National Cultural Strategy
We now move on to the debate on motion S1M-107, in the name of Mr Sam Galbraith, on a national cultural strategy.
I am pleased to open this debate on the national cultural strategy for Scotland. I believe that there has never been a better time for us to have such a cultural strategy. We face the future with the confidence of a nation with its own new Parliament. It is the intention of the Scottish Executive to prepare a cultural strategy so that we can properly promote and develop Scotland's diverse cultural interests in the new millennium.
Over the years, various aspects of cultural life have been subjected to scrutiny, review and research. Most recently, there has been the excellent work carried out by the Scottish Arts Council under the chairmanship of Ruth Wishart. The process on which we are embarked is different in that it is intended to be the first in which we draw together all parts of the cultures and arts in Scotland and go further in examining all aspects of our cultural life.
At this stage, nothing is ruled out and nothing is ruled in. We shall listen to what the people tell us in the consultation. However, it would be disingenuous not to make my starting point clear. The aim of this process is to establish a clear strategy and set of objectives, which we can all work together to achieve in the years to come.
This process is not about a wholesale restructuring of the arts and heritage sector. Some changes might be needed, but the focus is firmly on the arts and what they can do for individuals in our society. This is not an exercise in re- engineering bureaucracy. The strategy will recognise the richness and diversity of our culture and seek to harness it for the benefit of all our citizens. It will encompass all the arts, including music, dance, theatre, writing, sculpture, architecture, painting, design crafts, television, film, photography and video. The strategy will embrace the most recent developments in multimedia and the creative industries with their important associated economic effects.
The strategy will embrace Scotland's cultural heritage, our museums, galleries, libraries and the built heritage. It will celebrate the past, while preparing for the future. It will embrace the old and the new, the traditional and the modern. We also recognise that the Gaelic and Scots languages and traditions are each important and that the cultural wealth that other languages and traditions
have brought also has a contribution to make.
My colleague, Rhona Brankin, launched this process a few weeks ago in Inverness. Copies of the national cultural strategy are now available in print as well as on the internet and in this Parliament. Our aim is to ensure that the process is as inclusive as possible. To that end, we are planning a series of meetings throughout the country, from north to south and east to west. Those meetings will be open to the public and will be held during September, October and November.
I have asked this question before in relation to another matter. Mr Galbraith is talking about consulting throughout the country. When we talked about the education improvement bill, he said that he would consult young people. I have to say that the efforts at consultation have not been inclusive of young people. Will Mr Galbraith assure us that consultation on the cultural strategy will be better than that on the education bill, whose website has received only 24 messages?
I must explain to Fiona that it is in the nature of consultation for responses to be submitted in a rush at the end, rather than at this stage. It is not true to say that the consultation has not been inclusive—it has been very inclusive. We are only at the start of the process—we have September and October still to come—and we should resist rushing to judgment while it is still in its infancy.
I can assure members that everyone will be included. This strategy will not belong to anyone in particular—it will belong to the people of Scotland. It will not be the property of the Scottish Executive or of the Scottish Parliament; we want ideas from everyone. We want to reach as many people as possible, whether they be arts professionals, amateurs, large organisations, neighbourhood groups, multinational organisations or small businesses. We anticipate a healthy debate and even some argument.
This Parliament, as the assembly of elected representatives of the people of Scotland, has its own role to play. We can reach people in all parts of Scotland and conduct debates with our constituents. I hope very much that that will happen.
We are now at the start of the intensive process that I have described. Once the initial consultation is over, we will consider the responses that we have received. Certain themes or strands may then emerge on which we want to seek further views and advice. Our strategy will then be drawn up, taking into account the views of those who have responded. We intend to produce a strategy document by the middle of next year. It is important to stress that the process will not end with the production of that document. To be of any use, the strategy will need to be revisited regularly and updated when necessary.
It may be helpful if I take this opportunity to outline those areas on which we wish to focus particular attention. As I have said, the process is to be as inclusive and far-reaching as possible. We will certainly look at what have traditionally been considered to be the arts. We will also want to look at architecture, the built heritage, education, social inclusion, creative industries and the links that can be built up between those different areas.
In all that, our duty is to sustain quality and achievement and to ensure that everyone who wishes to participate in the arts is able to do so. Accessibility in the widest possible sense is the key to any future strategy. We want to ensure that those people who wish to participate in the arts in any way have an opportunity to do so and do not feel excluded.
We have a great wealth in our museums, galleries, libraries and built heritage. We have a rich and diverse built heritage of ancient monuments, archaeological sites, landscapes, historic buildings and townscapes, all of which provide an important, enriching, authentic and tangible record of the peoples of Scotland. The built heritage provides a sense of place and community throughout Scotland, in both urban and rural areas. It makes a major contribution to the sense of national identity that we all possess. Indeed, many of our cultural institutions are located in buildings of historical or architectural distinction.
Our stock of castles, great houses, abbeys and historic towns and villages is one of the principal reasons why tourists come to Scotland. There is thus a major economic as well as an intrinsic cultural value to our built heritage. There are also strong arguments, rooted in the principle of sustainability, for the retention and, where appropriate, re-use of our historic buildings.
