Seòmar agus comataidhean

One of BBC Scotland’s great strengths is its remarkably broad offering with regard to people’s tastes in music, sport, news or talk. It seems to fit in an amazing breadth of content. As a general observation, any reduction in that breadth has to be a matter of concern. Certain musical forms, such as piping or jazz, are not traditionally thought of as mainstream musical offerings, so where else on Scottish or UK radio—or globally, now that one has global access to radio in this digital age—will you hear Scottish pipe music and various forms of jazz?

I remember hearing BBC Radio Scotland’s pipe music programme coming on when I was growing up, and I like jazz—I should declare an interest as I went to school with Tommy Smith, who is one of our greatest musical exports. When people in the arts community say that they think that something such as that cut will have a major negative impact on performers and on a new generation of pipers and jazz musicians, that really needs to be taken seriously. I hope that BBC Radio Scotland will listen to what people have highlighted to it, and I look forward to being able to continue to hear—with a bit of luck—pipe and jazz music on BBC Radio Scotland.

I would love to do an entire session on that, convener, if a shortlist is ever put together for what the committee might want to discuss. I would be delighted to come back to speak about the subject at great length, because I spend a significant part of my time and effort on it.

I recognise the point that Jenni Minto makes. I am very much a glass-half-full person in that respect, and I believe that there are huge opportunities to build on the first-class work that is done by the likes of the national companies, which tour internationally, and by many others besides, who also tour and perform elsewhere.

How do we co-ordinate, work together and do as much as we can to support one another? In that respect, the Scottish Government has a role to play in funding, but also in convening and in respect of some of the assets that we have.

I will give a good example of how we are currently using those assets. Committee members will be aware that we have offices in a number of capital cities around the world, which are used, among other things, for cultural promotion. I was delighted to speak at Scotland House London at the launch of a report on Scotland’s arts and cultural assets, which I highly commend to members. I do not know whether members have seen both the documents that form that report, but they reflect, in significant part, on how Scotland is perceived in cultural terms and how it is that people are able to enjoy the broad spectrum of Scottish cultural offerings.

As an example of what is happening in this particular area, I note that that aspect was the subject of a conversation that I had with the national companies about tours that are taking place. There was discussion about a run of performances happening in Washington DC, and I am keen that we and the Scottish Government office do everything that we can to support that. It does not take a lot of imagination to understand the potential spin-offs for tourism in particular or the other forms of collaboration and co-operation that might emerge from that.

I know that that aspect has been thought about a lot in relation to festivals in Scotland, with regard to looking at how we ensure that we get maximum benefit from the shared experience of others and from those institutions that have international reach, including the Scottish Government, Scottish Development International and others.

I will be happy to come back to the committee to report on that work in greater detail. Work is under way in the Scottish Government specifically in relation to our international cultural priorities to ensure that we make the most of the cultural and artistic sector. Those in the sector are very keen to work with Government and agencies to ensure that we do just that.

That work will have an impact in different ways, because there are particular cultural focuses in different countries. That is one of the reasons why I was delighted to see a Scottish Government office open in Copenhagen in particular, because we can learn huge lessons—for example, in the screen sector—from what Denmark and the other Scandinavian nations have been doing. Those countries are around the same size as Scotland and they speak languages that are not as widely spoken as English, but they have been able to become incredibly successful.

Jenni Minto’s question opens up a broad range of opportunities and I am keen that we grab them with both hands. Money and funding is important in this area, but the intangibles are also part of the process. The good will and the willingness of organisations, host countries and organisations to play a part in it is hugely exciting, which is why it is hugely beneficial to have an international network and talented people who are there to promote Scotland in the broad ways in which they do that. Everybody else does it. We should be very proud of what is already happening, but we can do more to support the culture and arts sector both domestically in the UK and internationally.

First, that process is happening. Some conversations are happening directly: organisations might say, as the national performing companies did last week, that they would like to meet and discuss things from their particular point of view, given how they are funded and structured, and what it is that they do. Conversations are happening at that level.

Some conversations are happening through the round-table sessions, which involve everything from venues and organisations to other parts of our cultural and artistic community in its widest sense. Yes, that includes the performing arts, but we also discuss issues relating to design and architecture, as we did this week, and other aspects of the sector, such as freelancers and small organisations.

There is not a single aspect to that issue, nor is there a single solution to it. The solution will be multifarious, and we will have to be open to new ideas. I would be happy to report back to the committee when those different considerations and suggestions have been worked through. Some organisations in the sector will do some of those things themselves—they are doing them already—but others will rely on support and assistance.

One of the things that has struck me as interesting has been the number of times that I have heard people, during the round-table sessions, say to one another, “It’s really good that we’re meeting.” People are getting to know others who are involved in their world but whom they did not know before, and they are talking about what they are doing in their organisation, which can be shared. That is one of the intangible benefits of that kind of process. That reflects the great advantage of being in a country of Scotland’s size: it is possible to do that. We are taking a hybrid approach: a significant number of people are in the room, but others, often those from other parts of the country, can join those conversations, too.

The discussions are happening. As Jenni Minto has put her finger on, the solutions will largely come from the sector itself. As I have said to the committee previously, it is not the Government that does culture; it is the cultural sector and people in the arts community, although the Government and other agencies are there to, and can, support them. If there are ways in which the Government or other agencies can provide greater coherence, I am all ears, because we will all have to carry some of the burden of getting ourselves through these challenging times. If that means that we have to change how we do things, we should think about that.

