Enterprise and Culture Committee, 26 Oct 2004

Meeting date: Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Official Report 264KB pdf

---

Arts in the Community Inquiry

We shall take evidence from the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport and her team. I welcome the new minister, Patricia Ferguson, to the committee. As this is the first meeting between us, I congratulate her on behalf of the committee on her appointment and wish her all the best. We want to work together with the minister for the benefit of tourism, culture and sport in Scotland.

The minister has circulated a paper and is quite keen that we should move straight to questions. The first question is from Murdo Fraser.

I was looking at paragraph 6 of your submission, which relates to guidance for local authorities. The reason that that came to mind is that, during the recess, Jamie Stone and I went to Inverness to meet some of the people who are involved in community arts in the Highlands and Islands. That was interesting and quite instructive, because quite a number of the people whom we met were critical of Highland Council. Some people praised Highland Council, but others were critical. The Executive is clearly setting its objectives, but the delivery of those objectives is down to the local authorities. Do you have any comment on that? Specifically, how do you try to resolve that tension around seeking to deliver policies on community arts at Executive level, while the implementation of those policies is not within your control? How do you encourage local authorities to deliver your objectives?

I thank the committee for that warm welcome, and I can reassure you all that I will not take personally the fact that so many members are missing this afternoon. As the person who, as business manager, allowed Richard Baker to be off today for his honeymoon, I suppose that I have to take some responsibility for that. Given my long attendance at the bureau in one capacity or another over the past five years, I also sympathise entirely with Mr Stone. I am sure that he would enjoy himself more thoroughly here than he will where he is, but I assured him that the meeting would not last very long, so I hope that I am proven right on that point.

Murdo Fraser is correct to identify the fact that there will always be that kind of tension. Tensions could exist between the Executive's priorities and local authorities' priorities in a number of areas, not only in the area of community arts. We are keen to work with local authorities to ensure that we can reduce whatever tensions there might be.

It is important to acknowledge that local authorities will set their own priorities. From memory, I recall that the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 talks about adequate resourcing but does not specify what adequate means. That is an interesting debate. We have to take into account the role of the Scottish Arts Council. In the Highlands and Islands, the SAC has been active in trying to ensure that people work in partnership rather than in isolation. We also have to consider that the delivery of an arts and culture policy can be more difficult in the Highlands and Islands because of the geography.

Many such issues are being considered by the Cultural Commission and it will be interesting to see what it comes up with—especially after it has heard not only from the local authorities but from arts providers and administrators, because what they say will be of great interest. John Mason may want to add something.

I apologise: I should have welcomed John Mason, who is the head of the tourism, culture and sports group in the Scottish Executive, and Angela Saunders, who is the head of the national cultural strategy unit.

Thank you, convener.

I would like to add a point on the work that we did with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities on drawing up guidelines on best practice, and on what we hoped that COSLA would do in implementing arts and culture policies on the ground. To drive the work forward, we were planning to do some work with COSLA and VOCAL—the Voice of Chief Officers for Cultural, Community and Leisure Services. However, with the setting up of the Cultural Commission, we felt that it would be better for the commission to take on that next stage of the work. The commission is therefore working through ideas with VOCAL and COSLA. I hope that, at the end of the process, we will receive further recommendations on how we can better link national policy with local delivery.

I, too, congratulate the minister on her appointment. During our inquiry into arts in the community, we heard telling evidence in our first evidence session, and again in other sessions, of the intangible benefit that community arts and other arts experiences can offer. I am talking about the hair standing up on the back of the neck, and the smile on the face of the individual who has achieved something. In determining policy, in drawing up policy guidelines on funding and support, and in receiving feedback, where do you rank that gut feeling of "This is a good thing"? What sort of advice would you expect from civil servants and non-departmental public bodies?

You are right to suggest that many of the benefits are intangible. However, a community with a thriving arts element will be a healthy community—healthy in the broadest sense of the word. That could almost be an intangible measure of an intangible thing. It is the mark of a healthy community that it has a commitment to the arts in their broadest sense. From time to time, it will be necessary to measure and to monitor that, so that we can judge whether the resources that have been given to projects are being used in a way that benefits communities. However, the fact that there is willingness to get involved in arts activities is, in itself, a measure. I am keen that such activities should develop, but I agree with Christine May that the benefits will always be, in some respects, intangible. However, arts can add to the overall sense of well-being in a community. Without arts, communities are much less vibrant and healthy.

As a supplementary, I should point out that those who gave evidence on this matter said that it was difficult to encapsulate that intangible benefit in a return. The fact that there was no box to tick led me to ask about the advice that you expect to receive on how that aspect might be incorporated into policy and funding support.

