Chamber and committees

Yes.

Social security is in Ms Somerville’s portfolio, and any operational issues around claimant rates or error rates fall within that portfolio. As I said, I will ask Ms Somerville to come back with answers to those specific points.

The point is absolutely valid. If we drew a big map of the whole public sector and laid it out, it would cover the table. We would need to draw a line somewhere. You are right. There are lines between social care and health that need to be addressed. There are lines between social care, social work and child protection, which takes us into the education space. However, we are hugely cognisant of the fact that there are bits in that delivery landscape that would not necessarily sit well in the health space—everybody recognises that. I will not go into detail now, because I do not want to pre-empt where we end up on that, but your point is absolutely valid. We need to be clear about what sits where, and the engagement with partners at the moment is part of that. If you have thoughts on that, I would love it if you sent them to us.

That is a fair point, and it is important for people to focus on what is important and the value of operating at a strategic level. To use the example of Glasgow, already, the city region deal and the economic partnerships are increasingly effective at delivery, and they have some real opportunities, so it is important to understand that.

I have made my comments on the work that is happening on council tax per se, but how that money would flow through the system is a valid part of the conversation about local government structures. You might keep the same council tax, but deciding how that money is moved around the system is also important, if we are looking at what happens at the regional level and the community level and how all that fits together, so there are discussions to be had on that.

We have a high-level ambition for our country, which we will deliver on.

I apologise, because I do not know the specific bridge that you are talking about. You are right that the DFM has responsibility for those budget allocations and for engagement with local government about how money is spent and whose responsibility it is. That conversation is best had with her.

There has been quite a bit of engagement with COSLA over a period of time about what the future of council tax should look like. Those discussions are predicated on the assumption or the principle that it is revenue neutral. The conversation about council tax reform should continue, but I see it as separate from what we are talking about. As it will be revenue neutral by definition, it will not provide more resources to local government; it will balance out who pays what, but it will not change the quantum of resources that are available.

The Government has been clear that council tax reform is a really important piece of work. We have also been clear that it is important to have consensus on it. We are working with a range of partners, and that work will continue, but I do not see it as necessarily part of the same conversation as the one that we are having on PSR.

I said that that was the scale across the whole public sector.

My team has resolved technical issues, but there is much more to it than that; the issues are legislative and cultural. We in the PSR team would lead and facilitate that work, but a lot of partners here are very exercised by the need to do that work, be it in the justice, education social security or health space—frankly, it is everywhere—because everybody recognises that it is a huge barrier that we need to lean in and work together to remove.

There will be duplication, and people who engage with those agencies will be talking to different agencies about things that are part of the same aspect of one issue. For example, the agencies will be looking at planning applications separately. They will have their own teams that consider whether to put in an objection and following that through. The agencies will have different perspectives on that, but that does not mean that there is no duplication in how they approach it.

Based on the resources that the agencies are applying to similar activities, and given that members of the public, businesses and others are having to engage with multiple agencies, we recognise that there will be scope to do that. Clearly—this applies across the piece—we need to get the governance right. That goes without saying, and it is about getting the right leadership in place to take forward the transformation or different elements of it. There is absolutely scope there. It is encouraging to hear you say that the process could work very well. We just need to make sure that we deliver it and that it does work very well.

I need to check, but I think, from memory, it has been 3 per cent for a while. I can come back and confirm that with you.

At fiscal level, the process is coherent and consistent. The Scottish spending review lays out the spending plans for the next five years, which are identified in different bits of the system, and it states what the trajectories look like. PSR is one of the tools that enables us to be able to deliver on those fiscal projections.