Seòmar agus comataidhean

First, the process itself has been exceptionally valuable, with significant levels of participation across the sector. It is a continuation of an approach that was taken during the Covid pandemic whereby having regular discussions with representatives from across the culture and arts sector meant that we were able to understand the themes, needs, interests, concerns and expectations of people in the sector. Obviously, during the pandemic, much of that was linked with the extreme circumstances of the lockdown and the income difficulties that individuals and organisations faced in the culture sector.

Now, we have obviously moved on, and organisations are able to perform and tour and people are trying to bounce back from the pandemic. A broad range of themes is emerging that still needs to be brought together in report form. We will, no doubt, be able to share that with you and other committee members. As you might expect given the range of participation, from individual freelance performers or people involved in other aspects of culture and the arts all the way to larger organisations, a very broad range of issues is being flagged up, which are reflective of the underlying factors. Incidentally, I should say that I also held a meeting with the national performing companies last week.

This is about how organisations can continue to operate in circumstances in which there is a squeeze on their income because they have perhaps not yet fully recovered to pre-pandemic levels in relation to the number of ticket sales or visitors. There are also the additional costs of heating overheads and inflation.

As we know, at a national level, inflation is officially at just over 10 per cent. However, we are hearing from participants that inflation in many areas that impact directly on culture and the arts can be a factor of that—I have heard figures of inflation of up to 30 per cent impacting on organisations. As one might imagine, those participants that have property—theatres and the like—have significant overheads that are squeezing their finances.

On top of that, some participants are reporting that other income streams that have traditionally played a significant role in their finances are also being impacted. The amount of financial support through philanthropy, for example, is proving challenging for some organisations.

Public funding is also of huge importance to the culture and arts scene in Scotland, as it is in most countries in the developed world. As we have discussed at committee before, one often hears the request for individuals and organisations to have the greatest possible certainty. We hear a lot of support for the intentions of the Scottish Government to support multi-annual funding horizons for individuals and organisations, which is the direction of travel that we are on.

A very strong theme that is coming back from all the meetings is that the culture and arts sector wants to work collaboratively through these difficulties. There is an appreciation that things will not improve in the short term, given the economic circumstances, and there is a willingness among those in the sector to consider what they can do. No doubt suggestions will also be made about what we, in the broadest sense—that includes the Scottish Government, agencies such as Creative Scotland, Screen Scotland and Historic Environment Scotland, and all the different stakeholders—can do to make sure that we get through this most extreme of circumstances, having protected and supported our culture and arts community.

One factor, which I have been hearing more of and on which we all need to reflect, is people saying that it was personally hugely challenging for them to get through the pandemic. Funding was available for that period, but, with the UK Government now ending that support, one hears people say that their level of personal challenge remains acute because of the uncertainty about the medium and longer term.

We need to reflect on the pressures under which people are operating and the responsibilities that they have to themselves or to small or larger organisations. Everybody is cognisant of examples—I have seen some recently—of beloved organisations and venues finding themselves in existential financial difficulty, which is obviously making others concerned about what the future holds for them.

As soon as we work up a read out from those round-tables meetings, I will ensure that the committee is able to see it; together with the evidence that you have taken here, that will help your deliberations and ours.

Yes. That is constantly being worked on by culture officials, including in discussions with other parts of the Scottish Government.

There has been significant budgetary instability, if I can call it that, given the events of the past year. In particular, there has been tremendous budgetary instability in the UK Government. Given the constraints on us, and given that instability, one must make sure that, if and when one moves to multi-annual funding rounds, people can depend on the projections of their funding situation.

Given that instability and those constraints, it is understandable that more work needs to be done in that area, because, for the people who have been mentioned already and for many others, it is going to be a very important development—for the better, I hope. As I am sure that you have heard in evidence, many people who run extremely effective and efficient organisations have to spend what they view as a disproportionate amount of their time every year making funding applications and considering how to maintain their organisations. We understand that.

However, it would not be responsible to change from the current funding model to a new one until we can say with absolute confidence how that will work and what it will provide, and give people the certainty that they want. I want Mr Cameron to understand that we are committed to doing that. As soon as we are able, I will be happy to update the committee on how we will do it.