The committee will be aware that the literature review that we have undertaken will help us with that process. At the moment, I have not been able to consider the matter as much as I would like to have done and will do over the coming weeks and months; however, the review makes it clear that we must have more ways of measuring what we do. We are about to carry out a research exercise into whether there are better ways of measuring some activities and of determining what some of the opportunities might be. Indeed, we must not just measure what has been done but find out whether there might be opportunities to do more or whether we can intervene in areas where there have been no activities. It is very much a work in progress.

The committee will be very interested to see that study.

I, too, welcome the minister to her new position.

In paragraph 7 of your paper, you mention the First Minister's St Andrew's day address and say:

"Cabinet Ministers are now working together to drive forward the Executive's vision, identifying ways in which their shared objectives can … bring culture closer".

When can we expect an announcement on how ministers will work together to bring culture into every portfolio? After all, the First Minister's St Andrew's day address promised major announcements over the coming 12 months and we are now 11 months into that period.

There have been discussions between ministers across portfolios. As you rightly point out—indeed, as the First Minister identified—culture and the arts are not necessarily one minister's responsibility, even though the major shareholding in those matters rests with my portfolio. In certain areas, there will be cross-cutting agendas that we should follow and work has begun on those matters.

I have begun a series of discussions with my colleagues to find out where they have reached in that work and to try to make some progress. Members will forgive me if I do not know much of the detail of that; however, I am particularly interested in this area, because it is obvious that cross-cutting work needs to be done. For example, with regard to the geographical problems in the Highlands and Islands that Murdo Fraser highlighted, dial-a-bus and dial-a-taxi initiatives might encourage people to take advantage of opportunities to participate in or to enjoy art in one form or another, even though those opportunities might be a little far from where they live.

Again, John Mason might be able to say a little more about some of the ideas that have been discussed.

I do not want to give away any of those ideas, because they will appear in the report. The committee might recall that we produce an annual report on the developments in the national cultural strategy over the year. Indeed, one such report is due to be published later this calendar year. Some matters are still to be decided, but we hope that this year's report will specify the various activities that have been discussed between portfolio ministers, particularly the new or improved actions that have been taken forward as a result.

In response to Chris Ballance's question, we hope later this year to publish a full report of how those discussions have progressed and the initiatives that have emerged from them.

Yesterday, as I was reading the latest edition of Holyrood magazine—obviously with some interest, as it contained an article on the First Minister's reshuffle—I came across an interesting article by Graham Berry of the Scottish Arts Council and a lovely photograph of the clown doctor's scheme. Although that scheme has been funded under the health portfolio, it is an example of the kind of work that we hope to do. Examples of cross-cutting work are out there, and I encourage members who have not yet read their Holyrood magazine to do so. We would also welcome any ideas that committee members might have in that respect.

Paragraph 14 of the minister's paper says that the Cultural Commission's interim report will be published in October. Given that today is 26 October, is the interim report on target for publication? Will it be published this week?

The report will not be published this week, but it will probably be available next week. That is what we are aiming for.

Okay.

I thank the minister not only for setting out the mechanics of the process that is under way but for sharing her thoughts with us. I would be interested to hear the minister's view on some of the recurrent themes that are coming through in the work in which all of us are engaged in different ways.

First, I return to the question that Christine May raised about evaluation. You seemed to indicate that you have considerable sympathy for the view that the existing evaluation and monitoring processes struggle to capture many of the benefits of various arts-related activities to individuals and communities. It is a bit like trying to store water in a shoe box—the two do not work together. None of us has the magic solution.

Having read the documentation on the literature review, I note that it made a similar observation. However, I am a little concerned to hear that another piece of research is to be commissioned—it seems that we are to get yet more examination of the issue. Are there not some leaps of faith that we could make? Could not some significant step changes be made, even on an experimental basis? To do so would move us away from the paper and tick-box approach. Frankly, it would allow the flowers to bloom a little more at community level. Common sense, judgment and human instinct tell us that certain activities are working. What is your response to that suggestion?

I hope that, from my comments, the committee will see that I am very sympathetic to that view. The many creative activities—I am thinking more widely than just the arts—make an important contribution to our communities. However, we cannot get away from the fact that, from time to time, some kind of evaluation is required, not least so that, if something has not worked, we do not continue it. Perhaps the activity can be changed or modified or, if not, we can move on to something new that will give the community those kinds of benefits.

We are trying to come on to qualitative ways of measuring social impact and how things have worked in a community. We need to know whether, if a cross-cutting element was involved, for example, it worked in both or many of those areas. We might find that an element worked in one area but not in others and that it might be worth while continuing it on that basis. We have to be flexible about how we do that. That said, it is worth trying to establish a playing field that everyone is clear about, even if it is a playing field on which we can be flexible depending on the circumstances.

