Chamber and committees

I thank everybody for their contributions so far and for what they have given us in advance, too. The submissions have been really helpful, as always.

First of all, I have a question about the issue of participation, which we have just discussed. Given some of the barriers that we have heard about, how would you characterise your involvement in the budget and the resource spending review? Could Susan McKellar, Allan Faulds, Oonagh Brown and Clare Gallagher answer that briefly?

I know that that is a lot of answerers, but you could be really brief. I am just trying to get a sense of how engaged you guys have been in the budget process or how open it has been to you.

That was really helpful. I asked the question, because we heard earlier on about the importance of transparency. Obviously, we have already discussed that issue, but I just wanted to get a feel for where we are at so that the committee can understand the scale of the challenge.

My next question is in the same vein and is about minimum core rights and progressive realisation and what we need to measure in that respect. I know that those are big questions, and we have heard a lot about them this morning. I note that Audit Scotland’s submission highlights a gap between the rights that the Government encourages—or the rights that it says that people have or that it wants people to have—and the reality and that Susan McKellar’s submission talks about women being overlooked. Moreover, evidence from others including the Scottish Commission for People with Learning Disabilities—and, indeed, the letter to the British Institute of Human Rights in 2016—have highlighted some of the problems that we have.

We can look at the budget line for, say, social care and say that there might be more money going into that or into social security. However, we heard this morning from people with learning disabilities who are not even able to choose whom they live with. You can argue that the budget going up represents progressive realisation, but the lived reality does not even represent much of a minimum core, I would say. What do we need to measure and what framework can we use to help us get to a point where we can develop a minimum core and then ask sensible questions about the budget?

I throw that question open to anyone who feels that they want to give it a go.

I know—I am sorry.

That is sensible.

I am slightly concerned about some of the concerns that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has raised about data gaps—in particular, the difference between the data that the commission has been able to collect in Scotland from Social Security Scotland and the data that was previously given through the Department for Work and Pensions. Can you comment on that? In your report, you say that it is not clear what impact the Government expects from benefits, and that, although it can report on qualitative measures, there are not so many quantitative measures of the impact. Why is that important and what do you expect to see?

All my questions in this area have now been answered, so I am okay.

The other questions that I had have already been answered.

I have a specific question. My signal quality has not been 100 per cent, so you should feel free to say that the question has already been answered. Do you have any concerns about an impact on Social Security Scotland’s workforce planning and on the programme on the back of the Deputy First Minister’s announcement on cuts in that area?

Good morning. Thank you for answering the questions so far and for the really helpful briefing that you sent in advance of the meeting.

I want to talk a little about transparency. In your report, you said that you would expect to see more detail on the updated business case. What more detail would you look to see? How frequently would you expect costings to be published?

Thank you, both, for your answers. Do you think that the data, and therefore the forecasts, are reliable?