Seòmar agus comataidhean

To go back to the topic, a chief executive officer—an accountable officer—would, no doubt, be keen to be able to consider expansively the opportunities to do new things and do things differently.

I also reflect on other things that Historic Environment Scotland has to deal with at the present time and the potential solutions that would never have been considered. I imagine that you may have brought up to Historic Environment Scotland—as other individual MSPs regularly have—issues of high-level masonry and the challenge of how older buildings, castles and other facilities can be protected. Because of climate change, that is becoming even more of a problem. Until now, the only solution has been to cap certain buildings—buildings without roofs. However, there may be potential in some of our national sites to think about much more than just protection from further decline. There may be ways in which we can think of some of our amazing historic sites, which are, in effect, ruins, and find new income streams to restore, protect and—who knows?—reroof them.

Those are all things that an organisation needs to think about, which it has immediate and direct responsibility for, but Mr Brown has articulated a challenge to it and to the rest of us to ask ourselves how we can work in partnership to make the most of Scotland’s heritage. I agree with him, and I want the chairman of the board, the chief executive and the leadership team of Historic Environment Scotland to know that they have the support of the Government and other public bodies in ensuring that we are making the most of all those things.

Those are two different things, and I have said to Mr Hogg and to colleagues that I would wish to have been told and I wish to be told about these sorts of issues in future. It was a judgment call. I agree with Mr Hogg that, in the context, it would have been deeply compromising for me to attend a board meeting given the serious nature of the investigations that were under way, and I agreed with Mr Hogg and colleagues on what would have been the correct course of action.

It would have been better for me to have been aware. Before the committee, I would have been perfectly content to share that with the committee—absolutely. It is just how the issues developed.

09:45

No, I am not.

On that point—

We have acted appropriately throughout this challenging situation. Are there any additional powers, as Mr Harvie suggested, that should be part of the armoury for managing such circumstances? I am open to considering that, and if Mr Halcro Johnston has any suggestions about what they might be, I will listen to them.

Today, we have shared a timeline that explains at what stage I sought to intervene in a number of ways. The Government has acted in good faith to try to help an arm’s-length organisation that was created under statute to find its way back to a leadership, a culture and a way of operating that we would all wish it to have.

The obvious difference in these circumstances is that there was a new chair of Historic Environment Scotland. No doubt, when he gives evidence to the committee, as he will, he will be able to answer that question.

The new leadership in HES is absolutely key. I agree with Mr Bibby. The fact that a new chair was able to do what was not possible under the old leadership speaks for itself, but it is not for me to speak for Sir Mark Jones.

Indeed, which is one of the reasons why I have a very, very high degree of trust in and respect for Sir Mark Jones.

I have chosen my words carefully. I have confidence in the leadership of Historic Environment Scotland under the chairmanship of Sir Mark Jones. I have already taken the earliest opportunities to strengthen the board by making sure that it has board members who have experience that the previous board members did not.

It is in the nature of these things that all such organisations have a rotation of board members and senior leadership teams. I imagine that everybody wants to make sure that Historic Environment Scotland, under new leadership, has the appropriate people in place. I will be advised by Sir Mark Jones on that point. I have not been presented with any suggestions about the board that he leads. I will leave it for Sir Mark Jones to speak for himself and for how the board is now operating.

Mr Bibby has identified how changed the circumstances were after the shortest possible period of time under the new leadership of a new chairman of the board. I credit that change to Sir Mark, and it is the reason why I have such a high degree of confidence in him.

No, it is about a more profoundly important point, which is that investigations are under way. The committee knows that. I will not prejudge any investigation or any conclusions that it may reach.

My words have been chosen very carefully. I await the report from David Martin, as I am sure do Mr Bibby and the committee. That will help me to reflect on the question that Mr Bibby has asked more generally about where Historic Environment Scotland and its leadership are today compared with where they were last year.

I say again that I will not generalise about every board member, every member of the senior leadership team or the chief executive. Given that we are dealing with an independent organisation that operates under statute at arm’s length from the Scottish Government, it is important that the organisation should be able to get on with what it is supposed to be getting on with and that any lessons that emerge from the investigations should be acted on.

It is not inappropriate for me to meet the chairman of the board, who I have met twice; nor is it inappropriate for me to meet the chief executive, who I met in one social setting but not in a formal context. I will be advised by Sir Mark on that point. I have said to him that, if he wishes for me to meet the board and feels that that would be appropriate, I will consider doing so.