Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 10 Jan 2001

Meeting date: Wednesday, January 10, 2001

Official Report 143KB pdf

---

Petitions

We have three petitions before us this morning. Petition PE23, from Save Wemyss Ancient Caves Society, calls for action to be taken to repair storm damage to the access to the caves. The petition has been on-going for some time—members will recall that we first considered it in January last year. Considerable work has been done on the petition and issues have been raised with Fife Council and the Executive. I suggest that we send the papers to the petitioners and await any comments from them. There may be nothing further that we can do at this stage, although members may think otherwise.

Is there anybody in the public gallery who is here with regard to any of the petitions that we are considering today? If so, I suggest that we give them the opportunity to address us.

I have no problem with that suggestion. Is there anybody here on behalf of the Save Wemyss Ancient Caves Society? I see that there is not. Are members happy with the course of action that I have proposed?

It is a pity that, despite the fact that this issue has been running for more than year, neither we nor Fife Council are making a huge amount of progress on it. However, the most recent letter from Fife Council indicates some movement on the matter. It would be useful to keep up the pressure, as I noted that, somewhere in the papers that we have received in the past year, attention is drawn to the rising water levels. Although Robin Harper did not draw attention to that point when the petition was discussed by the Transport and the Environment Committee, it is obviously a concern; if sea levels are rising, the caves will be flooded or badly damaged. That needs to be addressed urgently. Progress is being made and the petition could be referred back to the Public Petitions Committee, which could keep pushing the matter.

From reading the papers, I think that there is an issue that we could usefully highlight, perhaps once we have received a response from the petitioners. Organisations face difficulties in attracting funding for projects whose primary purpose is to preserve part of our heritage or something of cultural value to the nation, as the funding criterion always seems to be whether any investment could achieve an economic benefit. Historic Scotland and the Executive have not readily felt able to support initiatives to bring about a resolution that would please the petitioners in this case, as the artefacts that we are trying to preserve are part of our cultural heritage. The question is how we value such artefacts or sites or measure their value in economic terms. Until we resolve that question, issues such as this will continue to arise all over the country where parts of our national heritage are under threat and it is difficult to attract funding to protect them.

That is a reasonable point, to which we may wish to return in more detail.

Petition PE233 is from the Technology Teachers Association. Is there anyone in the gallery in connection with this petition? There is not.

I have asked a couple of questions about how the Executive is addressing the fall in the number of presentations for examination in technological studies and the availability of technology teachers, but the questions have received holding replies—they say that the minister will reply in due course—so I cannot comment on the answers. Part of the reason for the decline will relate to the fact that other choices are being made—if choice is widened, certain subjects will be taken up less. Clearly, this issue needs to be examined. Technology is an important subject in the eyes of everyone who stands back and looks at the matter. I do not know where we go from here. I have asked the questions, but the answers are not immediately available.

I, too, am concerned about this issue. I think that we have to take the petition very seriously, particularly because it has been submitted by a teachers organisation.

I found one parliamentary question on this matter that had been answered. Kenny MacAskill asked about the number of children being presented for examination in technological studies at standard and higher grade in the past five years. The answer takes the form of a complicated table, from which I will give one global figure. In 1995, 5,978 candidates were presented for examination at standard grade, but, in 1999, the number had dropped to 3,649. That demonstrates the problem. The number of pupils taking technological studies is undoubtedly falling. The subject is almost dropping off the curriculum—we should ask why that is happening. It will be difficult to reinstate skills, infrastructure, teaching and enthusiasm for the subject once it has been lost.

As well as the statistics, we could also usefully examine the level of support that has been expressed by the organisations that are most involved. In its response to the Executive's reply, the Technology Teachers Association says that support for the petition has been expressed by a number of organisations, but we have not seen the letters of support that it has received. It would be useful to know whether organisations such as the United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association, Electronics Scotland and Scottish Engineering, which are major players in high-level industries, have supported the petition and share the concerns of the Technology Teachers Association about the fact that youngsters are not coming through the system with the skills and training to slot easily into the positions that those industries are trying to fill. All of us who are concerned about Scotland's industry and its ability to compete with the rest of world have to consider this matter and view it with some importance. If it is the case that we are not training youngsters adequately to take up the jobs that are available in high-level industries, we are failing somewhere.