We must strive for excellence in our new buildings, because they will be our monuments to future generations—our young people must be proud of them in times to come. That is why we made a commitment in the "Partnership for Scotland" agreement to develop a first-ever national policy on architecture for Scotland. Since we made that commitment, we have been preparing a framework document as the first step in the development of such a policy. The document will be published on 20 September and will set out the Government's views on the benefits of good architecture. It will also describe the potential role of Government in the promotion of policy and outline a framework for action. The
purpose of the document will be to raise awareness of the importance of good building design and to stimulate debate on the many issues that are involved in the making of good architecture.
Scotland is a nation at the cutting edge of technology, which, too, has links with culture. The value of the creative economy to Scotland is estimated at £5.3 billion and 91,000 jobs. However, there is potential for further growth and I am confident that the national cultural strategy can assist in further developing employment in the sector.
The market for culture is highly competitive and we must consider ways in which Scotland can promote and market its culture. We must use the opportunities that are offered by new technology, such as the internet and CD-ROMs, and by software design and development to raise the international awareness of our intellectual and cultural products. The Scottish cultural resources network, which I opened a few years ago, is a wonderful example of what can be achieved in that area.
We are an old and proud nation with an opportunity to build a new and even greater future. We should put in place a sound framework for the future of our culture. The consultation process that we are engaged in is the first step in designing a national strategy for the future development of Scotland's culture. We are giving all Scotland's people a chance to participate. We need to do that, and we need to do it now.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that culture, in all its diversity, has a central role in shaping a sense of community and civic pride in the new Scotland, and a contribution to make to its prosperity, health and cohesion; welcomes the Executive's proposals to develop a national cultural strategy for all of Scotland's people, and endorses the far- reaching consultation process on which Scottish Ministers have embarked.
I call on Michael Russell to open for the Scottish National party.
Your propriety as regards the names of parties was never questioned, Sir David.
I welcome this debate. The opportunity to discuss cultural matters is an example of why there should be an effective Parliament in Scotland. I have never been a member of the Westminster Parliament but, as I am sure the minister will confirm, the discussion of Scottish culture could never be central to the work of Westminster—that is not a criticism—although it can be central to our work.
I give a broad welcome to the Government's proposal, as culture is a subject on which there could be bipartisan support. I hope that that will develop. However, I am critical of this motion and lodged an amendment, which, unfortunately, was not called for debate. One of the difficulties I found in trying to amend the motion was its anodyne nature. Another difficulty was the reference— buried in the middle—to the national cultural strategy. There are many areas of cultural policy in which the Scottish National party would want to work with the Administration, but the national cultural strategy presents difficulties, on which I will concentrate today.
The Government's document is stylistically attractive but, as we will discover during this debate, lacking in substance. It opens with a quotation from the partnership agreement document, which the Government seems to believe is a work of art—it is certainly a work of fiction. It says:
"We believe that arts and culture have a central role in shaping a sense of community and civic pride in the new Scotland."
None of us would have any difficulty in endorsing that. We believe that arts and culture are central to our lives. Another quotation in this document, however, is even more accurate. It is from A L Kennedy, speaking in the Poets' Parliament. She says:
"I think Scottish writing has contributed to the moves that set up a Scottish parliament, but it did that by being nonaligned and anarchic and critical and all the things it is and I hope will remain".
The important nature of cultural activity of all sorts is that it should be anarchic, critical, nonaligned and exciting. Anybody who has been in Edinburgh in recent weeks will have found that even this douce city, which can be grey in the heart of winter, has its existence touched, transformed, shaken and enlightened by the intense application of the arts—even if some weeks ago the First Minister called some of the performances "fair hellish".
There is an enormous range of activity apart from the festival: the fringe, the television festival, the film festival, the book festival and a range of other activities. An early step that the minister might take would be to persuade the festival authorities that it is fundamentally daft to have a festival continuing without a fringe and that the festival period should be intensified, not diluted.
Creativity and culture should touch our national life. It should touch everyone because everyone can be transformed, shaken, enlightened and excited by creativity and everyone is creative. The real question in a cultural policy, therefore—and I do not want to talk about strategy—is what a Government can do to make that happen. What is
the Government's proper role? Its proper role is to encourage and support excellence, diversity, creativity and inclusion—those are all things that a Government must aim for. How is that to be done? It is to be done by consultation, discussion and financial support.
The question we have to ask of this strategy is: will it achieve its aims? I have to say that—at the moment, with the jury out—I, like many people, have severe doubts. The strategy is off to a bad start, because the right way of starting the search for the answer to those questions would have been to consult the other parties in the Parliament before the document was published.
For example, I am worried about the composition of the focus group—and about focus groups in the arts. I am sure that many of the people are well qualified, but the group does not seem to be particularly inclusive. If there had been an attempt to consult the other parties, we might have agreed on how we could contribute to the process.
