Seòmar agus comataidhean

On the point about relief in the sector that we are turning a corner in funding, a significant number of people in the sector have been very kind about the fact that we have been able to secure increased funding for culture while, unfortunately, because of budgetary constraints, that is not the situation elsewhere, in other parts of Government. I am grateful for the support of people in the sector in being able to make their case. It is important that we do everything in our power to ensure that the sector thrives.

On the difference between sustaining and developing, Ms Forbes echoes a point that Donald Cameron made at the previous evidence session that I attended, about organisations that may perform a very important community role but that might not be on a trajectory to be financially self-sustaining. Such organisations may clearly have an important community or wider role to be supported.

I am very alive to this point. There is, indeed, a tension between sustaining what matters—which may or may not be self-sustaining or profitable in a budgetary sense—and developing the sector writ large. I underlined this point in my opening statement, and I am trying to find the wording that I used. I am very keen—as, I know, Creative Scotland is—to consider how we can help cultural and arts organisations to build in the resilience, financial sustainability and, importantly, capacity that they need to thrive.

We can do a lot more of that, because it is different from what Skills Development Scotland or Scottish Enterprise might offer in the wider economy. However, given the experience that we have gone through with the changing nature of society and its interaction with the culture and arts sector, we need to help the sector to manage its room for success more effectively. We need to think anew about how we make that happen. That is where joining up our financial capabilities and additional funding streams will be the answer to Ms Forbes’s conundrum.

I have just confirmed, again, that it is cumulative, so it is just over £40 million additional.

I have now said this three or four times, I think, so there should be no doubt about the clarity of the commitment that has been given about the additional £100 million. However, in terms of the route to get there, we are talking about £15.8 million in this budget and an additional £25 million in the following one—so that will be an additional £40.8 million—and then, in the two years after that, the numbers will be dependent on the budget discussions that take place in the usual way.

If I think back to previous discussions, there was a sense of doubt from some colleagues about whether this is a real thing. It really is a real thing. It is not an aspiration. In comparison to other Governments in the United Kingdom, including Labour-run Wales, which has cut its culture funding, we have increased it. Unlike the UK Government, which has cut culture funding this year, we are increasing it.

We have given the commitment—the Deputy First Minister did it in the budget statement—on the £25 million additional in the financial year 2025-26. As soon as I can, I would want to be able to confirm what the subsequent years will deliver.

I totally understand that the sector wants the front loading of funds. It is what I want—absolutely. It is what I argue for internally, and I want this to happen as quickly as possible. It is correct to say—and Iain Munro is absolutely right to say—that what we are able to do this year is very much within the sustain phase of the culture and arts recovery. As we are able to secure the additional cumulative totals that will boost the culture and arts scene, we will be able to support the sector in a much more significant way to develop and innovate.

First, that is not a sensible suggestion, given that a majority has been elected to the Scottish Parliament with a mandate to pursue Scotland’s independence. Secondly, in the grand scheme of the budgets that we are talking about, the amount is minute and it would make absolutely no serious contribution whatsoever to the scale of the funding challenge that we have as devolved Scotland. If that is the limit of ambition in relation to being able to reallocate money and deliver public services in Scotland, we are in real trouble.

I have always taken the view that it is really important to try to understand the perspectives of different people in different organisations. In this case, I see Creative Scotland demonstrating the demand in the culture and arts sector. If you ask organisations in that sector, “How much money would you like, in an ideal world?”, you will get a massive total, and what that illustrates for an organisation such as Creative Scotland is that it would like the maximum possible funding settlement. I understand that—that is what it wants. I understand that, whether it be Creative Scotland, individual organisations, venues or whatever, people who are receiving support either directly from the Government or through agencies need to illustrate the extremity of the situation as a way of securing support—and the situation is, indeed, very challenging.

The first thing that I would like to say, then, is that I understand why Creative Scotland and its board members are very keen to ensure that they have the funding to get through the massive change programme required for multiyear funding. That is why I was very empathetic in my opening statement and in my answers to the committee’s initial questions about what is being done at present. I work very well with Iain Munro and colleagues at Creative Scotland; I work very well with Isabel Davis and colleagues at Screen Scotland; and I can say the same for Historic Environment Scotland, our national collections and our national performing arts companies. I do not have a problem with any of that.