That is a key point. The petition is interesting, as is the minister's response, albeit slightly evasive. However, our information is incomplete. We do not have the information from industry and universities that we need to judge whether we should pursue the petition. The committee paper says that the Public Petitions Committee asked the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee to consider whether there is a deficit in applied technology training in schools, which would have a knock-on effect on universities, but that is a narrow point, as a much wider range of organisations than just universities are affected. I wonder whether we could ask the clerks to seek comments on the petition from other bodies, such as industry bodies and universities. We could consider the petition again when we have received responses.

The issue is wide. We need to consider what is happening in schools, including the issues of gender—girls are doing a lot better—and development and advice to young people. Certainly, in my area, which contains employers from the petrochemical industry, there is concern about the number of people in schools who have not considered working in industry. That is the case not just in relation to technical areas; across the board, people have not given much thought to industry. People in industry are concerned about the lack of advice on technical subjects.

We may want to return to the issue, which is important for the skills base. Companies are saying that in 10 or 20 years they will not be able to operate in Grangemouth or elsewhere because they cannot recruit young people who have the skills and want to enter the industry. I am aware that the McCrone committee considered this matter. We may wish to reconsider the contents of the petition, but we must also examine the wider issue of what is being done in Scotland to encourage young men and women to consider a career in industry. Industry has become an unfashionable area in which to work.

It would be useful to have detailed information from educational authorities about the Technology Teachers Association's assessment, as the situation varies across the country. The position will be affected by personal choice and local factors such as the push that is made. There seems to be a dichotomy between what the association is saying and the broader debate in which we are all involved on preparing for new technologies and industries. We should try to bring things together. We should perhaps seek the views of people such as Frank Pignatelli, who was involved in the Scottish University for Industry; I am sure that such people will be critical of the situation, given that there are those who would take technical and technology education to fourth-year level and then move into employment and those who might want to take those courses from fourth year into higher level and on to the university sector.

Only yesterday, I received some correspondence on this matter, which merits more investigation before we can say much to the petitioners. One important aspect that the petition raises is the level to which technological studies can be taken. People may not take a standard grade if they do not think that they will take the subject further and so they do not take it up at all.

I am reminded—this is a small anecdote—of my own experience. My best subject at school was technical drawing—

Mine was woodwork.

However, when I wanted to go into architecture—which is what I did—I was advised by my careers guidance officer to drop technical drawing, as I would not need it. A course that may be required for, say, the petrochemical or any other technological industry may not be matched by the technological teaching in schools.

It would be easy for us to dismiss the petition or to support it but, without knowing more about the subject, we cannot do either.

I suggest that we try to gain some more information about the petition. Perhaps we should write to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland. Frank Pignatelli would also be a good source of information. We should also write to the trade groups that are involved in some of the bigger industries. Once we have that information, we could consider the petition in more detail.

We should also ask the petitioners what responses they have had, as I know that they have been pursuing the matter with industry.

Perhaps we could contact Scottish Enterprise as well.

We must take that action bearing in mind the committee's remit—we must not stray from that—in relation to how education is delivered and how technological studies deliver for industry.

Petition PE307 is from the Scottish traditional music lobbying group. I understand that representatives of the group are here—in fact, the petitioner is here. If he would like to say something, I am more than happy—

I might just clarify a couple of points.

Come and have a seat.

It is a pure coincidence that our petition is being discussed on the same day as Celtic Connections starts in Glasgow, but if members were to look at the scale and success of that festival, which attracts major artists from across the world, they would think that everything is healthy and rosy in the garden of traditional arts. However, that is only one side of the coin; although I am a great supporter of Celtic Connections, its success could be countered with the fact that last year saw the demise of the Edinburgh Folk Festival and the official closure of Balnain House on hogmanay. I spoke to Caroline Hewat of Balnain House at the Celtic Connections reception last night; it does not seem that great progress is being made in setting up an alternative facility in the north. I heard that people were seeking to obtain alternative premises in order to continue the educational and developmental side of Balnain House, rather than the commercial side. That is the other side of the coin: year after year, folk clubs are struggling and many have to close down or considerably curtail their activities.

The first point in our petition asks the Parliament to promote as proactively as possible traditional arts and culture. I would like to clarify that point a little. Projects such as community arts projects, of which the Adult Learning Project in Edinburgh is a good example, are behind our thinking. The Edinburgh project is largely self-financing—it raises its own funds by running ceilidhs, the money from which goes back into similar projects. However, the grass roots need to be supported, as it is at that level that young adults are encouraged to learn traditional music, play instruments and sing—the project has more than 400 students who are learning those skills.

