Chamber and committees

That is perhaps something for us, as a committee, to probe with the Government. Thank you.

I will make an observation. Creative Scotland was established in 2010 under the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Act 2010, during a previous wave of public service reform. That act dissolved Scottish Screen and took its remit into Creative Scotland. Then, in 2018, Screen Scotland was established within Creative Scotland, and we are now putting it out on its own.

At the same time, we have this overarching narrative from the Government about the need to reduce public sector bodies or, at least, to rationalise them. I speak to people who have worked in the national health service for years, and they tell me that they have observed a similar pattern of the same ideas coming back around. It seems that, if you work in a service long enough, you end up back where you started. Do you think that it feels as if we are going around in circles?

I appreciate your point that this is a huge area of growth, and we should absolutely back the sectors that are bringing growth, particularly in the culture sphere. Ultimately, however, the Government is facing a £5 billion shortfall in its budget and, whatever it may say, that is what is motivating a lot of public service reform. This might be a question for Iain Munro as well, but are there pieces of work that the Government has asked you—or other bodies in what is quite a full landscape—to stop doing so that administrative and financial efforts can be focused on the new separate entity of Screen Scotland? Has the Government had that level of discussion with either of you?

I want to touch on regional funding. The review referenced that there had been cuts to regional and lead officers. The feedback from stakeholders was that that had made the organisation seem more distant and perhaps less visible on the ground. Where do you have a physical presence? Where do you have officers?

I am still interested to know what the impact of the loss of regional officers has been. The stakeholders’ testimony was that the work of Creative Scotland has perhaps become a bit more distant.

The paper that you provided shows the success rates of Creative Scotland funding award applications by local authority area. There is huge variation across the country; awards are not going purely to the central belt. However, some of the lowest acceptance rates include 33 per cent in the Falkirk Council area and 34 per cent in Dumfries and Galloway. First, there are patches of the country where it seems that fewer applications are being made—Falkirk and West Lothian councils had among the fewest applications for funding. Secondly, some council areas, such as Falkirk and Dumfries and Galloway, had quite a low acceptance rate compared with that other parts of the country where it sat well above 50 per cent. How do you square what you have just told me with that empirical data? How do you see that tracking across?

My other questions relate to public service reform and Screen Scotland, convener, so you might want to bring other members in.

Will you just answer my first question, please? Where do you have officers?

That was going to be my next question. You have said that there are specific local areas where there might have been issues and that you have worked to improve the acceptance—or, I should say, success—rate in them. Have you done that through working with the local authority? With whom have you worked to do that? Could you answer that specific question?

No—that was helpful.

On 11 March 2026, your predecessor as culture secretary told the chamber:

“I am in favour of multiyear funding being delivered for the national performing companies.”—[Official Report, 11 March; c 3.]

I know that that is an ask from them, as it is, I am sure, from many organisations. The cabinet secretary then said that he supported that, although he was not really in a place to do anything about it at that stage, because the budget had already been passed. Can you say more about the Government’s position on multiyear funding for the national performing companies, including the new traditional music company?

Deputy First Minister, what should the Government or the Parliament do differently in the future? I take Mr Mackie’s point about the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill being a member’s bill, but it was in the headlines for years before it got to its final stages, so I do not accept that the Government did not know that such issues were coming. I imagine that a number of lawyers who work for the Government advise on such issues. What would you do differently? That question can be for Mr Mackie or the Deputy First Minister. For example, the human rights bill, whatever it may be, might interact with the Equality Act 2010, as was the case with the GRR legislation. What will you do differently so that there are not the same issues over the next five years?