I will pursue the point a little further, if I may. I think that you said that there was a place for a more qualitative approach to be taken. Do you see an individual's articulation of their experience and of what their involvement means to them as something that could and should be given greater weight in the process? In some of our discussions, we heard about audience feedback. For example, we heard about the enjoyment that people secured from a performance—someone referred to it as people having a smile on their faces.

As we all know, there are harder edges to some of these things. I am thinking of an individual who might say that two years ago they suffered from depression and were taking medication but that, since they got involved in the local arts club or whatever, their well-being, health and self-confidence have been transformed. We know that such links exist—indeed, the Executive's research bears out that finding. Are you sympathetic to the suggestion that we should find ways of giving extra weight in the evaluation process to the personal testimony of individuals?

Very much so. I return to the point that I made at the beginning about community involvement in the arts being the sign of a healthy community. In itself, that could be one of the measures. We could sit for hours discussing what a healthy community is, but I think that we all know what we mean by the phrase. However, there have to be different approaches. I do not know whether Executive officials have given thought to that, but the research that we are undertaking is going down that road.

Under the heading of the national cultural strategy, your submission refers to the cultural co-ordinators in schools programme. Questions have already been asked about departmental cross-cutting and how communities can build the artistic or creative activity to which you referred in your previous answer, and it is a fundamental point that if young people get certain habits early on—good habits, I hope—those habits are likely to stay with them into later life. What role do the school cultural co-ordinators have in relation to community arts? The co-ordinators are funded partly through the Education Department and partly through your department and, contrary to public perception, most of them are not schoolteachers but are practising artists in one form or another. What contribution have they made outwith the school community, not only in terms of what happens when the youngsters grow older but by making links with cultural organisations in their communities?

Your point about the habits that young people get into early is relevant. Anyone who, like me, learned to play an instrument at primary school will know that, although the outcome might have been bad, as it was in my case—when I listened to Nicola Benedetti, I knew that I had made the right decision when I gave up my instrument—the experience was not bad because of the enjoyment that was gained. The enjoyment of being part of a group that participates in music making and of learning about music, albeit relatively informally, is almost intangible but we all recognise it as important.

To be honest, I am not up to speed with how much the cultural co-ordinators work outwith the school community. Perhaps John Mason or Angela Saunders has a bit more information about how that programme has progressed.

The cultural co-ordinators in schools programme involves teachers and others from the arts community who are not teachers but who help young people to maximise their opportunities through culture and the arts while they are at school. We have evaluated the project continually since it started, because we were keen to know how it was developing, and there are some good examples of its impact on children. However, in other areas the programme has not been quite so successful, so we need to consider it over the piece and determine how we can build on the good examples when we decide how to progress with it.

What plans are there for the programme? It was introduced initially as a two or three-year project, but that must be just about coming to a close now. Will it be mainstreamed?

Yes.

When is the latest annual report on the national cultural strategy due to be published? I do not want you to pre-empt that report, but what, in general terms, will it say about community art in its various forms? I hope that future annual reports will take account of what the committee will say in its report at the end of the inquiry.

I will answer that by going back in time to November last year to the First Minister's St Andrew's day address, which said that the national cultural strategy had been a wonderful start—a lot had been achieved and there had been some amazing initiatives and successes—but that it had not been as ambitious as he would have liked. That is where the vision for arts and culture in Scotland came from: the First Minister articulated it on St Andrew's day. He said that there would be a cultural policy statement that would link in with the launch of the cultural review. As you know, that happened in April this year. The new cultural policy statement encapsulated some of the key themes from the St Andrew's day address in its first part and, in its second part, presented the remit of the Cultural Commission, which was announced at that stage to undertake the review.

You might ask where the national cultural strategy sits in relation to that. When the strategy was launched in August 2000, it was intended to be a four-year policy framework. Of course, those four years have now concluded. At the moment, the department is working towards an audit of the actions that were announced in that strategy to determine what progress has been made in each case. In a sense, that should roll up the various annual reports that came out each year and should provide a definitive statement of progress in the various actions. We hope to produce that later this year.

So instead of being an annual report, it will be a review of the strategy.

It will look back over the four-year period.

We would very much welcome the committee's comments on the inquiry that we are undertaking. I know that the plan is to give those results to the Cultural Commission. I am pleased that the committee wants to do that, as that will be worth while.

Our plan is to issue a report sometime in early December. Hopefully, we will manage to stick to that timescale.