So here is the document, fully formed. Indeed, the document is almost ironic, because although it contains Scottish Office prose, it also contains the most wonderful pearls—not written by the Scottish Office, of course. One of those pearls is this superb quote from Hugh MacDiarmid:
"He canna Scotland see wha yet
Canna see the Infinite".
There is not the slightest sign of the infinite in this document—it is all far too definite already. We have to have a strategy to get a strategy. The strategy should be to discuss how the Government takes a proper role in the arts, and that is not being done.
Many issues are not even mentioned in the document. There is hardly any reference to education, language and local input, and only one word on broadcasting. I can imagine the embarrassment of the Administration and why it may want to avoid talking about broadcasting. The BBC regards itself as one of the biggest, most important cultural organisations in Scotland—it cannot be excluded. Broadcasting has to be included.
There is nothing on sport, strangely enough. Many people would argue that to treat sport as a separate subject is daft. Sport is one of the biggest influences on our lives. We should not be dividing those influences; we should be looking at being inclusive as we go forward.
The worst thing about this document is that, by its very existence, a national cultural strategy will exclude people—it is a sort of five-year plan for the arts. We need an approach that includes people. Before we go ahead, I would like some thought to be given to that problem.
The Executive will come up with a plan next year, and no doubt there will be many words about consultation. No doubt the Executive will tell us that people are responding only when the consultation periods are over, and things of that nature. The reality is that the strategy is going to exclude people. It is also going to use a methodology that says nothing about anarchy and the need to have diversity of opinion. Unfortunately, it is going to be a new Labour approach to cultural strategy, and that is the last thing that Scotland needs.
There are many good things happening in Scotland across the spectrum of culture, the arts and the built heritage. I have called for a review of the Scottish Arts Council—which Sam Galbraith has refused—not because I do not think that good things are happening in the Arts Council. Many good things are happening: crafts, traditional music and excellence in support for publishing. There is a wonderful new scheme for novels. Books such as "The Voice of the Bard", by Tim Neat with Dr John MacInnes—I have a copy here—were published in the past few days with the support of the Arts Council. There are excellent things happening, but the structure puts people off applying and is unnecessarily bureaucratic. Scottish Screen is doing great work. Its presentation to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee last week was excellent. Many artists are achieving things in Scotland. We want to find a proper way of supporting them, opening what they do to others and infecting others with a sense of creative purpose. We do not want to define a national strategy that can be set on a shelf and which—by definition—will exclude.
I welcome this debate because there is a way forward. The way forward would have been to have had a proper consultation before the document was published. Although that has not been done, there is still time for the Executive to consult the other parties to establish whether we can come to a common mind on encouraging Scottish culture. Would that not be a great achievement? We could encourage people to be touched, opened up and changed.
That is certainly the purpose of the Scottish Parliament—no matter whether it is devolved or, as I hope it will be, independent. Change in Scotland can be achieved to give people new life and new hope but, reading this document, I fear terribly that that is not the direction in which we are going. We are closing things down and that is not what should happen.
What does culture mean to people? In the middle of the document is a quotation from
George Campbell Hay:
"Fad na bliadhna rè gach ràithe
Gach la's gach ciaradh dhomh
Is e Alba nan Gall ‘s nan Gàidheal
Is gàire, is blàths is beatha dhomh".
In another language, that means:
"All year long each season through
Each day and each fall of dusk for me
It is Scotland, Highland and Lowland
That is laughter and warmth and life for me".
That is what culture in all its aspects is about. It is laughter and warmth and life. It is neither a five- year plan nor something for control freaks. If only I felt a touch of laughter, warmth and life in this document, I would be more confident that the strategy on which the Executive has set out will be successful. The Executive does not have to rush ahead; it could stop and think again. If it rushes ahead now, it will not produce the laughter, warmth and life that Scotland can have in its new democracy.
Before calling Mr Brian Monteith to open for the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party, I remind members that they should indicate that they wish to speak by pressing the appropriate button.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, especially for the full title of the party.
On first impressions, there seems little with which to disagree in the Scottish Executive's motion. To paraphrase Ben Wallace's words yesterday, I am in favour of culture. It is understandable that the Scottish Executive should seek to have a strategy for culture.
However, the motion contains a fundamental flaw in that it appears to have been drafted on the premise that culture is a finite entity and a commodity that can be planned, shaped and organised by the Government. That might not be the intention of the motion; we will wait to find out what happens when the cultural strategy is published. Culture is the product of our nation's artistic, political and economic history, and of the spontaneous and independent contributions of talented individuals.
As that august Scottish historian, Michael Fry, said, culture is not something conjured up by an official statement or a subsidy. Culture is sucked in with the mother's milk. It is in the air. It is lived and breathed. Without such sustenance, it is unlikely that anything else will keep it alive.
The role of the Scottish Executive should be to preserve and promote our historical record and artistic achievements, and to foster an open society in which new contributions can be made without requiring political endorsement. A cultural strategy might be required by the Government, but only in the same way as the best incomes policy is no incomes policy. The Government should try to encourage excellence, to nurture and enable, but it should do so at arm's length. It should not seek to create or endorse culture so that it becomes official.