The second point in our petition takes the issue back further, to schools. It is good to have cultural champions, but I, and the group that I represent, would like traditional arts to be incorporated into the curriculum, whether they are tied into Scottish history or into culture in general. That would give every child the opportunity, if they want it, to access their culture and to play traditional music or to learn traditional signing. In many schools, a child who picks up a musical instrument is encouraged to learn classical music. Kids should have the opportunity to go for traditional music—they should pick up the fiddle if they want and learn it. That would start the process, which would continue through the community-based initiatives.

On the final point in our petition, I know that there might be some controversy around regional arts centres, as, in some ways, money would be put into buildings, which, as we have seen with Balnain House, is an expensive operation. However, the centres must be spread around Scotland in order to reflect the variety in traditions, music, song and dance culture throughout the country—the traditional arts in Edinburgh are not the same as they are in the north-west Highlands, the islands or Aberdeenshire. Our thinking is that there must be centres to reflect the variety of the traditions in different parts of the country. Local authorities might have a role; I recognise that they are strapped for cash, but they could provide premises at reasonable and affordable rents, which would get around the problem of the expense of maintaining buildings such as Balnain House.

Our group believes that there is an inequality in recognition, support and funding for the different forms of art in Scotland, especially in comparison with what is provided for the allegedly high arts. I was at the debate on the national cultural strategy; I believe that Scottish Opera gets £6 million a year and classical music gets £4 million. I appreciate that the traditional arts will get an extra £1.5 million over three years, but that says it all to me. If we are to value our culture, we must ensure that there is more support and funding for the traditional arts and culture, which are too valuable to lose.

Thank you very much for your comments. Over the past year and a half, the Education, Culture and Sport Committee has consistently raised the issue of traditional arts. We welcome the petition, as it helps to put back on the agenda a matter that might have slipped off.

Mr Carnegie, you made a number of valuable points, which I am sure we will want to consider in some detail. Your final point about the discrepancies in funding is one that the committee has flagged up on numerous occasions, particularly during our inquiry into the financial situation of Scottish Opera and during our discussion of the cultural strategy and how traditional arts can be supported in Scotland.

I suggest that we should have a committee report on the petition and that, given Cathy Peattie's experience and interest, she should prepare that report. There are issues to do with the funding of cultural and regional centres and it would help us to move the debate forward if Cathy examined those issues in some detail and came back to us with a report.

Cathy Peattie is the ideal person to do that work.

The petition is timely—as you said, convener—and it is right that we should keep the issue in our sights. I am always nervous of the either/or argument in cultural funding. However, there is a great deal of sense in what Dougal Carnegie said, particularly given the parliamentary answer that I received some weeks ago, in which I noticed that the cost of the failed merger between Scottish Opera and Scottish Ballet was well over £500,000. My question attempted to make sense of a strange funding pattern within classical music—one can only dream about what £500,000 would have achieved for the Scottish traditional arts.

It was important that Dougal Carnegie reminded us about the current tragic difficulties of Balnain House. That example also raises a question mark over the third point that is made in the petition. While I am not in any sense against investing in traditional arts centres, the difficulties of sustaining Balnain House, which were regrettable, might lead us to wonder whether investing in buildings in that way might skew the amount of funding that might be available for other activities.

However, I support thoroughly the proposal that Cathy Peattie should produce a report for the committee. We should take account of that report in our discussion of the next agenda item, which is our work programme. We should timetable consideration of that report in late spring, so that we can put some impetus into the matter and persuade the Scottish Arts Council to do a lot more.

I have frequently made the point about languages in Scotland in the chamber and, when we consider Scottish traditional arts and culture, we should bear in mind the fact that if we do not do anything about them, no one else will. Nobody on the planet but us is responsible for looking after our culture. If only people who live elsewhere are looking after our culture because they are interested in it, we are seriously failing. The culture is ours—it is our duty to do something about it.

I support the suggestion that Cathy Peattie produce our report. I cannot add much to what Mike Russell has said. The petitioner mentioned the teaching of music in schools and I have great concerns about that. I hope that Cathy will consider it in her report. Related to the teaching of music is the teaching of dance in schools. One aspect of Scottish traditional music is that it is not only music to listen to, but music to dance to. Dance also needs to be taught in schools.

I ask members to support my motion on Sir James Shand, which has been lodged in a cross-party spirit. I hope that members will feel able to sign it.

I have already done so.

I grew up listening to Jimmy Shand, so I am bound to sign it. His music is in my blood.

I welcome the petition and it was good to hear Dougal Carnegie speaking about it. He has attended so many of our meetings that I expect one day to see his name in front of him at the table. He said all the things that needed to be said. I am happy to go away and do the report.

