Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not think that I have any meetings at the present time. However, as I have always said, I am open to dialogue with trade unions in any circumstance. I am aware that the trade unions have been involved in relation to some of the internal matters, which, as Mr Bibby will appreciate, I cannot go into in any level of detail. The trade unions’ locus, as I understand it, is in relation to their members as part of the staff team at Historic Environment Scotland.

I am not aware of any request for a meeting with the unions. They will appreciate that on these HR issues the locus is not mine. Mr Bibby will understand that. I do not want to give him the impression that I am against meeting with trade unions, especially where there are distressed circumstances. I am not against that, if it is felt that it is appropriate. However, there has never been a suggestion from them that they would wish to meet me, given that I do not have that direct locus in the issues that they are raising.

I want to give Mr Brown total assurance about my personal interest in, and the Government’s interest in, ensuring that organisations that have commercial potential are able to secure additional and sustainable funding streams. Forgive me—I am looking for the number, which is not at the top of my head. Historic Environment Scotland now has commercial income of north of £70 million annually, which is significantly more than it has been in recent years. HES is able to do that because the Scottish Government has changed the accountancy procedures that previously acted as a disincentive for it to make more commercial income. That is the first thing.

We have recognised the opportunity that Mr Brown has drawn our attention to. I think that we all understand the challenge facing Historic Environment Scotland, given the nature of our historic estate in Scotland. HES has more than 300 sites. In addition to historical wear and tear, the environmental impact is accelerating the decline at a lot of these very old sites. Anything that can be done to consider a “proper return”, to use Mr Brown’s words, and to think imaginatively about how we can marry up the diaspora and other interests with different parts of Scotland and support particular projects.

As Mr Brown knows, I have responsibility for diaspora matters for the Scottish Government. I have also spoken with the new chief executive and chair about signposting particular projects that are under way in Scotland. They might be Historic Environment Scotland projects, or they might be projects with the National Trust for Scotland or Historic Houses. There is a range of different bits of our historic estate that are, because of wear and tear and environmental damage, in need of significant investment. There is much more that we can do in that regard.

We have made the changes that have begun the process. Is there more that can be done? Yes. Do I believe that the new chief executive and the new chairman are and will be seized of that? Yes, I am. This is one of the grounds for the optimism that I have, notwithstanding the serious challenges that there have been in Historic Environment Scotland. HES’s core business and the opportunity that it has to deal with the challenges of maintaining the estate are issues that it will be able to address with the new leadership that is coming into place in the organisation.

I am sure that the incoming leadership at Historic Environment Scotland will be following this evidence session very closely. The sensible points that Mr Brown has raised will be heard, and I will follow them up in the on-going conversations that I have with the appropriate people at Historic Environment Scotland. Such conversations have taken place in the past and they will continue to take place.

First, the operational and HR questions are matters for Historic Environment Scotland.

Secondly, there is an on-going discussion with all non-departmental bodies around financial questions. That is an on-going issue, which is why we have sponsorship teams. Were there to be any particular ask, as part of dealing with these challenges, I would look on it as I would look on any request made by any body in my area of responsibility. However, I have not had that reported to me.

The committee will be aware that Historic Environment Scotland is a very well funded non-departmental body that is increasingly commercially successful. That is something that we have set great store by, and Historic Environment Scotland has been a model arm’s-length body.

I would need to be advised on that, which I have not been. However, I understand that staff members at Historic Environment Scotland have a range of complaints and concerns. Obviously, legal action is a route that is open to us all as citizens, but I would have to be advised as to the nature of any particular legal complaint before I am able to answer that question.

I am keen to build on a number of aspects of cross-portfolio working. As I have said in previous evidence to the committee, there are areas of the cultural space, in relation especially to health and wellbeing but also to the economy space, where there is the potential for us to do more.

I do not know whether the committee has heard from, for example, Scottish Ballet about what it has done, is doing and wants to do in the health and wellbeing space. I highly recommend that the committee hear about that work, because it is absolutely world class. Scottish Ballet is a really good example of a cultural institution in Scotland. It is a national performing company, so it is directly funded by the Scottish Government, and it is doing a lot in the health and wellbeing space, which is paid for out of the culture directorate’s finances.