The last decades of old Scotland before the union of crowns in 1603 lent an enduring shape to national culture. John Knox's cultural revolution, which is known to us as the reformation, stressed that people should be taught to read the bible for themselves. That generated a literate population, which was better educated than any other in Europe and gave Scots a fascination with the problems of good and evil—with the dual nature of man. It produced a highly intellectual—not elitist— culture: a democratic intellect that is still alive in the 20th century. That culture was truly popular; it took deep root and flourishes to this day.
The strength of our culture then was proved by the fact that it did not need a state to support it. It was not a disaster when the king and his court, who had been the main sponsors of artistic works, moved to London in 1603, nor was our culture damaged when Scotland entered into union with England in 1707—quite the reverse. In 1707 the greatest days of Scottish culture lay in the future. As the lives of ordinary Scots were enriched by the union and the empire, so was their culture enriched.
Scottish culture has never been dictated by an elite or by the policy of the state, nor should it be. Scottish culture has always been what the Scottish people say it will be. If Scottish culture is to remain true to its traditions, we should continue to keep the state at arm's length.
Politicians and bureaucrats can foretell the future of our culture no more than they can predict anything else. The present flourishing condition of the Scottish novel, theatre and films owes nothing to political interference. Politicians in Scotland have more often tried to ban artistic innovation than to encourage it, and I know that some members of the Conservative party have tried to do that, too.
Indeed.
Yes, indeed. Such conformity and patronage risk creating a circle of pseudo-artistic sycophants who are mainly interested in pleasing politicians. As a matter of fact, I had breakfast with them the other day.
A national cultural strategy could lead to a concept of official art, as happened in the defunct Soviet Union. Continual debate about our culture, something that was impossible in the east European soviet states, is what is required. To borrow from Trotsky, culture is permanent revolution.
We should debate the poor understanding of Scottish and British history by today's schoolchildren. It is a sad fact that many children do not know who Robert the Bruce was, or indeed David Livingstone, and that they know of William Wallace only through a Hollywood version of the truth.
We should debate the concept of excellence, as John Tusa did during the international festival of the arts, but I notice that excellence is not mentioned in the cultural strategy document.
We should also debate the need for a national theatre. Although I notice that Kenny Gibson is not here, I mention for his benefit that I have worked for the Royal Lyceum Theatre Company and for the Tron Theatre.
We have national companies for dance, for opera and for music, but we have no national theatre. Our regional theatres manage very well on significantly less funding than is available to theatre companies in Nottingham, Leeds, Sheffield and other English cities. Indeed, it could be argued that regional producing theatres in Scotland would be better to seek funds from an English arts council. A national Scottish theatre company, created as an addition to our existing producing companies, would showcase our finest talents and provide a vital export when touring abroad.
I have no doubt that many members enjoyed some theatre during the international festival of the arts. How many of them realised that the actors, many of them well-known names, in official productions such as "The Speculator", were earning about £5 an hour?
The talent is here but the money is not, and that is why many actors gravitate towards London. A national theatre could help to change that. It would encourage excellence and have many positive spin-offs, not least for our infant film industry.
Debate is necessary, as are clear guidelines for how the Government and its agencies will work in the cultural field. We will support a cultural strategy that preserves and promotes our historical past and encourages debate about the future. However, the Government can no more pick winners than it can put the Bay City Rollers back at the top of the charts.
Thank you, Mr Monteith. Before I open up the debate, I advise members that the allocated time for each contribution is four minutes. Several members want to speak, so they should stick to the time limit.
I should declare an interest. In the past, I was the spokesperson on cultural issues for the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. I am therefore delighted that a national cultural strategy is being proposed.
Some members of other parties have misunderstood the purpose of a national cultural strategy, which is to determine how the Parliament and the Government can support cultural activity in our country. It is not about how we can control culture; it is about how we can support culture.
In the months before the Scottish Parliament came into being, there was much discussion among interested parties such as COSLA, the Scottish Arts Council, the Scottish Museums Council, the Scottish Library Information Council and the voluntary sector, about the way in which Parliament should handle culture. Many people argued for the appointment of a minister for culture and for a national cultural strategy. I am pleased that the Parliament is making progress. It has delivered a minister for culture and is now undertaking a consultation exercise on a cultural strategy. I stress that we are still at the consultation stage, and have not yet defined the strategy.
Culture is much misunderstood. The word is frequently used as an alternative for the arts and it is often thought of as a minority interest of the urban middle classes. In fact, when she heard that there was to be a debate on culture, one member—who is not here now—said that she was not interested in culture. That is unfortunate.
The proposed nationwide consultation on a national cultural strategy gives us an opportunity to emphasise that culture is much more than a minority interest.
Everyone has some form of exposure to culture, at very least the culture of their own community and its history. Culture interprets and illuminates a community's experiences; at a national level, it expresses Scotland's history and environment. Indeed, it has often been asserted that the Scottish cultural identity played a major part in bringing about the conditions that created the Scottish Parliament. At the moment, some members of the press might think that that is a bad thing, but I think that culture played an important part in bringing our Parliament about.