Is there what one might call a creative tension here, given the very nature of the process? The Scottish Government dispenses funds and organisations that receive them want as much as possible—I understand that. Given the constraints, people have wanted to gain public understanding as well as an understanding in Government of the requirement for money.

I definitely agree, though, that there is a profound lack of understanding about the extent of the financial constraint on devolved Administrations in the United Kingdom. It is unprecedented, and I have not heard a single person, whether it be a member of the Scottish Parliament, someone from an agency, a journalist or anybody else, contribute any suggestion as to where, this year, any additional means that one might want would come from. Nobody, but nobody, has come up with a suggestion on that front—not one.

This year, we have been able to make the case internally for a down payment on additional funding going forward, and no doubt everyone in receipt of funding will want to ensure that they get a part of that. I have talked at some length—and no doubt, convener, you will have me back to talk about it again—about how this new approach will work from the perspective of the Government, our agencies and beyond. We will have to be in a new place. I am working with the people in Creative Scotland and other agencies on the basis of trust and I am confident that we have a trust that is good enough to be able to deliver all that.

I do not think that there is a single, silver bullet through any of the different organisations or funding streams to help the Scottish culture and arts sector to thrive in a way that we all agree on.

Having said that, I think it is right that we consider all potential options for supporting the culture and arts sector. We have to acknowledge that other countries are further ahead of us in some respects. The visitor levy is a good example of that. The overwhelming majority of countries across the European Union have a levy, and I am not aware of any evidence that suggests that it has a detriment on tourism spend. Indeed, it has the benefit of bringing in additional funding to municipalities and regions.

Similarly, the percentage for the arts scheme has the potential to provide additional funding, and there are other suggestions that we have discussed in the committee and in the chamber. For example, Mark Ruskell regularly brings up the issue of a tax on tickets as another potential route to gain additional funding. I have thought for quite a while that, in addition to what local and national Government do, we also have an opportunity to work much more closely with people, or the trusts and foundations that they may be involved in, who give money to the sector. I think that we can work much better together with the philanthropic sector domestically and internationally. I look forward to exploring all those things.

As to your point, convener, none of those things provide the single answer to the concerns about the funding situation that the sector has been going through, which we know well, but they could all play a part in the answer to helping it to be as well funded as I hope we all agree that it should be.

I acknowledge the importance of those funds for Creative Scotland as it goes through the significant funding change to multiyear funding. The Scottish Government is providing public funding to make up for a reduction in national lottery support that was intended to be provided for only three years and has now been extended. Notwithstanding that, I appreciate how important those funds are for Creative Scotland as part of its transitional planning, and to the regularly funded organisations that will form part of the multiyear framework. Those funds are also important for the financial means to support wider parts of the creative and arts sector that will not form part of that multiyear funding approach.

Creative Scotland is right to want to ensure that the transition works well and that there is no cliff edge for the organisations, venues and other projects that it supports. That is why I have been persuaded of the importance of the funding, given that the priorities that I have set out from the Scottish Government’s point of view align with those of Creative Scotland, as a way of ensuring that we make that change.

The previous time that I gave evidence, I drew attention to the fact that the third sector in particular in Scotland has been crying out for that multiyear approach in order to give financial certainty and to reduce the amount of time that is currently spent applying for funding on an annual basis. Creative Scotland is absolutely at the vanguard of that change, which is why the issue of the £6.6 million from the previous financial year came up. We gave a commitment—I gave a commitment at a meeting of this committee—that we would restore that funding. I am delighted to confirm that we are doing what I undertook we would do and that there will be an additional year’s funding of £6.6 million.

It is worth noting that that is significantly more than the national lottery funding shortfall, but notwithstanding that, I accept, agree and value the importance of that funding as part of the transition. To my mind, it falls very much within the phase of sustaining the current arts and culture infrastructure.

As we begin to have more finance in the culture and arts sector, which we have secured because of commitments that were made by the First Minister, agreed by the Deputy First Minister and supported by me for quite a long time, we can then look to the medium term in respect of some of the ambitions that Mr Ruskell has outlined.