At the same time, there are other areas in the cultural space, such as the screen sector, in which we can look at significant economic aspects. The committee has been well advised about the ambition for it to become a £1 billion GVA industry in Scotland by 2030, on which really good progress is being made. How does that marry with other parts of Government that have responsibilities? We are definitely doing more to ensure that we get the most out of opportunities. I could move on to tourism, for example, and there are other areas that are, to all intents and practical purposes, not part of my direct responsibility in Government. However, by ensuring that everything works together, we can do more.

Screen is another good example of an area in which we are required to do more. Screen Scotland has direct responsibility for television and film but not gaming, which sits in the economy space in the Scottish Government. Meanwhile, we have a national performing company—the Royal Scottish National Orchestra—that has a significant new source of income in the form of soundtracks for films and games. In painting that picture, I am making your point that cross-portfolio working is absolutely key. I have not even got to social prescribing, which is one of the committee’s previous particular interests and one that I have given evidence to the committee about.

I am cognisant of all the different areas in which culture has a lot to offer. Given that you are interested in the budget element today, I note that the key change that we are seeing at present—Creative Scotland’s multi-annual funding of twice as many organisations as before—is foundational for the delivery of cross-departmental benefits, which might have been harder to achieve in the past.

It was definitely the case that, when there was significant financial distress, especially as we emerged from Covid, there was concern in some parts of the country that certain local authorities might make decisions on the provision of some cultural services that raised the potential for funding to be diverted. The Scottish Government would take very seriously the prospect of the likes of Sistema Scotland or the Youth Music Initiative not being able to continue in one part of the country, because they are an important part of our commitment to helping children in more challenged social and economic circumstances to access music and cultural provision. I have been very alive to that possibility. I have been meeting the cultural lead and other representatives of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities throughout my term in office, and meetings have been taking place more widely with the cultural leads of local authorities.

I am optimistic about learning more from the review of Creative Scotland, which has been looking into the availability of cultural services in different parts of the country, as it is not uniform and there is not a uniform approach. There is one issue around local government and another around the local enterprise companies—we have three in Scotland, and they take quite different approaches to culture. That is another layer of understanding: how are things working in different parts of the country?

We must then add the question of the extent to which Creative Scotland’s decision making is about what is funded and what that means in different parts of the country. Are there gaps? I would be keen to understand whether that is the case. I would say in mitigation that both the Culture Collective and Creative Communities funding streams, which are being provided throughout Scotland, offer important mechanisms to ensure that all parts of the country have the ability to draw down funds to support cultural activity.

Your question, convener, about ensuring that there is provision of cultural services is absolutely right, and there is a whole parallel discussion to be had about libraries, which fits into that context, too.

As the committee knows, I walk a fine line between wanting to ensure that we, as the Government, are doing everything that we can to support local government, the enterprise companies and Creative Scotland and respecting our arm’s length relationships—which exist for obvious reasons, as it is not for cabinet secretaries to micromanage what we might personally wish to have more of, whether on stage, on screen or wherever. I leave that to the experts.

Having said all of that, and referring back to the question that you posed, convener, I would say that there is a role for Government in using our convening power and the best possible information to ensure that we have cultural provision across Scotland that can by accessed by people of all backgrounds. In general, that is working well, and I am interested to learn, through the review, whether there any areas where we could be doing more.

I can see a very subtle hand movement from Lisa Baird, who may, I think, want to add something.

A few years ago, one would regularly read that there were concerns in some parts of the country that local facilities—whether museums, galleries or other facilities—might be closed, which might lead to a diminution of cultural provision, especially in more rural parts of the country that are away from major population centres. That caused me concern. That is why, where we have a locus in being able to help, support, buttress and develop the likes of museums, that is what we are doing.