Last week I went to see a play called "The Derners" at the festival—that is the Langholm arts
festival, not the Edinburgh international festival. The play is along the lines of "The Steamie" and is about the experiences of women working as darners in the town's textile industry in the 1950s. Apart from being a very funny and excellent performance by ordinary, local people—by talented people who sing and act as amateurs and who enjoy it—it demonstrated for me two important aspects of culture. First, it enabled members of the community to celebrate their own culture—their traditions and history. Secondly, it allowed me, as an outsider, to experience and understand better the experiences of that community. Those are two important facets of culture. That is why promoting and widening access to culture is so important.
Engaging in cultural activity helps us to understand each other and ourselves better. It improves our self-esteem and our tolerance and appreciation of the different cultures of others. That is why cultural activity must be part of the strategic objectives of the Parliament; the minister mentioned its connection with health, lifelong learning, social inclusion, tourism and enterprise.
The Executive is to be congratulated on starting the consultation process so early in the life of the Parliament. A few weeks ago I was very pleased to hear on the radio the minister for culture giving her commitment that the consultation process would be thorough and extensive and would stretch all the way from Ullapool to Dumfries. I know that people in Dumfries are already looking forward to engaging in that consultation process.
Scotland has many traditions, cultures and participants. The national agencies, local authorities—which are extremely important in the cultural scene—and the voluntary sector all play important roles in the provision of cultural opportunity. Scotland's culture is one of our greatest assets in attracting visitors, but it is much more than that: valuing and understanding our culture in all its diversity allows us to understand where we come from. Once we have done that, culture might also help us to determine where we wish to go.
I welcome the debate on Scottish culture. It is great to see us grabbing the cultural thistle so early in the first session of the Scottish Parliament. I agree with Elaine that if there were no Scottish culture, there would be no Scottish Parliament.
I want to seek a couple of assurances and to raise some concerns. I want to be assured that "Celebrating Scotland" is not simply another glossy document full of warm words and nice phrases. Let us have a refreshing approach from the Executive—a response to the recommendation with a plan of action that is properly resourced. That is essential. It is crucial that running through the strategy is a thread that recognises the importance of allowing Scottish culture to develop as opposed to dictating that development.
Many people outwith the Parliament are sceptical about the document. Last night, I spoke to my colleague, Sandy Stronach, who is a great champion of Doric in the north-east of Scotland and who helps to organise the Doric festival, which is coming up in a short time. He looked at the document and said that he thought that, as usual, more effort had gone into the design than into its content.
It is no wonder that people such as Sandy Stronach are so sceptical when they see the membership of the focus group. "Representative" was not the word that Sandy used to describe it. That is no wonder when we consider the diverse cultural traditions throughout Scotland and then consider the focus group.
At the centre of any approach to Scottish culture must be a recognition of the unquantifiable contribution of many thousands of groups and agencies around the country. They are the people in the front line, the people who develop Scottish culture.
The document is called "Celebrating Scotland". In celebrating Scotland, we have to remember to celebrate the whole of Scotland. We need a bottom-up process, not a top-down process. That means channelling support and funding to the many groups around the country, and that is where we can help to develop Scottish culture.
In the document, I would like to have seen more recognition of the role of local authorities. Local authorities are usually left to pick up the tab to help organisations that are trying to develop Scottish culture by teaching all of us about it and by involving us in it. The local authorities are strapped for cash and, in turn, many of the groups that they help to fund are strapped for cash. We must remember that.
Local authorities and agencies create many diverse cultural initiatives. The recent opening of Dundee Contemporary Arts—a world-class and award-winning facility—is an example of the achievement of a local objective. Yet only 65 miles up the road, in the city of Aberdeen, we see the Aberdeen Arts Centre going round cap in hand to oil companies and local businesses, trying to get cash to survive. That arts centre is an important facility and venue in Aberdeen, and it is important that central Government should step in to help such organisations.
Another area where local authorities and agencies play a key role is in film production. Over
recent years we have seen a complete lack of support from successive Governments for Scotland's film-producing community. As a result, many local authorities and agencies have stepped in to fill the gap, creating, for example, film commissions. Much of Scotland now has such commissions; there are especially successful ones in Glasgow, Edinburgh and the Highlands and Islands, as well as two or three in other areas. New film initiatives are being developed in, for example, Tayside and Lanarkshire. Central Government has played absolutely no role in achieving those ends. Scottish Screen has assisted but it has been unable to give any direct financial assistance because it is strapped for cash as well. That is where central Government could come into play.
The film commissions provide training for scriptwriters, film-makers and so on, but they also provide an economic benefit for the local communities, which can promote themselves as film locations. In "Mission: Impossible"—and I am talking about the film starring Tom Cruise, not the Labour candidate's task in the Hamilton South by- election—the scene on top of the train was filmed in Dumfriesshire. Two weeks' shooting put £100,000 into the local economy, and that came about because of the local film initiative. That is the way in which central Government can step in and help local authorities and agencies.