However, there is a footnote to that, which I never hesitate to make and that is quite important: Creative Scotland is—quite rightly—an arm’s-length agency, and, as such, it is an organisation with which we agree a general direction of travel. I have outlined our perspective on that, but it is for Creative Scotland to make decisions about all that when it comes to individual projects.

I am pleased, as I know that Creative Scotland is, that there is more money for culture in Scotland this year, which is not the case in other nations in the United Kingdom, and that our financial commitment is significant and will continue to grow cumulatively over the next years.

It is always a pleasure to be back at the committee, convener, and thank you for the opportunity to make some opening remarks. First, I would like to thank all the organisations that have given evidence to the committee. I have read and listened to their evidence with great interest. The evidence is clear that, although the budget and our announcement to increase culture funding by £100 million annually by 2028-29 are welcome, there remains a need for longer-term clarity and confidence. I would like to take the opportunity of my opening remarks to provide that.

I recognise that the additional £15.8 million of funding next year will not rectify years of standstill funding. That is only the starting point of a journey of three phases—sustain, develop and innovate—all of which are important aspects that I have heard referenced by the sector in its evidence.

The £15.8 million in the next financial year begins the sustain phase. This is intended to be followed by a further £25 million the year after, with culture budgets £40.8 million higher in 2025-26 than now.

The budget will increase cumulatively until it is £100 million per annum higher by 2028-29. That additional resource allows us to move beyond simply sustaining the sector to developing it in innovative ways to support Scotland’s creative sector and its contribution to our own wellbeing economy and international reputation.

In line with that, I have recently confirmed to Creative Scotland that we will not direct the use of the additional £6.6 million that will be provided to it in 2024-25, although I expect the organisation to use that money to help the sector to recover, to be sustainable and to innovate.

I fully support Creative Scotland’s move towards multiyear funding. As the committee heard last week, that is a critical issue for a lot of, if not most, cultural organisations. I hope that the announcement of the intention to provide an additional £25 million across the culture and arts sector in the next financial year will provide some certainty, and I will continue to argue the case for multiyear funding.

Our refreshed action plan supports delivery of the culture strategy and was published alongside the budget last December. The action plan, which was prepared in close engagement with the sector, including the national partnership for culture, has the ambition to support the sector to move beyond its recovery phase.

As we implement those plans to sustain the sector, we are also defining the work on the development of the culture and arts sector to provide confidence for the future. Scottish Government senior officials and I will be meeting organisations and third sector partners to discuss that.

We will consider all aspects of the sector so that we can support: freelancers, and to attract and retain their talent; community cultural projects in all authorities across Scotland; the national performing companies, so that they can engage and tour with confidence across the country and around the world; festivals, so that they can continue to be world class and contribute to our economy and international reputation; national collections, so that they can innovate and enhance their collections and public experience; the screen sector and its remarkable growth in Scotland, and the opportunities that that brings; the building of resilience and financial stability across the sector; the mainstreaming of culture across Government; and support making progress on participation, with the benefits across public services of health and wellbeing that that brings.

As part of securing the future of the sector, we will explore new funding streams in addition to Scottish Government funding. I am keen to progress consideration of the Scottish National Party’s manifesto commitment to the percentage for the arts scheme and to draw inspiration from international best practice, such as Denmark’s foundation model.

I am aware of the Music Venue Trust’s campaign for a stadium tax to support grass-roots music venues. My colleague the Minister for Culture, Europe and International Development, Christina McKelvie, has encouraged the Music Venue Trust to ask the cross-party group on music to convene an industry round-table discussion on the issue. I look forward to the outcome of that discussion.

I am keen to develop links with key philanthropists in Scotland and globally. I want Government networks internationally to support the export of Scottish culture and the sector’s resilience. Our international culture strategy—which will be published soon—will support that ambition.

As Neil Bibby MSP mentioned last week, the Scottish Government is only part of the public sector funding picture. Many organisations receive money from local authorities. The Scottish Government will work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to ensure that all local authorities understand the important role that culture plays. I look forward to working with partners in COSLA and with individual local authorities on that.

