Tough choices ahead but we will not let public services crumble, says Robison
The Scottish Finance Secretary was speaking amid a rising deficit and the announcement that the winter heating payment will be means-tested.
The Scottish Government will make sure public services do not “crumble away”, the Finance Secretary has said, but she warned of “tough decisions” ahead.
Shona Robison was speaking as the Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (Gers) figures showed a net fiscal deficit of £22.68 billion in 2023-24, compared to just over £18 billion the previous year.
Published on Wednesday, the figures showed the deficit as a proportion of GDP increased from 8.4% to 10.4%.
Elsewhere, the Government confirmed its version of the winter heating payment will now be means-tested following the same decision by the UK Government, along with reports of a letter sent by Ms Robison to Cabinet colleagues calling for a freeze on all unnecessary spending.
Asked if the dire financial warnings could wreck public services, Ms Robison said: “We’ll make sure they don’t crumble away and our priority is clear in making sure that we sustain public services, that we continue to tackle poverty and that we continue to invest in net zero and transforming our economy – those are our key priorities.
“But we will have to decide what we de-prioritise, and that work is ongoing.”
Ms Robison also raised the possibility of a reduction in the public sector workforce.
“What I have said in the letter saying we are putting in strict controls is that for the foreseeable future, only recruitment in those absolutely critical areas like, for example, blue light services, can move forward,” she said.
“There is absolutely going to be restraint on recruitment.”
The Scottish Government will work with the public sector, she said, to pinpoint what “voluntary options” are available in light of the policy of not allowing compulsory redundancies.
The Gers figures also showed total revenue increased in Scotland from £86.9 billion to £88.5 billion.
Government expenditure per person in Scotland is £2,417 higher than the rest of the UK, with £20,418 spent on average for every single person north of the border.
Ms Robison said the deficit is “not a reflection on the finances or policies of the Scottish Government – it is a reflection of UK Government choices”.
She added: “As an independent nation, we would have the powers to make different choices.
“As it is, we are using all the powers we do have to deliver our priorities of growing the economy, investing in net zero, eradicating child poverty and delivering strong public services.”
Ms Robison – who visited Edinburgh Napier University to mark the publication of the Gers figures – hailed the increase in revenue, which she said was due in part to “our progressive approach to tax and the revenue from renewable energy”.
But the Scotland Office pointed to the level of spending per head north of the border.
“These figures underline the collective economic strength of the United Kingdom,” said minister Kirsty McNeill.
“By pooling and sharing resources across the UK, Scots benefit by £2,417 more per head in public spending than the UK average.
“That means more money for schools and hospitals, if the Scottish Parliament chooses to invest in those areas.
“Ensuring economic stability and then delivering economic growth are two of the driving missions of the UK Government.
“We have reset relationships with partners across the UK and want to work closely with the Scottish Government to produce better results for people in Scotland.”
The Scottish Conservatives also touted the so-called “union dividend”, with finance spokeswoman Liz Smith saying: “Once again, their own Government’s stats underline the huge – and growing – union dividend that Scotland derives from being part of a strong United Kingdom.
“Every single person in the country is £2,400 better off because we are part of the UK.”
But Scottish Labour finance spokesman Michael Marra said that despite the higher public spending per head in Scotland, “Scots will be right to question why they aren’t seeing better public services as a result of this extra public spending”.