It is important that the message from the new Scottish Executive is not the message that we were getting from Downing Street in previous years. Its cultural icons are things such as the millennium dome. Hundreds of millions of pounds could have gone into sustaining many of our local cultural organisations instead of London's dome. I welcome the opportunity today perhaps to hear the minister condemn the millennium dome and say that the Executive will put money into Scottish organisations from now on.
I represent a village called Kilbarchan, which is known locally as an artists' village. Last Saturday, I spent many happy hours at the village's annual arts club show. Duncan McNeil is not here, but he and I have both been at the Greenock arts club's show. I can go to those shows and appreciate the art but, as they say, "Masel, ah cannae actually draw." I remember when I was at school, painting what I thought was a wonderful picture of a storm at sea, and the teacher coming up to me and saying that he was going to distemper his living room at the weekend and perhaps it would be a good idea if I helped him. But although I cannot draw, I can appreciate what goes on in those local arts clubs.
I want to talk about what I see as the link between the cultural strategy and the social inclusion agenda. I can think of the women from Easterhouse who write poetry about what it is like to live there, to be unemployed and to suffer poverty and ill health. Their efforts are partly funded by City of Glasgow Council. When we read poems written by drug addicts, recovering addicts and their families, we feel what they are going through. I can think of a project funded by Inverclyde Council, for teenagers who are referred by the courts because they are first offenders. They write, produce and act in plays that address local issues such as drugs, unemployment and domestic violence. Those enthusiastic and talented young people are supported by their families and by their peer group, who turn up, applaud and shout with great gusto when they see their pals on the stage.
This morning, we debated the changes in the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. I worked for a long time in a psychiatric unit, where the patients were encouraged to write, draw and act whenever possible. It was a moving experience to read poetry written by patients who were trying to gain an insight into the horrors and agonies of being mentally ill. We must encourage the gamut of arts in schools and local communities. There is a wealth of talent out there, which lies mostly untapped.
As the minister said, the cultural strategy should be for everyone. We should not only encourage community talent in continuing such events as the successful Edinburgh fringe festival, but encourage people to support community arts. The cultural strategy for Scotland is not only about national galleries, large productions and shows; it is about giving local people and communities the opportunity to express their feelings and aspirations through the arts. I was delighted to hear the minister's commitment to social inclusion in the strategy. That is important, because that is what the issue is about.
It is true that the Scots are entitled to be proud of their heritage—past, present and future— and, as Trish has said, that heritage should be inclusive. I agree with Richard Lochhead's comments on the importance of the film industry to Scotland. As a vital part of our culture, that industry has tremendous potential to shape the country's economic and social development. Films such as "Braveheart", "Rob Roy" and "Loch Ness" have given a boost to tourism in Scotland, while other films such as "Chariots of Fire" and "Local Hero", which have strong Scottish characteristics, were important in giving expression to Scotland's
identity.
Some of Scotland's film-makers have also received recognition for outstanding films such as "Mrs Brown", "Shallow Grave", "Trainspotting", "My Name Is Joe" and "Ratcatcher", which recently won a prize at the Edinburgh film festival. Edinburgh now hosts film premieres that might previously have gone elsewhere. Furthermore, the recent promotion of "Gregory's Two Girls" by the charismatic Bill Forsyth gives further evidence of the imagination and the undoubted creativity in the Scottish film industry.
Just now, the film and television industry employs 4,000 people in Scotland and the national lottery's support for film-making and the creation of Channel 4's office in Glasgow should lead to more job opportunities. The activities of Scottish Screen, which was set up by the previous Administration, play a huge role and now cover the whole range of film and television culture.
It is essential to enhance the visual arts to give greater stature to Scotland's culture. Scotland has the capacity to play a leading role in the film industry and commitment from ministers will make that a reality. As the Minister for Finance is providing £80 million extra for education, I ask ministers to use part of that funding to increase Scottish Screen's grant, which would enable that organisation not just to produce an innovative development programme, but to assist with educational projects.
I will—if I may—reveal a secret of the past. During the previous Westminster Government, one of the women engaged in providing hospitality in Bute House took it very much in her stride when she had to welcome former Presidents Gorbachev and Mitterrand, but when she heard that Mel Gibson of "Braveheart" might be coming, there was almost uncontrollable excitement. I suspect that that might have been the representative reaction of many Scots. Not only do films made in Scotland create employment, encourage tourism and provide recreation, enjoyment and entertainment, they give a higher profile to Scotland's way of life.
I call on ministers to give Scottish Screen and the Scottish film industry all their support, which it strongly deserves. It is an excellent opportunity for our country to grasp and I hope that the ministers will respond positively.
I welcome "A National Cultural Strategy", which Mr Galbraith introduced today. I have heard Ms Brankin talk about this on several occasions—she talks a good game. I am impressed by her commitment to the task ahead.
In essence, the document is a celebration and an appreciative comment on Scottish culture. It is a kind of mission statement and it has a mission statement's strengths and weaknesses. It lays out positive aspirations for a national strategy and sets out a basis for consultation. This is a consultation document, although the title may suggest that it is the strategy.