I am extremely keen to give the sector the assurances that, understandably, it has asked for, so that it can focus more on what it is supposed to do—delivering for our national cultural life—and perhaps spend less time on the annual cycle of financial applications and reviews.

I can speak more about the world cycling championships than I can about the athletics ones, but I will ensure that we update Mr Ruskell—who, if memory serves me correctly, asked a question about them at a previous committee meeting. He is absolutely right to draw attention to the fact that the Scottish Government is making significant financial contributions to the world cycling championships.

For those who are not aware of that event, I note that it will take place in Scotland. This is the first time that there has been an event of its kind. It will bring together the disciplines that exist in cycling as a sport, which will take place at the same time in different venues in different parts of Scotland. The event is going to be larger than the Commonwealth games, which is amazing. It will happen this year, and a lot of thought and effort are going into ensuring that there will be genuine community benefit and societal impact in encouraging people to get on their bikes. I confess to the committee that I may need to follow that injunction a little bit more myself.

I chair the board that brings everything together, so I am closely involved in the event and I appreciate how big it is. Anything that can be done to magnify and support the understanding of it as an event that is taking place in Scotland would be much appreciated.

With regard to the specifics of the athletics event, I am joined by Rachael McKechnie, who works for the Scottish Government on the events side of things, and she may want to add to my comments. I am happy to write to Mr Ruskell. I appreciate that has made a point about why, if it is a GB event, the Scottish Government might be carrying substantial costs. I will update him on the situation in that regard.

We are involved in sporting events with the UK Government in other contexts. For example, the Euro 2028 bid, together with other home nations, is an area in which we are working with the Governments in London, Cardiff, Belfast and Dublin, and I think that we are making progress there.

It is definitely on my radar screen. That is the reality that organisations are facing just now, which is why Iain Munro was right to highlight his concerns as a result of the feedback that he is hearing from the sector.

Different organisations are at different stages of financial challenge. That goes back to the point that I made to Sarah Boyack. Agencies—Creative Scotland, in this case—and Government can best help by having the best possible relationship with organisations that are going through those challenges so that there is some time available in which to understand whether and how it is possible to intervene.

Mr Ruskell is absolutely right to say that some organisations are facing existential concerns right now. He mentioned reserves; there are also other types of constraints and financial challenges, especially given the cyclical nature of significant parts of the cultural sector. At some times of the year, organisations take in money, and at other times, they make less money. There are all those complications involved.

That will be important not just for Creative Scotland and the regularly funded organisations, but for others beyond that. We should not forget that there are important cultural organisations and people operating in the arts community in Scotland who do not come under the RFO umbrella, and we need to think about them at the same time. The same applies there: how can we help everybody who is involved in the arts and the cultural scene in Scotland to give as much advance notice as possible of not only particular funding issues, but other problems?

Creative Scotland is very keen to help, as is the Scottish Government, along with the other Government agencies. Time is important, along with ensuring that we are aware of the scale of the challenge. That is why I gave the answer that I did to Mr Cameron at the start of the meeting. I recognise the scale of the pressures that the culture and arts community faces.

It goes without saying at great length that those pressures are also being felt elsewhere in the economy, beyond culture and the arts, but we are talking today about that specific area. One of the big jobs that we will have to do is to help regularly funded organisations and national companies, and we have made announcements about their funding, as well as those that are supported through other funding streams but are not RFOs.

I should declare an interest in that I have friends who have worked as arts workers in local government. Over the years, before I had responsibility for this area in the Scottish Government, I saw the value of the jobs that they do, and what they were able to bring to kids in classrooms. I also saw the ending of that support—I am talking, in this context, about Morayshire; that was a hugely retrograde step, and I said so at the time.

I encourage colleagues in local government to try as best they can—as we are trying as best we can—to continue to support arts and culture. It is important for all levels of government that have a responsibility for culture and the arts to co-ordinate their work. That is why we are having this conversation, and the more of that, the better.

I am concerned about anything and everything to do with global warming and climate change, and about whether we are doing enough. Undeniably, the arts and culture play an important role in helping to communicate that reality. During the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—I saw a lot that involved artistic and cultural representation of the climatic and environmental circumstances that we face. It does not take a lot of imagination to see the role that that might play in schools.

