Chamber and committees

I am thinking about that dialogue with the sector—with the culture community, in the broader sense. When you hear voices speaking up for what they want from legislation in this area, do you think that that foreshadows any revisiting in the relatively near future, perhaps towards the end of the current session of Parliament, of the strategic decisions that you are making right now? Are there positives that could come out of that, or is there a danger that possible new legislation might mean revisiting what Creative Scotland is as an organisation? Could it change the legislative landscape in a way that means that you have to go back and do some of that work again?

There is a last question from me before I bring in other members. I was trying to remind myself last night, when I was on the train through to Edinburgh, about the 2010 act that set up Creative Scotland. It is a big piece of legislation; even the sections that deal only with Creative Scotland are quite hefty. However, I could not find in it anything that defines “culture”. Does the 2010 act define culture? Do any of the directives or guidance that the Scottish Government has given you tell you what you need to understand by “culture”?

We hear people say, for example, that comedy should be regarded as part of culture, but it is not funded by Creative Scotland. I have heard Scotland’s science centres say that science should be regarded as part of culture and ought to be able to access those funding streams. There have been ongoing debates about the extent to which the games sector can be seen as culture, as opposed to purely part of enterprise or economic policy. Where do you get your definition of culture from?

09:45

Is that a discussion between Creative Scotland and the Government—

I forget the long title, but there was a task force that produced a set of recommendations on the fair work agenda in the sector. There is also recognition that Creative Scotland is not the employer of everybody working in the culture sector and that there are therefore limits to the extent to which Creative Scotland, in the way that you undertake your work, can practically and in reality embed fair work practices across the sector. Where are you at with the issue, and to what extent does that feature in your action plan for implementing the independent review’s recommendations for how Creative Scotland’s work goes forward? We have seen controversy in relation to fair work practices in the games sector, in a location just across the road from the Parliament, and a number of impacts on freelancers and independent organisations that receive Creative Scotland funding. The Centre for Contemporary Arts is another example of people’s livelihoods and living being left high and dry by the events that took place there, and there have been many examples of that around the country. In reality, how effectively will you be able to embed fair work principles?

Well, we all look forward to opportunities to discuss it when we see it, and much else besides on your agenda. As members have no final questions for witnesses, I thank you all very much—I know that the meeting has run for slightly longer than we planned, but I appreciate your time.

11:10

Meeting continued in private until 11:29.

Thank you for that—we will carry on with the funding theme for the moment.

I am going to tweak the order a little bit, because I think that Heather Anderson wanted to touch on the local government issue that has just come up, and then I will come to Pauline Stafford.

Thank you.

Item 2 is to decide whether to take items 4 and 5 in private. Do members agree to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

That brings us to the main business of the meeting. Item 3 is evidence from Creative Scotland on progress towards implementing the recommendations from the independent review that took place last year. I warmly welcome Iain Munro, chief executive of Creative Scotland; Isabel Davis, executive director of Screen Scotland; and Alastair Evans, director of strategy at Creative Scotland.

We have all been provided with a substantial amount of written evidence, including a fairly recent update and progress report. To begin, perhaps you could give us a brief overview of where you feel you are at in terms of progress to date, what the current challenges are and whether there have been any tensions or alterations in direction since the recommendations were made.

Thank you. I will start with some questions about how that fits into the broader timeline. For any organisation, taking a batch of recommendations from a review such as this could be seen as a bit of a snapshot, but it takes a long time for these questions to be considered and then resolved, and the recommendations implemented. A funding trajectory has been set, which is positive. Sometimes more money generates as much controversy as less money, so there are challenges as well as opportunities there.

We have had the independent review, and the Government now has a commitment to consult on legislation on culture and arts. That is a bit of a blank page—I see that as a positive; I am not trying to be critical of the fact that there is not a defined legislative agenda. An open consultation is going to take place about what kind of legislation the sector needs.

We—or Scotland in the broader sense—have set a funding trajectory and begun a review of Creative Scotland, which has included a recommendation that the current legislative basis of Creative Scotland is adequate and does not need to be changed. You are now developing your target operating model in the light of that, and then we will consult on the legislation. Are we doing all that in the right order?