I would like to give Ms Brankin and Mr Galbraith one piece of advice. Someone said that this was a closed document, but I think that it is almost too open-ended and might be difficult to respond to. I remember that when the McIntosh commission sought people's opinions it asked questions. I understand this document, but I do not quite know what I am being asked and think that a framework of questions would help.
The place of government in the arts is something that we must be careful of. It should be at arms' length. Its place is not to direct the arts, but to create a climate in which the arts can flourish and artists can put down roots.
We want to ensure that the strategy is inclusive. It needs to be geographically inclusive, covering the Borders to the Highlands and the Shetland islands. It must embrace the widest possible range of cultural activities. In scale, it should encompass great orchestras, town bands, ballet dancing and line dancing. The strategy must not be elitist, but it must protect minority interests as, in essence, many of the arts will appeal only to minority interests and a majority decision might swamp good quality things.
We should not be talking only of high culture. As Trish Godman said, the strategy must be socially inclusive. As she spoke, I thought of an occasion about a fortnight ago when I went to Galashiels to launch the publication of a book, "New Horizons", by a mental health charity. It contained touching and moving poetry. Life-enhancing art was put into the book with good backing and something was produced which raised the self-confidence and self-esteem of people who needed that help.
How do we foster talent when we find it? I do not know the answer to that and am only saying that it is a question to consider. When we get a talented musician or actress, we must try to ensure that a promising career is not cut off because of lack of funds or opportunity. We should give them the opportunity to foster their talent in Scotland in order for them to be able to practise it beyond, if that is what they wish.
The national strategy should start in schools and village halls and reach up to national institutions, such as the National Library and Scottish Ballet. I hope, like Brian Montieth, that a national theatre will be considered.
I would like to tell members a story. Ten days or
so ago, I sat in the rather psychedelic surroundings of the Hub listening, for about 15 minutes, to a Japanese dance director who could not speak English. For a wee while, it was slightly embarrassing, then somehow the man's artistic integrity turned his speech into a strangely eloquent declaration. He kept saying, "I am Japanese. I am individual. I am in Scotland." hope that our arts strategy will allow our talented youngsters and our artists to be national, to have their roots in our nation, to be individual, to be creative and to be able to use their talents on an international stage to universal acclaim.
In view of Mike Russell's comments about football as culture and given Rugby Park's undoubted status as a venue for live, participative and enthralling theatre—more Sturm und Drang than son et lumière—perhaps I should mention my connection with Kilmarnock Football Club as a registrable interest.
I, too, welcome the minister's call for a national consultation on cultural strategy, but in this instance at least, I may have been seduced by the sheer poetry of Mike Russell and Brian Monteith's welcome of the document. They are not quite yet the Fran and Anna of Scottish cultural opposition, but they are getting there.
The Parliament has many concerns—the economy, education, health, poverty, social inclusion—but the search for national identity is no doubt the most productive and purposeful way in which we can energise this country's cultures. I say cultures because we must recognise that there are many Scotlands and that by seeking a commonly held cultural vision for Scotland and working in parallel with the existing myriad, disparate, critically worthwhile initiatives, we can do much to bring the Scottish people together.
I hope that the consultation process will identify some practical issues and initiatives, such as the real need to bolster and boost arts provision in schools. I hope that the process will pick up, as Ian said, on the crucial need to celebrate and nurture our home-grown talent.
I believe, and I am with Mike Russell on this, that we must ensure that the notion of cultural diversity is alive in our established arts institutions. I also believe strongly that we must build on the work of the Edinburgh festival to create a coterie of festivals, throughout the country, as positive and vibrant celebrations of life in Scotland. I commend all members to visit Ayr during the next month to visit the Septembayr initiative.
As Mike Russell said, we must develop the anarchic spirit and ensure that our children are connected. They must be encouraged to be creative and we must ensure that their imaginations are untethered by the harsh grind of the real world.
I challenge all the participants in this debate to be equally anarchic in the consultation process and to ensure, with all Labour members, that culture is broad, popular and engaging. We must ensure that the end point of the consultation is not a five-year plan but—if I may be metaphorical for a moment—a year-long national festival.
In conclusion, I have two practical questions. I come from a local authority background and I am proud of the way in which South Ayrshire Council has continued to be able to support the arts, notwithstanding the resource constraints that it faced. How important will the role of local authorities be in the provision of arts and culture? As a corollary to that, how can we ensure that arts and culture form an integral part of social inclusion?
The one issue that slightly concerns me about this debate is that there has been little or no discussion about practitioners of the arts or artists. There has been an awful lot of talk about meaningful, to-be-desired initiatives and consultations, yet no mention of the Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union, Equity, the Musicians' Union or of our individual artists.
For nine years, I was an elected official of Equity and during those years—which were principally years of Conservative Governments, although there was one period of a real Labour Government in early 1979—we never had an opportunity to develop our cultural strategy. The Scottish committee of Equity was determined that there should be such a strategy for Scotland, which would be committed to the development of the three national performing arts companies—ballet, opera and the national theatre.
