Chamber and committees

I am sorry to interrupt, Mr Halcro Johnston. You have made your point well, and the minister has given a response. I do not think that you will get a different response from an additional question. If there is another area that you would like to ask about, you can ask another question. If not, we will move on.

Thank you; I appreciate that.

Our next item of business is an evidence session on the Scottish Government’s response to our report on our inquiry into Scotland’s supply chain. In that inquiry, we looked at the short-term and medium-term structural challenges that Scotland’s supply chain faces, and how the challenges and shifts in supply chains are impacting on Scotland’s economy. The committee published its report on 20 April, and the Scottish Government responded on 4 July. The purpose of today’s evidence session is to consider that response and to discuss in more detail the issues that were raised with the Minister for Business, Trade, Tourism and Enterprise.

I welcome to the committee the minister, Ivan McKee MSP, who is joined by witnesses from the Scottish Government. Andy Park is head of economics in the Transport Scotland strategy and analysis division; Graeme Cook is deputy director in procurement services; Carron Flockhart is unit head in skills planning and sector engagement; and Dermot Rhatigan is deputy director for manufacturing and industries.

As always, I ask members and witnesses to keep their questions and answers as concise as possible.

I invite the minister to make an opening statement.

Thank you very much, minister.

You recognise the breadth of the report, and members will look to cover many issues. We appreciate that you are not responsible for all those issues, but we welcome the fact that you have brought support with you. I hope that we can have a broad discussion.

The driver for the report was the impact of Brexit and the pandemic on supply chains. More recently, there has been the war in Ukraine, which is putting pressures on them. From the evidence that we heard, the committee felt that there needed to be more resilience in the Scottish system and concentration on shorter supply chains and more local supply. However, the Government’s response did not really take that broader or longer-term view. We recognise that lots of work is happening in different areas, but we did not really get the impression that there was a shift or that you were thinking about how to respond to not just the existing pressures but the likely future pressures, given the impact of climate change and other global issues. Is there a longer-term strategy or focus to make Scotland more resilient?

However, the project plans do not include specific milestones or targets for economic inactivity. The reduction by 20,000 that you mention is welcome, but do we know why that happened? Has it been because of proactive engagement by the Government, or has it happened because the labour market is tight? The evidence that we have heard during our inquiry and in relation to the budget suggests that there are concerns about the cut that has come in with regard to employability services. The businesses that we heard from last week told us that they need help to bring a group of people into the workforce, and that there are still challenges around part of the labour market.

I am sorry; I meant that there are challenges around employing people are economically inactive and need additional support to come into the workplace.

In its recommendations, the committee suggested that the supply chain development programme could be expanded. You have spoken about future supply chains in growth areas such as renewables and life sciences. We also had concerns about existing supply chains that people rely on every day, such as those involving food products. Like many other western nations, we depend on imports to a large extent—we saw disruption in that regard during the pandemic. Would the supply chain development programme include that kind of issue? Is there a drive in Government to consider whether a reliance on imports is the right balance, or is that issue not a priority? Should we change that?

Is the development programme a cross-departmental one?

I call Colin Beattie, to be followed by Michelle Thomson.

I appreciate that, and I appreciate your taking the opportunity to raise it at the committee. However, the minister has indicated that he will ask the transport minister to give us a response on the specifics, and he is not placed this morning to give you the commitment that you are looking for.

I do not think that we will get any further on that point. If there is another issue that you wish to raise, I can give you time to do that; if not, I will move on.