We are at a key turning point in relation to the funding for culture and the arts in Scotland. I acknowledge that I am in a privileged position, because we are restoring our culture budget at a time when other administrations are reducing theirs. I have great ambitions for how the sector should grow and thrive. I want to have more opportunities for people across Scotland to experience the empowering potential of culture, including through our community-based programmes such as the Culture Collective network. I am very focused on delivering those ambitions, which our additional funding allows for.

I want to work with the committee to develop the suggestions that it has to contribute to that exciting opportunity. I invite committee members and cultural organisations to come to me and my officials with ideas and suggestions about how we can fund the sector.

I agree entirely. To take only one example of that, if one needed any evidence for it—we are getting increasing amounts of evidence about the economic impact of the culture sector—one could look at the now-defined benefits of the film and television sector in Scotland. A few years ago, we had little screen sector footprint beyond the BBC, Scottish Television and Channel 4. We have gone to a situation in which the annual gross value added to the economy is now at around £650 million—if the trajectory continues, it will be worth £1 billion by 2030—and the sector provides more than 10,000 jobs. Incidental benefit is also felt. MG Alba was brought up, and we have a screen and broadcasting footprint in the Western Isles and Inverness, especially in the Gaelic language.

That is but one example of the economic impact that culture has. You have had persuasive evidence from the likes of the festivals in Edinburgh. I speak wearing two hats, of course: being the member of the Scottish Parliament for Edinburgh Central, the impact of the festivals is obvious to me. If one looks at the economic role that the festivals play—the artistic and cultural contribution is obvious to all—one sees that their economic value added is massive. Yes, that is about the Edinburgh festivals, but on this of all days, when Celtic Connections is starting in Glasgow, and with festivals furth of the cities as well, we need to have a better understanding of the economic impact of festivals.

We have had some tremendous interventions over recent years that have supported festivals—for example, through the expo and place funds. However, if we look at how festivals are supported in other countries, we can see that it is right and proper that we examine how we support them domestically. That is why I go back to the point that now is the right time for us to look at all of that and how it all fits together. Are we missing anything in our approach? Is there more that we should do? I am open to considering that and working with our culture and arts sector partners on it.

On the specific issue of harder-to-reach geographies and communities—I appreciate that, coming from a Gaelic speaker, that is also a linguistic question—we have done great things in recent years, but undoubtedly there is more that we can do. An organisation that I have mentioned before in evidence is the Culture Collective, which has been able to deliver in slightly more than two thirds of Scotland’s local authorities. I really want us to be able to support its reach right across the whole of the country, given what the organisation is able to do, especially in supporting freelancers, who are in one of the most tenuous positions in relation to income and reliable employment in the culture and arts sector. Supporting funding streams and projects that have already been tried and tested there is, for me, a priority.

I would want to know where we currently do not have that footprint. MSP colleagues regularly raise in Parliament the question of why there is provision in one place and not more in another. We have to test everything that we do to make sure that we are answering all of those questions, and, if there is unmet need and demand, we should be doing everything that we can to make sure that, given the new approach, we are thinking about things from those perspectives as well.

We need to be fully aware that the support of culture is not just the responsibility of the Scottish Government and Scottish Government agencies. Working in partnership with local government colleagues will be key in moving forward on that. Yes, it is about venues and yes, it is about projects. One could point to the likes of Sistema as an example. We are keen to see access to culture through tremendous projects such as Sistema.

Local authorities take a risk when they no longer continue to fund organisations, venues or facilities, and that is something that I want to talk about with local authority partners. My colleague Christina McKelvie has already held discussions with culture leads and I will meet the president of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities next week when we are both in Brussels—these are the kinds of things that we will talk about.

It is only by working in partnership that we will be able to get ourselves through the sustain phase and into the better funding scenario that we are moving towards. It is only by taking a partnership approach that we will see the success that we want to see right across the country. I have not met a single person in local government who does not want there to be excellent cultural provision in their local government area. That relationship will be key.

I am sure that my colleagues with finance responsibilities would point to the funding and support that has been given to local government so that decisions can be made at a local level while we have responsibility for the things that we support at a national level. However, it is only by working together that we will be able to get through this phase and into the next, and I look forward to doing that with COSLA and colleagues at individual councils.