Convener, you were right: I am reminded of Ian Smith's comment when we took evidence on the national companies, that something like 7 per cent of Arts Council funding goes into traditional music. Something is very wrong there, when we consider the effect of an event such as Celtic Connections on Glasgow's economy and tourism and the sheer celebration of the arts in Scotland that will take place this month. We should be doing something about it. I agree with Mike Russell; if we do not do something and if we do not hold on to our culture, no one else will.

I look forward to working on the report—but to a realistic timetable, because I would like to meet a host of people.

I would like the committee to consider something even broader, but which takes in what Dougal Carnegie talked about. It strikes me, Dougal, that the success of Celtic Connections is predicated on a number of things. It requires fairly substantial public support and it continues to receive that support from the local authority. Local authorities are crucial to the development of any arts or music strategy. The festival has also benefited from merging traditional and contemporary music. Its programme shows balance and mixture, including folk and country from the USA as well as traditional Scottish music.

That leads me to the debate in the Scottish Arts Council. I am interested in popular and contemporary music and traditional music, so I wonder whether Cathy Peattie could also look into those kinds of music and the issue of young people's engagement in the music industry. I know that cross-party working groups have been set up on that subject. I do not know whether we could use Ian Smith as a reference point, rather than setting up a separate inquiry into the popular music industry. A number of key players in that industry would consider such an inquiry into Arts Council expenditure and local authority commitment as a priority. We need to think about that.

The areas of Scotland that have supported popular music well—I am thinking of my experience in Glasgow—have done so because of committed public support for different art forms. Support has been given to things such as the Arches and Celtic Connections, but it has been recognised that the dynamics of the industry are changing. We should not have a fixed perspective. I wonder whether it would be worth while for Cathy Peattie, in her report, to cut across into some other issues as well. The bigger debate in the cultural industries in Scotland concerns the cultural strategy and the relationship with the Scottish Arts Council.

I am not convinced about the case for regional arts centres. I would need to be persuaded about that, but it is worth exploring. I hear from musicians that they are interested in support for individual musicians to help their development, rather than premises. That is not to say that premises are not important, but the core issue should be to try to develop the art form.

If members do not feel that Cathy Peattie should also consider those issues, I would certainly be interested in coming back to the committee with information on popular and contemporary music. For many young people, those are important issues.

I will suggest a couple of things. First, the petition is important and it is the petition that we should be discussing. We do not want to lose sight of the issues that it raises by discussing other things, because that could get out of control. It is important that we consider traditional arts in context and that there is an inquiry. However, Cathy Peattie will be aware of the comments that committee members have made and, when she meets the Arts Council and other organisations, she can flag those comments up and then come back to us so that we can have further discussion on them within our debate on the cultural strategy.

It would be good to allow Cathy as much time as possible, but I would like to have a report back before the summer recess. We can then, in October, pick up any issues that interest us.

Frank McAveety has introduced an interesting topic. On two previous occasions during discussion of our work programme, the committee has considered looking into the Scottish music industry, but has shied away from it. I resist the idea of Cathy Peattie taking that on as an additional responsibility, because the petition is clear about what it wants. We would not do the petitioner a service if we diluted it. However, I am persuaded that we need to look into the Scottish music industry as a whole. Frank has made an offer and he is the man with the largest collection of vinyl and other substances known to man.

You had better clarify that.

No, I will just leave it as it is. However, if Frank McAveety were to look into the Scottish music industry—especially into the question that he raised about engaging young people in the cultural debate—and if that work were to run in parallel with Cathy's inquiry, we would see two very interesting reports before the summer, which would contribute to our debates. Frank should be asked to do that—he has not been here 10 minutes and he has got a job.

Are you happy with that, Frank?

Yes, I am.

Right—we will go ahead with two reports.

And Mike and I did not discuss this before the meeting.

Members know that we have to consider the cultural strategy. The two reports will help to expand our discussion—when we come to it—on that strategy. Perhaps we can set our timetable so that we discuss the cultural strategy after we receive the reports.

I agree with what Mike Russell said about the role of the committee. It seems obvious from this discussion that the petitioner—on the general points if not, perhaps, on some of the details—is pushing at an open door. We and Parliament can change the way in which the arts are thought of. Irene McGugan spoke earlier about our heritage and about cultural funding. We need more information and these reports will be helpful.

I thank the petitioner for raising the issue with us and for helping us to have what I think has been one of the better discussions that we have had for some time—it has been positive.