³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Good morning. I have a point of clarification that follows on from Michael Marra’s question. You made it clear that the Scottish Government has not provided you with a public sector pay policy. Have you expressed concern to the Scottish Government about that? If so, when was that?

Which is obviously increasing as a percentage share of the total population.

What I am driving at is the policies that the Scottish Government needs to enact to try to address the big black hole in public finances. Some of that can be done through public sector reform, which you have set out, and some can be done with tax-and-spend policies. However, addressing economic inactivity in the Scottish population is a crucial element of your longer-term forecasts; indeed, it is a major issue. Do you have any indication from your analysis as to the policies that might be most effective in bringing those people back into work?

The nuancing of that will be very important with regard to the policies that might help us in the future. The statistics for the longer term that you have given us are pretty grim, and we need to do all that we can to try to address the issue.

I want to raise one point of clarification. Your report contains a very short piece about the UK Government’s raising of VAT on independent schools. Am I correct in thinking that, if that amount of money were to be positive, it would be spent in England and Wales and that, as a result, there would be Barnett consequentials for Scotland?

Thank you—that was helpful.

I want to turn to what we can try to do about the challenges in the Scottish Government’s finances. In the summary of your budget report, you set out some of the demographic trends, which I have to say are some of the most concerning aspects for the longer run, particularly the issues around economic inactivity in the labour force. Given Claire Murdoch’s point that there is some incompleteness in the labour market survey, does your data give you a good understanding of the behavioural changes in the group of people who are able but are unwilling to work?

Yes, it is obviously putting considerable pressure on the social security budget. What about people who are economically inactive and do not have disabilities or health issues? Do you have any idea of the policies that will make a difference to getting them back into the labour market? Obviously that has a huge implication for increasing productivity and, in the long run, economic growth.

That is a very fair point. I put it on the record that you have been a wonderful champion for disability groups in all their differences.

To finish, I will pick up on the point that the convener raised—that there is potential for considerable overlap in the commissioners that we currently have. Some disabled people are children, and some older disabled people are patients. How would you address the potential for such overlaps, which could be financially as well as administratively difficult?

May I offer a view in relation to the patient safety commissioner? In my opinion, the demand for that commissioner came about because of failings in health boards. I speak with considerable experience of the Eljamel situation; people affected by that are very clear that they want a patient safety commissioner. That has come about because of failures in a particular health board. To my mind, a commissioner is not necessarily going to solve that problem. You have to go to the root of the problem, which is about the way in which the health board was being run. To reflect on that from the angle of the need for a disability commissioner, are there problems that we could solve about the delivery of public services that do not really need a commissioner but could be addressed through other aspects of the delivery of public services?

Good morning, Mr Balfour. In looking at the whole question of commissioners, we have looked at those who have a regulatory role, those who are complaints commissioners, those whose role is investigatory and those who are advocacy commissioners. Commissioners have a broad range of roles.

One of the interesting things that the committee is facing is that the increasing demand for commissioners—as in your proposal—relates much more to the advocacy role. That has led us and some witnesses to question whether the demand for advocacy is increasing because the existing public services and facilities that are available to support people are not doing their job adequately. I ask you to reflect on whether that is the case for a proposed disability commissioner—namely, that public services are not looking after disabled people very well. If the answer is that they are not looking after them very well, is that related to cost or to a lack of understanding of the role that they should have—or perhaps both?

That is a valid point, and constituents in some of my areas in Mid Scotland and Fife have made exactly that point. However, do you think that that difficult scenario—you are quite right to say that, in some cases, that approach means that those in disability groups are housebound for that period—comes about because of a local authority’s failure to address the problem adequately and because of certain cutbacks? Earlier, you mentioned Covid, which, as we all know, has been a particularly difficult period for local authorities with regard to their financial arrangements. The point is whether we can solve those genuine issues by looking at the services that are provided by local authorities and, in some cases, by the Scottish Government, rather than by having a commissioner. That is the key question.

I understand the issue about consistency, which is important. The Law Society’s concern is about the safeguards for taxpayers. We will come later not just to my further amendment but to John Mason’s, which is about consistency with other devolved powers. However, it is on the point under discussion that the Law Society seeks that safeguard. If the minister can provide the assurance that his amendment will provide that transparency and safeguard, I am willing to remove amendment 30.