���˿���

Dave Moxham, you are keen to come in, and I will bring you in in a second.

Parliament is waiting with bated breath for the medium-term financial strategy—the first one for a couple of years—that will come in the next few weeks. You say in your submission:

“In recent years the MTFS hasn’t supported a more strategic approach to financial planning. Much of the blame for this lies with the previous UK Government whose fiscal policy was characterised by short-term budget decisions, a lack of spending reviews, and general contempt for the Scottish Parliament.

However, it also reflects a lack of early Scottish Government engagement with trade unions on strategic decisions about public sector resourcing and public sector pay.

Unrealistic public sector pay policy, published without the agreement of unions, has led to a regular cycle of strike ballots”—

and so on.

You can, of course, say what you were wanting to say—that is up to you. However, can you talk us through whether such issues arise elsewhere in the UK and what you consider to be a realistic public sector pay policy?

We are in public session, so, for the record, are there any specific countries that you think have got the transparency spot on—or near enough—and that we should emulate?

Committees tend to make their contributions before we get to stage 1 of the budget bill process but after the draft budget has been published.

The issue that we have had with committees is that, because they cannot ask for additional spending outwith their portfolio area, as they should be deliberating on spend within their portfolio area, they often tend not to say, “Let’s take money from schools and give it to colleges,” or, “Take it from universities and give it to schools,” or whatever. Frankly, they tend to be loth to make such suggestions, which is an issue. The question is how realistic it is to get committees to engage when they feel less than enthusiastic about the process in the first place, because they feel that it is not their responsibility to make such suggestions.

One thing that we suggested in a previous evidence session is that, when new ���˿��� come in, they should have a training session on the workings of the budget and so on, because we tend to be far too siloed in our approach. You make an important point about the need for wider engagement. I think that ���˿��� often feel as though they have to be experts in—or rather, that they have to have a good knowledge of—a number of different fields—and that it is perhaps a bit too much for them to take on the workings of the budget if they have not been given a grounding at the start of the parliamentary session, when they are first elected. Therefore, we are looking at how we can increase the financial literacy—to put it crudely—of all parliamentarians.

Thanks for that. Andy Witty, you are keen to come in and talk about the fiscal sustainability delivery plan. You say that it would add more value if it included a

“direction on the fundamental change to how public money is spent, cutting across the different portfolio boundaries”

and aligned

“economic growth spending to gaps in skill needs.”

Could you comment further on that?

You have mentioned international best practice a couple of times. Which countries have best practice? Do they have devolved Parliaments? One of the issues that we have in Scotland is that are we quite dependent on decisions that are made elsewhere in terms of timings and so on. What areas of best practice would you like to highlight by way of comparison with Scotland?

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the 15th meeting in 2025 of the Finance and Public Administration Committee. We have received apologies from Ross Greer.

The first item on our agenda is a round-table discussion on the Scottish budget process in practice. I welcome to the meeting Andy Witty, director of strategic policy and corporate governance at Colleges Scotland; John Wood, director of membership and resources at the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities; Dr Alison Hosie, research officer at the Scottish Human Rights Commission; Dave Moxham, deputy general secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress; and Carmen Martinez, policy and engagement lead at the Scottish Women’s Budget Group. I thank you all for your excellent written submissions.

I intend to allow around 90 minutes for this session. I would like the discussion to involve us all, so, if witnesses or members would like to be brought into the discussion at any stage, please indicate that to the clerk so that I can then call you.

As you will know, there were 11 questions—some were answered by all of you in your submissions and some were not. I have written down the interesting points from those 11 questions and—lo and behold—at least two of them apply to each of the five of you. I will pick on someone to kick us off. We are not going to stick to a script—this is just to ensure that all areas are covered this morning.

My first question is for John Wood from COSLA. The COSLA submission states:

“The 2025/26 budget process saw improved engagement between the Scottish Government and COSLA. There was earlier and deeper engagement between the COSLA Resources Spokesperson and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government and increased transparency”.

How could things be improved even further?

Thank you very much.

I thank all our witnesses this morning. Our final evidence session on this matter will be with the Scottish Government in the next couple of weeks.

That concludes the public part of our meeting today. We will now move into private session for the next item on our agenda, which is consideration of our work programme.

Is there a wider demand for that, frankly? How many people in Scotland do you think would be interested in that kind of stuff? A lot of people are interested in having good public services, for example, but not a council tax rate that is too high. Beyond that, they want to ensure that the streets are lit well and safe, that the schools are good and so on, as we all know, but do they want to get into the granularity of budgetary decisions? I suppose that is why they elect people to do that. They can then judge them on their performance.

I would be surprised if more than 1 per cent of Scotland’s population would be interested in that. I have been an elected member since 1992, in local government and the Scottish Parliament, and I have not seen a demand from the wider public for that kind of granularity of budgetary information. Stakeholders and organisations certainly want it, but the general populace do not. That is unfortunate, and the media certainly does not report much of what we do in these kinds of deliberations.

Those are independent countries—they are not sub-state legislatures like us, so they are not in the same position. Much of the budget process that we have to work under is decided elsewhere. We have a kind of ball and chain round our ankles in some areas. That is why I am thinking of Bavaria or California, for example, which are more equivalent to Scotland, rather than New Zealand, Argentina or Germany.

Okay. I open up the session to colleagues around the table.