The decisions this government will be the difference between a Scotland that flourishes and one that buckles

Ivan McKee’s appearance at Bute House in late May, as John Swinney assembled his new top team, came as no surprise.

The former public finance minister – whose main responsibility it had been to drive public service reform over the preceding two years – had been champing at the bit to be handed more power to deliver on his vision for a changed and renewed state.

What did take many people aback was Jenny Gilruth both being made Swinney’s number two and handed the finance portfolio. For the deputy first minister post, many politics-watchers had assumed the FM would give that to either Stephen Flynn or Mairi McAllan – essentially anointing his successor in the process.

But beyond the internal politics of the SNP leadership, it seemed more than a little strange that McKee was made Cabinet Secretary for Public Service Reform, an entirely separate portfolio from that of the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, when the chance of success in one is so integral to success in the other.

We now need tangible action and at pace. Setting out that goals will be achieved by the end of this parliament will not be enough

Last week, auditor general Stephen Boyle wrote a blog ahead of parliament returning from summer recess. In the usual fashion of the public spending watchdog, the article was even handed.

He praised what ought to be praised – the elevation of PSR to cabinet, the creation of a specific directorate, the new PSR committee at Holyrood – but also set out his complaints in unequivocal terms.

“I said the action the Scottish Government has taken so far is essential. But the hardest work remains,” he wrote. “Hard decisions about the shape, size and, especially, the operation of the public sector have not yet been taken… We now need tangible action and at pace.

“Setting out that goals will be achieved by the end of this parliament will not be enough. Ministers need to explain to the public and the Scottish Parliament what stepping stones will be taken so that they get there. And the devil will be in the detail of those delivery plans.”

MSPs must heed the auditor general’s words.

It had been 15 years since the Christie Commission challenged the government to make the much-needed changes to public services in the face of budget constraints, a changing population, and unacceptable levels of inequality. But since then, very little has changed.

There’s been the amalgamation of the regional police and fire services into two national organisations, though questions remain over their effectiveness.

The integration of health and social care via integrated joint boards has not gone to plan, only serving to create more bureaucracy.

And while there are pockets of good work being done by councils sharing and pooling resources, the practice is not widespread enough to truly be a success story.

The decisions this government must make over the next five years will be the difference between a functioning Scotland that enables all its citizens to flourish and support those in need, and a Scotland that buckles, unable to provide for any of us. It is, quite simply, that serious.

So why so fundamentally separate control of the public finances from these necessary reforms?

There is an argument to be made that having someone solely focused on the future of public services, and how to finance them, without the distraction of day-to-day budgeting is useful.

But all of Gilruth’s choices in this coming budget and beyond will have a knock-on impact on that work.

Whether McKee is able to make the necessary reforms is entirely reliant on getting the financial backing to do so, and that will by necessity require difficult and unpopular decisions.

When they are inevitably at loggerheads, the question is who Swinney will side with

The recent update from the Scottish Fiscal Commission confirmed the finance secretary has more cash to play with this year than expected. It will be tempting for her to use that cash in the autumn adjustment for a short-term win.

But Professor Graeme Roy, the SFC’s chair, also warned that the fiscal outlook will be “exceptionally difficult and really quite challenging” until the end of the decade. It might therefore be more prudent to resist the urge to spend the cash immediately and instead use it to fund the reforms McKee is advocating for.

McKee and Gilruth must work together to balance all this. And both must be brave enough in their working relationship to be able to call one another out when their natural instincts (McKee to move quickly but not necessarily bringing people with him; Gilruth to go too slowly for fear of leaving folk behind) kick in. And when they are inevitably at loggerheads, the question is who Swinney will side with.

A successful programme of reforms will ultimately mean Gilruth (and, importantly, future finance secretaries) will have more cash in the long run because less will be wasted on short-term fixes that do little to solve the big problems.

Christie was absolutely clear that one of the biggest changes required is more focus on prevention. Yet for all the rhetoric, there have been few steps to get there. Look at the NHS – it still, for the most part, delivers a service focused on treating symptoms and not stopping problems developing in the first place.

This should not be an insurmountable problem. We know what we need to do. Ministers know what they need to do. But they need to have the courage to take those decisions, even if it goes against the grain of public opinion.

The accusation that PSR is about cuts is not untrue – there does need to be less spending on acute and emergency services. But only because it is no longer necessary. Bridging that gap – financing both current services while delivering change – will be expensive. We, and crucially Cabinet, need to get comfortable with that.