Seòmar agus comataidhean

Why pause it, then, if it is successful and very valuable? The sum of £1.6 million is not a huge amount of money. The Parliament spent £3 million on its website alone. It is a tiny amount of money, and it seems odd to pause the programme if it has been successful.

I appreciate that.

I will move on to two further topics. When we talked about Highlands and Islands Enterprise, you might have been reluctant to admit that the funding has reduced over the past 10 years or more. Given the importance of Highlands and Islands Enterprise and the other enterprise bodies, that will surely have an impact on their abilities in the longer term.

I have two specific things to ask about. Across all sectors, a number of businesses have come out the past few years carrying large debt. Some are managing that debt, but others are struggling to do so. The enterprise bodies tend to focus on new companies, expansion and growth. Is there any support, or is any support being considered, for businesses that are viable, bar the debt that they carry because of Covid restrictions, energy costs and so on?

I am not necessarily suggesting that that would fall under the responsibility of the enterprise bodies. However, does the Government recognise that Scottish businesses may be successful in many ways but are having to manage debt that may be increasingly difficult to manage or refinance? Is the Government looking at doing anything to support and help them more widely?

I note from what I have in front of me that DigitalBoost

“offered SMEs funding to adopt digital technologies and upskill staff.”

That went directly to businesses; it was not just for supporting agencies, was it?

Perhaps it is something to get more information on, but it seems strange to me that a programme that you have said was successful—I imagine that it was oversubscribed, if that is the case—and which was funded with what is a small amount of money in the grand scheme of things has been paused. A few years ago, the committee had people in front of it talking about the importance of getting more and more businesses online. Admittedly, that was pre-Covid.

That is interesting, because there is no doubt that there is a need in that particular case—and, I imagine, in other cases. However, as I said, the question is, given such changes, about the objective of the original deals and how they were put together after quite a long process.

We talked earlier about housing and how important it is. It is obviously a major and important issue in the Highlands and Islands and across Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch, which is the constituency that you represent, and which we both represent in one way or another.

You talked about increases in the housing budget this year and in the next budget, which are welcome, but they are, of course, making up for cuts in previous years. Do you accept that the previous cuts are having, and have had, a significant impact—in particular, in relation to providing affordable housing in some of the most remote and rural communities in Scotland, which we already struggle to get people to come and work in?

A lot of businesses went online, but there are probably still many businesses that are not online, or are not at that level. It might be helpful to get a better understanding of the situation.

I have a question about VisitScotland and its costs. We know that we do not spend as much as Ireland, for example, on our tourism offer and promotion. The sector has experienced huge pressure, including on short-term lets, and there are real concerns about a tourism tax, as I am sure that you have seen in your inbox as a constituency MSP.

You talked earlier about people booking things and getting their information online or doing all of that on their phones, which is why we do not need iCentres. However, many of the people who speak to me have suggested that those iCentres have gone because of budget cuts. There is real concern and anger in a lot of communities, particularly among those who work in the tourism sector and in largely remote communities, about the loss of the centres. Do you recognise that? Have you heard that yourself? If the centres were essentially outdated, why is there real concern about their loss?

As an Orcadian.

Good morning, cabinet secretary and team.

I want to cover a few areas that have come up today, but I will first continue on the city and region growth deals with a quick question about a particular case—the Corran Narrows ferry—that happens to be in your constituency and my region. There has been repurposing of UK Government and Scottish Government funds for infrastructure and for a new ferry. I am not going to dwell on whether that is what the community wants or whether it is the right answer. Do you have any concerns that repurposing that money and directing it to other areas might affect the overall objectives of the deal, given that, before the deals were in place, the funding would probably have had to come from councils, together with the Scottish Government? The deals are therefore not really being used for the intentions that existed in the first place.

I will finish on this point. We should remember that we centralised control of the tourism centres and the local tourism bodies, and we are now basically asking communities to go back to running and marketing their own tourism, certainly on the ground. It feels as if we are almost going back to where we started. I do not disagree with you; in many ways, local communities have the most passion, knowledge and understanding when it comes to these matters. I am just saying that we have gone through a process of flipping between the two.