Chamber and committees

I want to come back to what Carmen and Allan said. I think that a lot of us are in agreement that a care outcome is a good thing to add, but is there a danger of having too many outcomes? Are we aiming at too many things? Should we drop something else?

Thanks. That is helpful.

My next question, which is about priorities, is for Councillor Hagmann, but other witnesses might want to come in, too. Clearly, we all have a fixed amount of money; the question is how we spend it. When I sat on the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, submissions to us said that, in this year’s budget, there was an increase of something like £900 million for social security, which includes the Scottish child payment and, I think, a slightly more generous adult disability payment. Has that been a good priority for the use of money? Is it a good one going forward, or could we use the money in a better way?

Since you have brought up the Scottish child payment again, I ask our other witnesses to respond to that point from a technical point of view. Is that payment, or any other benefit, taking any pressure off local authority finances, because families are a little bit better off and so do not have to come to you with their needs? Is it too early to say that, Mr Robertson?

In relation to capital spending, I think that housing, which we have already mentioned, should be a priority. Is the Government spending too much on roads—in particular, on the A9?

My question is exactly on that point. We have been talking about the national performance framework for a long time, but it frustrates me that many of us do not stand up and mention it in the chamber very much.

I suppose that these questions are specifically for Allan Faulds. Do you have any suggestions to offer? First of all, does the framework matter? If it lies underneath everything, do we need to talk about it? Secondly, if we do need to talk about it, how can we raise its profile more?

Yes, absolutely—that is the area that I am about to move on to. I will be interested in Education Scotland’s view on this—not just that of the SQA or qualifications Scotland. The bill’s proposals include the charters that you just mentioned, the interest committees and the strategic advisory council, which are all either new or revised bodies. I think that there is already an advisory council—

Yes. The committee as a whole accepts that there is a lot going on. Therefore, the question is what difference the bill will make and what more, or what different things, will happen.

I will ask you about one other point.

Is that part of the problem at the moment—that people are engaged a bit but they just do not feel it?

Does Ms McManus want to come in?

Do the other two witnesses want to come in on the point about interest committees?