My officials and I pore over the evidence that is given to the committee, but if you hear, through visits or other conversations, solutions of which, you think, we or other agencies are not aware, please ensure that we hear them. We need to look for good ideas, some of which might be new and some of which might be older. Especially at such a time—to quote somebody who has been part of the process—we cannot simply hold our breath and think that, in two months’ or two years’ time, it will be business as usual, because it will not.

There might be things that we can do relating to physical infrastructure and ownership, but I draw attention to the fact that we still had problems in Aberdeen in relation to the Belmont facility, which is within the purview of the council. Ownership might be part of the solution in certain circumstances, but the pressures are being felt by everybody, no matter the ownership structure or type of organisation. That reflects the point that the Government and agencies have to be nimble enough, with the notice that I am stressing, to be able to respond and provide the help, support and advice that we can.

There is a lot of help and support available. It is not simply what falls within the purview of my ministerial responsibilities. There are other Government agencies—for example, Scottish Enterprise and so on—that support the economy.

There are other agencies, other bits of the Government and other organisations. We just need to make sure that we are all part of the process. We are doing our best to do that. If anybody wants to be part of that and feels that they have not been part of it yet, they should let themselves be known. We are definitely interested in ideas, wherever they come from.

In terms of the lottery?

There is a lot in Sarah Boyack’s question and commentary, most of which I completely agree with. We have learned from the particular challenges and circumstances relating not only to the Filmhouse but to Dance Base. I think that Sarah Boyack, the convener and other members will appreciate that, as a constituency member for Edinburgh Central, I am constrained in what I can say in general, but also in specific terms, because my colleague Neil Gray, Minister for Culture, Europe and International Development, takes the lead in those areas.

However, as I have discussed with Iain Munro and colleagues at Creative Scotland, speaking in general terms about the challenge to organisations, we will all need to have much more, and earlier, insight into any particular concerns about organisations. If one wants to maximise the potential intervention and support that Sarah Boyack has highlighted—I concur with her that there are a number of sources—one needs to be able to do that before organisations get to a stage where they cannot trade. That is just a statement of fact. If organisations get to a stage where they announce that they cannot trade, it is beyond anybody’s ability—whether that is Creative Scotland or the Scottish Government—to help to maintain those organisations.

At that point, there is a legal process and administration, so there is another set of challenges and potential interventions but, in some respects, the ability to keep organisations standing and going is reduced. I have discussed the issue with Creative Scotland, which is much closer to the organisations, because that is its role. Members will appreciate that the reason why we have a culture and arts organisation such as Creative Scotland is because it is not for ministers to micromanage the interface with individual organisations. However, there is a general understanding that we need to know where the greatest risks are.

Donald Cameron mentioned the evidence that Iain Munro gave to the committee on his concerns about specific organisations. In and around that space, if it is necessary to help, assist or support particular organisations, I am keen that we are able to do that, and I use that “we” in the sense of Creative Scotland, the Scottish Government and other agencies. It will take a cross-agency approach to make sure that we do that as properly as possible. I think that time is the key thing in understanding that.

Members will appreciate that it is not something that I will keep a running commentary on, for the very obvious reasons of commercial sensitivity, but that process is already happening, and organisations have been able to make changes with the support of others, because people have put up their hands in time for other bodies to intervene and support. In certain cases, organisations have been able to make the most of, for example, the philanthropic support that they have received in the past and have been able to secure that in order to continue operating in the circumstances in which they have found themselves.

Specific funding has promoted public support for a return to the arts. That has already been happening. People have their own degree of hesitancy for their own reasons. We therefore need to build confidence, and our cultural organisations have been doing a superb job in giving people assurance and reassurance about why it is safe to return to galleries, theatres and other venues and events.

Can more be done? Absolutely. I am looking forward to going to the opening of Celtic Connections tonight, and I unashamedly use this opportunity to say to anybody who is watching that they should take the opportunity to support events such as Celtic Connections. Where tickets are available, please attend theatres and festivals and events. That is my first observation—that there has already been support for that, but more can absolutely be done.

Sarah Boyack asked about a number of other points in her previous question, which, if she will forgive me, I was not able to come back on. She asked about potential new funding streams or different ways in which resource could be allocated. Notwithstanding all the pressures and constraints, we in the Government are still keen to make progress on that. She mentioned a percentage for the arts scheme, the visitor levy and a better understanding of how social prescribing can operate. Those are all absolutely under on-going discussion in Government and across portfolios, and we will report to Parliament on that in our culture refresh in the spring of this year.

Having said all that, I would not want to miss the opportunity to say that there is some extraordinarily good practice and progress going on. Sarah Boyack mentioned our national performing companies. I do not know whether everybody on the committee saw this morning the report on Scottish Ballet and what it is doing in relation to health and wellbeing, which is exemplary. Its dance health team is a UK first. Opening a national dance centre that will be aimed at helping people in relation to health and wellbeing, dementia and long Covid is exactly the sort of thing that we have been talking about in general principle terms, and which we are now seeing being taken forward. I am sure that there will be more of that.

To go back to the experience from the round-table sessions that we have been having, one of the participants in our Dumfries meeting—which I attended virtually this week—reported on the work that is under way in hospitals, nursing homes and care homes. It is important to appreciate that a lot of what we are aspiring to have even more of, in terms of scale and reach, is currently happening.

There is innovation and outreach, and culture is delivering much more beyond art for art’s sake and even the narrow issue of benefiting the Scottish economy; it is already delivering in areas such as health and wellbeing, which we talked about before. However, we want to widen and grow that, and, notwithstanding the constraints that we are working under, I am still very ambitious about helping to deliver that in a much broader way.

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.