Seòmar agus comataidhean

I was not doing that.

People are increasingly engaged in COP26 compared to previous COPs—I am again using COP as an analogy or metaphor for this question. There is public awareness of the problems, although perhaps not of what policy changes will be needed. It strikes me that one thing that drives forward the kind of change that the witnesses or COP are talking about is public engagement in the possible outcomes. Therefore, useful though such conversations are, there comes a point at which we have to start talking about specific outcomes. That is why political parties put in their manifestos commitments about X number of Y. It is comprehensible, unlike the important but abstract conversation that we just had.

What do we all do to engage people in specific outcomes? If you were drawing up a shortlist of those outcomes, what should they be?

Am I right in reading the bill as not specifically attempting to create a new body to administer the bill?

I hope that my question is not too tangential, Mr Burgess. It relates to your point that much of the policy detail will be in the plan. I realise that you cannot speculate much about what will be in the plan, but the bill refers to “relevant authorities”. Can you elaborate on what those “relevant authorities” are? Are they reporting authorities?

I am curious about some of the issues that were touched on by a number of the organisations that gave evidence to us in relation to coming through the experience of the pandemic. I am thinking of museums and historical sites, in particular. Can you say anything about how the budget will reflect some of their experience? Obviously, emergency funding has been provided but, as has been mentioned, a number of organisations have talked about the challenges ahead, not least the challenges that have been presented for the fabric of sites and buildings through their not being in use. What is your thinking about how to help that sector?

On the specific point about Historic Environment Scotland and its historic real estate, you will be aware that a number of us have asked questions about that. I will not ask about specific sites but, if the board is meeting to discuss that, are you hopeful that we will get back to something like the number of sites that were open pre-pandemic?

I am grateful for that.

I want to return to the issue of how the budget will recognise new ways of doing things. Again, I am thinking about the museum sector. There has been support for the things that the museums sector and the galleries sector have been doing in the digital sphere. The situation has not been of their making, but they have made the best of it. To think more positively about the opportunities that those sectors have, will the budget recognise the fact that museums and galleries are doing things differently? I am thinking about not only the move to digital but the fact that they have plenty of stuff in their vaults that nobody ever sees. I am sure that they have been thinking about how to bring that to a wider audience.

In that case, convener, I will be brief.

In the interests of time, I will ask Derek Logie one or two specific questions about housing. A few folk have touched on the fact that the Government is putting money into affordable rented housing in island areas, but obviously it is up to local authorities and housing associations to decide where those houses are built. That is not a criticism, because I understand the difficulty of evidencing demand in areas where there have been no houses to apply for and of building houses where doing so is more expensive and there are no economies of scale. If we do not fix some of the problems, how do we get past the issue alluded to by Beatrice Wishart of there being a risk of houses getting built in towns instead of in rural areas?

People will not be surprised to hear me mention this, but the other issue that I want to ask about is Gaelic. In your summary, Dr Hopkins, you say that younger people are more likely to use Gaelic. I would love that to be true, but it is not. It might be important when considering the results in relation to Gaelic to be clear on the distinction between the very welcome increase in—the question referred to this—the opportunities for the minority of younger people who speak Gaelic to use Gaelic in reading and writing and the prevalence of Gaelic use among younger people. Those are two different things.

Given the sensitivities around the issue and the amount of misinformation out there about Gaelic, I am very keen that whenever the report is summarised that it is made clear that those are two different things. Anyone who lives in the islands will be able to say that, as I am sure that you realise, Gaelic use among younger people is, sadly, less than among older people.

I appreciate that we are running out of time, so this will be my final question. The other issue that was alluded to in the report was that in some, though not all, places on the islands it is becoming increasingly difficult—indeed, impossible—to buy a house. The housing market is obviously influenced by second homes and short-term lets, and I know that there are some measures in place to address the latter issue. Again, this question is for Derek Logie. What do we have to do in this respect? Are there any examples from other parts of the country or the world that we can learn from? What can be done to get around the impact of second homes not just on the availability of housing but on the prices of all the other houses in certain places? After all, without rehearsing the obvious, I can tell you that there are places in my constituency—and, I am sure, other member’s constituencies—where it is not really possible for a young family to buy a house.