That goes back to the broader point about mainstreaming culture and the arts across Government. Education comes immediately to mind. Perhaps Mr Golden has some other ideas. Undoubtedly, more can be done. That goes back to how we make mainstreaming work.

Nevertheless, quite a lot happens. That is a good thing. Perhaps we need to do more to publicise it. I will look at what Iain Munro said and will be happy to speak with him about whether, in specific areas, things are being missed in relation to which we can perhaps do more. I would be happy to look at that.

However, I get the impression that the issue is increasingly reflected in an arts and cultural context. Spoiler alert to anyone who has not yet seen “The Rig”—I am looking at you, Mr Golden; have you seen it?

Okay, no spoilers. It is safe to say that it is a cultural product—a series on a streaming platform—in which the climate dimension is inherently reflected in the storyline. That makes the point that culture has a really important role, which is to reflect the challenges that we face as a society and world. So, it is happening now. Can we do more? Yes. If Mr Golden thinks of any specifics that we need to do more or less of, or differently, I would appreciate him letting me know.

First, I always listen very closely to what Creative Scotland says about the state of the cultural sector in Scotland. It is a hugely effective organisation that we are keen to support financially.

Your question conflates two different things. The first is the medium and long-term funding challenge that Creative Scotland and organisations and individuals in the culture sector might face because of budget constraints. It is important to understand, as I outlined in my introductory statement, that Creative Scotland is in a position to maintain its levels of funding this financial year, which will provide stability to regularly funded organisations.

The second thing, which I hear loud and clear, is the concern about the funding of organisations beyond that time horizon. That goes beyond just the RFOs—if there is a financial constraint, it impacts on a much wider scale. That does, indeed, concern me and I am keen to work with Creative Scotland on that issue to ensure that we can maximise the funding that is available to it.

As I have already made clear to the committee, there needs to be an understanding about the scale of the financial constraints under which the Scottish Government operates. If Mr Cameron is in a position to identify significant areas of funding that could be transferred from elsewhere in the portfolio or the Scottish Government budget, I would be happy to hear about that.

I appeal for the committee to understand that, given the level of constraints under which we find ourselves, it is a good thing that Creative Scotland is able to maintain its level of funding this financial year, and I will be working intensively with it to understand the dangers that it foresees in the years beyond the coming financial year, because I want Scotland’s cultural organisations to flourish rather than face the existential concerns that Iain Munro outlined to the committee, which are of concern to me.

Yes. Funding was put in place to make up for the reducing return from the national lottery to the arts. I should say that conversations are going on with funders such as the national lottery to try to ensure that we can protect the amount of funding that goes towards the arts.

Yes, funding was made available to Creative Scotland to offset what was going on with the national lottery. Creative Scotland was able to build up reserves as a result of that. Out of those circumstances, there will be funding stability through this financial year, but, as I have said to the committee, unless there is an economic upturn or an end to some of the financial pressures, there will still be a medium-term challenge beyond this financial year.

There are two parts to Mr Cameron’s question.

In understanding the budgetary process for this year compared with last year, it is important to know that the portfolio will not incur the same level of costs for the census. That is an important part of understanding the global budgetary position.

That anybody would face risks to their employment status in culture or the arts is of concern to me. As I have said to the committee before, an additional concern is that people will not become active in the sector to start with. It is not just about how the current economic pressures impact on organisations and people in employment; it is about those who might want to start a career in the culture sector.

I am extremely seized of that matter and I am doing everything that I can to underline that the cultural and arts community in Scotland is of import not just for art’s sake but as an extremely important part of our economy.

On Mr Cameron’s justifiable concerns, it is also fair to add that parts of the culture sector are growing considerably. Last year, for example, we learned that the screen sector’s value to the economy is more than £0.5 billion and that, on current trajectories, it will be worth more than £1 billion by 2030, with a significant increase in the number of people who work in that sector.

It is absolutely fair to point to the constraints and difficulties that have been caused by the broad economic circumstances and to Scotland’s budgetary constraints. However, at the same time, it is important to highlight that the culture sector is moving ahead in what are difficult circumstances; that some parts of it are doing extremely well; and that the Scottish Government and our agencies such as Creative Scotland and Screen Scotland, which have a responsibility to work with the parts of sector that are facing difficulties, do everything that we can to support those parts in these difficult times.