Chamber and committees

The witnesses have highlighted very well the administrative burden of bidding for public sector contracts, especially for SMEs and newer companies. Have initiatives such as the quick quote system had any impact on reducing red tape?

Yes—I would like to ask one more question if I could, thank you.

First, I have to question whether the nutritional value of food in schools has been improved under the rules and regulations.

Earlier, Colin, you alluded to the difference between procuring an information technology system, which might involve one supplier supplying a service worth tens of millions of pounds, and procuring from your members who are individual food producers, who must go through the processing of the food—sending it away or whatever. There has been lots of legislation on procurement since 2014, but I am not convinced that it has improved anything. Does the current framework allow for the difference between the big IT procurement stuff and having multiple suppliers for other things? Going back to food procurement specifically, it is just easier, from a local authority perspective, to have a single point, rather than having to procure lots of different local produce. That can be done—we have seen it being done in local authorities—but does the current framework perhaps struggle with it?

Good morning, minister. Who can argue with legislation that is aimed at “reducing harm for consumers”? I do not think that anybody would argue with that.

Nevertheless, my issue with the consumer duty relates to consideration of the benefit to consumers of “reducing harm”. How would you define that in relation to a public authority? For example, I am aware of a couple of mental health organisations in the third sector that are having to close their doors because local councils have withdrawn funding. That will definitely not reduce harm. Community programmes in sport, music and art are closing—all those things are being curtailed. That is not reducing harm. Local public procurement of food for schools and hospitals is being squeezed. That is not reducing harm.

I therefore have two concerns. First, how do you define “reducing harm”? Secondly, how would you enforce that aspect of the duty. You could not go to a council and say, “You can’t shut that service just because of budget constraints, because that will cause harm.” How will you define what that means?

Colin Smith, let us talk about food procurement. We have had these conversations previously. I did some work on the issue when I first came into the Parliament. God—it was nearly eight years ago now. We looked at where food was procured from in all 32 authorities, and it was staggering to see where everything came from. You mentioned ice cream coming from Belgium. We found that there were root vegetables and potatoes coming from Ireland. The one that the press jumped on was chicken coming from Thailand, for some obscure reason.

It was not a very good picture back then, even though some local authorities, such as East Ayrshire Council, were procuring 75 per cent of their food locally. Is the picture any better now? I do not see much improvement, but, from your perspective, has it improved?

Outcomes are all that matter. I will leave it there.

The cabinet secretary misses the fact that decisions that are made at Scotland level have consequences. What I am trying to get at here is that, if you invest less in business, you will have less money to invest in public services; in fact, if you invest less in those areas, you will require more investment in public services. You are talking about a long-term strategy, and you have talked very well today about Government targets. However, by cutting those particular agencies, you are giving yourself less opportunity to create the wealth that will generate enough tax take to put into public services. Again, where is the long-term strategy in the budget?

I think that the councils would disagree with your analysis. The decisions that the Scottish Government has made continue to make Scotland the unhealthiest nation in Europe. We also continue to see huge reductions in our programme for international student assessment scores. That is the reality. When will the budget address those elements, which are a huge drain on our economy?

The reality on the ground is that, because of decisions that the Scottish Government has made, the further education sector is screaming for more investment. The university sector now has to cut 1,200 places for Scottish students. Coming on the back of the Withers review, as well, how on earth does that help the Scottish economy? It is surely a false economy. If we are not creating equal opportunities for our Scottish students, how on earth will we continue to support a wellbeing economy?

Thank you. I will go down a similar route on the third sector. The choices that the Government is making and the squeeze on council budgets are giving our councils almost impossible decisions to make. For example, in my area I have been speaking to two third sector mental health organisations that are no longer funded and will therefore have to shut down. The people whom they support will still have to get treatment, which means that they will join an NHS queue.

That funding might have come out of the budget in the council’s ledger, but it will still come out of the Scottish Government’s budget in another portfolio. Do you acknowledge that those kinds of cuts are a false economy? I say to you again that it is short-term gain for long-term pain, and there is no real cross-portfolio working to tackle such issues.

Good morning, cabinet secretary. You will be aware of my interest in longer-term strategies and the prevention agenda. Following on from some of the earlier questions, I want to dig a little bit into the cost to enterprise agencies and the SNIB and the fact that there is no allocation to the flexible workforce development fund. That will, inevitably, lead to less investment and less support to establish and grow companies, which, in the long term, will lead to a reduced tax take and less money in future budgets. Where is the long-term economic strategy in the current budget?