it is not what people want anyway.

That brings me to the next part of my question, which is about feedback to unsuccessful bidders. Has that improved? Is there room for further improvement? What do your members think about what they are told after an unsuccessful bid?

Stacey Dingwall, what feedback have you had on that from your members?

My final question fits in well with your answer about the green industrial strategy and our investment proposals from it. We know that, in certain sectors, there is huge potential. We have huge potential with hydrogen, particularly for export. We know that the German economy will require substantial amounts of hydrogen and we have the ability to produce it here in Scotland. Obviously, we then have to get it to Germany. Colleagues, including Mr Beattie, and I have had conversations with folk who are very excited about our potential and what can be done here. It would not be difficult to get private investment for a number of the projects if the seedcorn money were there initially. Will the cabinet secretary comment on that? Will we peruse and pick some of those projects to ensure that we get the private sector investment that is required in order to move some of those things forward?

To move forward to net zero and achieve a just transition we will have to invest in innovation. I have heard you and other members of the Government say that we will have to be much more focused with investment. We saw the budget decisions that, unfortunately, had to be taken on reducing enterprise agency money. Looking at everything in the round, however, with enterprise agency investment and just transition fund investment, how do we ensure that we allocate the resource to the right companies and entrepreneurs so that we make sure that we reach our goal of net zero and that just transition?

I will give you an example. The other week, I met Zephyrus Aerolabs, which is a very smart tech company in my constituency. Sometimes, it is difficult for those companies to get seed funding for that initial spurt of growth. How will we ensure that the enterprise agencies moneys and the other moneys that are allocated go to the right places to create that spark so that we get what we all want to see, which is that growing green economy?

Good morning, cabinet secretary. I will follow on from Maggie Chapman’s questions on employability funding. I recognise the severe pressures on the budget, but I think that there are things that can be done that do not require huge amounts of money.

Let me give you an example. We have a huge pool of talent in our neurodiverse population, yet so many folks with neurodiversity find it very difficult to get into employment. We have seen, over the years, the difference that the carer positive employer scheme has made in getting carers into employment. Would the cabinet secretary and his colleagues consider looking at whether a neurodiverse positive employer scheme could be established to get folk into the workforce—a workforce that would be better for having them?

Thanks for that positive response.

I will change tack a little. Obviously, as a north-east MSP, ensuring a just transition is a priority for me. I certainly welcome the Government’s commitment to the north-east just transition fund. I wish that the UK Government would act in a similar manner and match the moneys that the Scottish Government has allocated for that. However, one thing that is missing from the budget is the £80 million that was committed by the Scottish Government for the Scottish cluster for carbon capture and storage. I recognise that we are still waiting on track 2 decisions from the UK Government, but could you give us an indication of what will happen here, given that there is no allocation? If there is a move from the UK Government, will the Scottish Government find the money that has been promised to ensure that the Scottish cluster goes ahead?