Lisa Baird has already drawn attention to the fund that exists to help museums to future proof what they do and to think about what they might be able to do differently and better, and how they can maintain their numbers. We have amazing museums in different parts of the country. I was recently at a museum in Kirkcudbright that I had not been to before. I would encourage anybody with an interest in painting, in particular, to take a look round it. That is but one example of the need to have different ways of being able to support the cultural infrastructure in different parts of the country.

I did not hear Iain Munro’s evidence, but I know that Creative Scotland—now that it has been freed from the annual consideration of budget applications—is very interested in taking a more focused approach to helping to support the development of the management of cultural organisations, venues and so on, because, as we know, audiences are changing, as is how people make best use of the cultural offering. I have already drawn attention to what the Culture Collective and Creative Communities do. I think that we have a good mixture, but I am open to learning whatever lessons we can from the Creative Scotland review to find out whether there are gaps and, if there are, what interventions we might make.

Mr Halcro Johnston is a relatively new member of the committee, so I say to him—through the convener—and to others that, if there are examples in different parts of the country, do not assume that there is an omnipotent, all-seeing eye that understands the realities in all the various parts of the country. Please take the opportunity to share with us examples of what you think we should be doing more of or less of, or doing in a different way. I will be very content to take those examples away, because, as you know, my approach is to work in partnership with the committee. That is a good example of how we can work together.

That is understood. I have made it absolutely and unambiguously clear to the committee that I agree that there is a wide range of issues of concern relating to the senior management of Historic Environment Scotland. They cause me extreme concern, and I expect to learn what the consequences of those cases are. Some relate to matters that are subject to on-going internal human resource processes, and I await the conclusion of them. I also believe that those issues will be fully attended to by the incoming chair of Historic Environment Scotland, Sir Mark Jones. I have total confidence in his ability and willingness to deal with the issue. We all share an interest in the focus of Historic Environment Scotland’s efforts being on the tremendous job that it does throughout Scotland.

If this part of the evidence session is drawing to a close because we are moving on to other subjects, I want to take the opportunity to assure Mr Bibby and other colleagues that, if you, convener, wish me to come back at an appropriate time, I am content to do so. Echoing an earlier answer, I would wish all members of the committee—and, through them, other members of the Parliament who have raised issues with me directly, even this week—to have confidence, through transparency, that the outstanding matters of concern that have been raised with us directly, through the media or through reports that we have been sent have all been dealt with.

The feedback has been extremely positive. There are different metrics. How many shows were there? What percentage of the population attended? What was the number of total ticket sales? Most of that has been put in the public realm by the different festivals.

We are definitely beyond where we were, and the concerns that we had as we emerged from Covid, but I acknowledge that there are still questions about how we can ensure that the world-class status of our festivals remains intact. How do we ensure that accommodation is available? People coming from throughout Scotland and from further afield to see AC/DC or Oasis was a challenge for a city where most of the accommodation was already taken up due to the festivals. How do we ensure that the accommodation is on offer? How do we have affordable accommodation? Those are the medium and long-term questions that are being discussed in the Scottish Government-chaired strategic partnership for Scotland’s festivals. We need to think about how we best answer those challenges, but we are dealing with the challenges of success because the festivals were absolutely fantastic.

Having been cabinet secretary for four years, having previously grown up in central Edinburgh and having been going to the festivals since childhood, one thing that is definitely new for me is the unsurpassed level of international interest in them. There are receptions by the Brazilian embassy and consulate, the French embassy and consulate, the British Council and people from around the world. The international focus on the festivals is much more organised and focused, which offers tremendous opportunities. For example, the Edinburgh military tattoo is now touring internationally.

Some members of the committee will have had the good fortune to attend “Make It Happen” with Brian Cox at the Edinburgh International Festival or “Mary, Queen of Scots” by Scottish Ballet. Our national performing companies have had all kinds of discussions about touring those tremendous productions. I have the figure of £620 million in my head, but I need to double check that. We are talking not only about the value that is added to Edinburgh and Scotland and to artistic life, which we cannot put a financial value on, but about the internationalisation of all of that.