���˿���

Absolutely.

I am sorry, Deputy First Minister, but I am not trying to get the specifics, for the reasons that you outlined. I am trying to get parameters—for example, what is the minimum that it is likely to cost and what is the maximum? Surely the Government must be aware of that at this stage in the budget process.

That stability over such a long period has helped the Scottish Government’s policy direction whereas, south of the border, there has been incredible turmoil in energy policy, which has gone in all sorts of different directions: it has reversed and gone up, down and round about. There has been little consistency or long-term financial planning, whether we are talking about wind, solar or nuclear power. I take that on board.

My last question is about growing the tax base and productivity, which is a key area for us. You responded to the points that we made on that in our report by saying:

“Economic modelling estimates that delivery of key components of the strategy”—

the national strategy for economic transformation—

“could increase the size of the Scottish economy by at least £8 billion”,

which is almost 5 per cent,

“more than it otherwise would have been in 2032.”

You went on to mention a network of hubs to support high-growth tech businesses, the technology sector export plan, a hydrogen innovation scheme and the low-carbon manufacturing challenge fund. However, I wonder what other components will deliver that extra £8 billion.

Secondly, on ScotWind leasing, you referred to

“£28 billion of potential Scottish economic activity.”

Over what time period will that be delivered?

That ends stage 2 consideration of the bill. I thank the cabinet secretary.

We move into private session to consider our work programme.

Do you accept that there is an element of frustration in the committee that we will not get the financial memorandum until after stage 3 has passed? Obviously, members are keen to know how much of a commitment there is to the NCS. We know the size of the overall budget and that more than £1 billion extra is going into health and social care this year, but there is a focus on that specific aspect.

Last week in the chamber we heard wildly differing figures for how much it will cost over the next five years. That is partly because we do not have a real grip on the financial memorandum and exactly what it is likely to say. Any help in terms of parameters would be useful—minimums and maximums, for example.

Indeed.

Some capital projects have had to be deprioritised. I am keen to get information on which projects have been affected. I am aware of one in my constituency, for a start. Major rail projects seem to be an area in which there has been deprioritisation. However, the Scottish Government has met its commitment to expand its green investment portfolio, the target on which it has exceeded by around 15 per cent. The current figure is £3.4 billion, so there is also some good news, is there not?

One area of taxation where there is concern is council tax. A working group, which includes representatives from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, has been set up to consider proposals for meaningful changes to be introduced in the short term, such as increasing the rates of council tax on second and empty homes. The group will also consider approaches to long-term reform. When is that working group likely to report?

I will stay with council tax. Currently, the Scottish Government provides council tax relief and 450,000 households receive a council tax reduction, with recipients saving more than £750 a year on average. By my calculations, that is a Scottish Government investment of £337.5 million, give or take one or two million. If council tax increases substantially this year, do you anticipate a significant increase in the Scottish Government’s input to that scheme?

In some demand-led areas, there might be less demand than one anticipated, and it could be that taxes are a wee bit higher than was perhaps originally anticipated. What kind of projects have been delayed? What are we talking about here?

That is certainly helpful. It is a lower figure than what I and—I am sure—others have heard. Colleagues may wish to pursue that further.

I want to talk about the capital and fiscal framework. It has been a very difficult year in that the capital allocation from the UK Government has been reduced by £185 million—obviously, with inflation, that figure is higher.

When we asked questions with regard to the capital and fiscal framework, the response was that the Scottish Government has

“disproportionately constrained borrowing and reserve powers.”

Since 2016, inflation has been 39 per cent, but the Scottish Government is still working with the same kind of figures that it had all those years ago. Have you had any indication from the UK Government about when it would be willing to review the borrowing figures, for example? Inflation is 50 per cent higher than it was in 2016—perhaps even 60 per cent or 70 per cent higher. What on-going discussions have you had, because that is clearly having an impact on the Scottish Government’s ability to manage its finances?