���˿���

My last wee question is whether there is any update on the status of air passenger duty. There has been quite a lot of talk in recent weeks about private jets and so on.

You have made that last point very clearly and, indeed, have made it previously.

Just to finish off this conversation, I have a point about the term “inclusive”. I notice that the equality impact assessment called for consideration of a more gendered national performance framework. The official line from the Scottish Government is that it proposes to mainstream gender more effectively, but it is not yet

“possible to take an intersectional approach”.

I would like your comments on that because, for me, that feeds into some of my concerns with regard to the term “inclusive economic growth”. After all, we know that there is a continuing issue over whether women are getting a top seat at every level of the economic table. I would therefore like to hear your reflections on the EIA and where we are with addressing some of these issues.

Thank you for your final point—I hear you strongly.

I have a final wee question, and I will let Helen Martin come in as well. To what extent is all the data that is collected routinely disaggregated by sex? Although I fully accept your final comment, do you and all the agencies see that data? Perhaps you could answer that and then Helen Martin can add any final considerations.

I know that Helen might want to come in, but I will follow up on the discontinued survey that you mentioned. How much appetite for that data do you anticipate from other agencies—including the UK Government—that are responsible for undertaking services and collecting data? I am talking about some of the data that you highlight is necessary for us to measure whether we are on target to be a fair work nation and exploring the appetite for that data from the UK Government and other agencies, such as the ONS, which you mentioned.

Good morning. Thank you for attending. Underpinning a lot of the discussion thus far is the data and what it means.

The Scottish Government has stated that the research that you commissioned helped to inform its “Fair Work Action Plan: the Scottish Government’s Evidence Plan on Fair Work”. To what extent does that evidence plan provide an effective framework for measuring whether Scotland is on track to be a fair work nation? If it does that, how does it do so in terms of data items and measures? If it does not, where are the gaps?

Thank you.

I imagine that the scale of that fiscal risk is such that the Government is unlikely to take it, given the lack of long-term projections over funding.

At the start of the meeting, the convener made a throwaway comment when she alluded to, I think, a relatively modest further commitment to Grangemouth in the light of the recent announcement. There are two sets of £10 million on the table, because the £80 million is for the Falkirk growth deal—for the wider district. What are your thoughts about that £20 million fiscal contribution from both Governments, in the light of the predicted possible closure of the refinery? Is that enough money?

My last wee comment is that, as you know, I was very complimentary about the commission’s “Fiscal Sustainability Report”, because I felt that discussions thus far—without factoring in the wider fiscal considerations—were doomed to failure because of a significant lack of funding. Obviously, there is public and private capital and so on. Do you think that I am right about that? As a result of your report, is there more understanding that how we get there cannot be totally fleshed out until we understand some of the opportunities and risks around the funding? Am I right?

Good morning. I apologise again for not only not attending in person but my connection freezing when it did. If any of my questions have been covered, please just say so.

Professor Roy, I want to finish off the item on the existing fiscal framework. Earlier, you alluded to the fact that there is an anticipated 20 per cent cut in the Scottish Government’s capital budget over the next five years. You also made the worthy point that, fundamentally, the fiscal framework is not set up to deal with the kind of challenge that we face. Have you managed to—or, indeed, been invited to—have any discussions with the UK Government so that it can understand that? You have clearly had discussions with the Scottish Government. If so, do you think that it is understood that the fiscal framework will simply not be fit for purpose when we have funding issues of such nature and scale?

I imagine that the scale of that fiscal risk is such that the Government is unlikely to take it, given the lack of long-term projections over funding.

At the start of the meeting, the convener made a throwaway comment when she alluded to, I think, a relatively modest further commitment to Grangemouth in the light of the recent announcement. There are two sets of £10 million on the table, because the £80 million is for the Falkirk growth deal—for the wider district. What are your thoughts about that £20 million fiscal contribution from both Governments, in the light of the predicted possible closure of the refinery? Is that enough money?