I will give members a few bits of background information about the people we are talking about but paying no attention to. The average earnings of an artistic worker in Scotland in any year is £8,500 and most are unemployed for 22 weeks in any year. All artistic workers have extreme difficulties with the Inland Revenue and the Benefits Agency. I make a plea to the Executive: that it addresses the issues of our artists and the artistic community on the reserved areas of benefits, income tax and other taxation matters. The Executive should take a leaf out of the Irish book, as Ireland has been extremely successful over the past 20 to 30 years.
The creative industries make up 5 per cent of this country's industry. I am perplexed Sam's figure of 91,000 full-time jobs as, according to Scottish Enterprise's creative industry team, in July 1999 there were 70,000 full-time jobs. I assume that the team has not conducted a new study since then. There were only 64,310 jobs in food and drink; and there used to be 41,000 in textiles—until the advent of the Labour Government—and 46,000 in electronics.
The arts are vital to this country and, more important, people employed in the arts live and work in Scotland, although we do not give them the opportunity to work as often as they wish. For example, in 1997 131 contracts were issued to members of Equity, of whom there are just over 1,600 in Scotland, by Scottish producing companies, repertory theatres and touring companies. In 1998, 213 contracts were issued. This morning, I was told that Equity expects around about the same figure for this year, because the Scottish Arts Council, under its current regime, spends an enormous amount of money on consultation, management and bureaucracy, but little or nothing on the production of theatre works.
I shall quote from this year's annual report for Equity in Scotland:
"too many companies are cutting back on the number and size of productions. Although there seems to be plenty of lottery money to improve buildings and facilities, there is standstill or less money to run these companies, and the first things to be cut seem to be productions and actors' wages."
The report goes on to say:
"There has been an increase of administrative bureaucracy and a decrease of the production which the public pays to see. Of course audiences are falling, there is less for them to see!"
I am also shocked to discover that there is not a single practitioner among the people who are on the focus group. I suppose that we can rejoice in the fact that the Minister for Finance's wife—
What about Donnie Munro?
He is not currently a practitioner.
I hope that Bridget McConnell's membership of the focus group might lead to the release of some money to the arts, if she has a word in her husband's ear.
I draw members' attention to the following joint motion passed at the annual conferences of the Musicians' Union, Equity and BECTU in Scotland, as it covers one of the most important issues for those organisations:
"In view of the fact that Scotland contributes 10% of the BBC licence fee total but only receives 5% of the total expenditure for BBC TV programmes this AGM of members in Scotland calls on the Governors of the BBC to ensure that the whole licence fee raised in Scotland is spent in Scotland primarily to provide work for our members thereby counter-balancing to some extent the London bias of most media production."
I hope that the focus group will take that on board and that the Executive will consult the industry's practitioners and the unionised members of BECTU, Equity and the Musicians' Union. I know that that might be difficult for a non- socialist party, but it may well be worth while.
My interests in this debate are registered in the proper place.
I compliment Mike Russell on the excellent and eloquent way in which he expressed his concerns. There is an art form that is capable of touching and transforming and enlightening us. It is anarchic and critical and non-aligned. I am, of course, talking about theatre, but in particular about travelling theatre companies, which bridge the gap between professional theatre and the community that Elaine Murray mentioned. Travelling theatre takes professional acting into the community.
As Lloyd Quinan pointed out, the total number of actors employed in Scotland has fallen by 50 per cent during the past two years—since the Labour Government was elected. How has it happened? How is the problem addressed by the document that is before us? There has been a positive efflorescence of administrative posts in the publicly subsidised sector. I refute what Brian Monteith said when he suggested that the arts do not need subsidising. He seemed to be giving a historical perspective to show that the arts survived without subsidy in the past. That is completely incorrect. We would not have much of the music and much of the theatre that we have today—our Mozart and our Beethoven—without the private and public subsidies available in previous centuries.
I am not convinced of the wisdom of going all- out for a national theatre now. I am speaking for a more diverse form of theatrical excellence in Scotland. I plead with the Executive and with all those involved in this debate to support all kinds of theatre in Scotland.
I declare an interest here, because for the last three years I have had the privilege of being chair of the Glasgow 1999 festival of architecture and design. At the risk of making an east coast, west coast point, 1999 is the biggest cultural
festival that has taken place in Scotland since Glasgow became the European city of culture in 1990. I am delighted, having had that experience of working closely with architects, designers and the community to mount that festival, that for the first time it is envisaged that there will be an architectural strategy for Scotland, as part of a broader cultural strategy.
Architecture is crucial to the regeneration process of a city such as Glasgow and its surrounding area. The city's architecture and its regeneration fit together. What can be achieved by bringing them together can affect tourism and housing, can support the economy, and can upgrade and secure the environment. Architecture has a series of clear and concrete payoffs. Above all, architecture stands at the intersection between people and their daily lives, and the key artefacts of living. By looking at architecture and design in a new way we can make substantial changes in the way in which people see themselves and their past, and in which they look to their future.
Scotland in general, but Glasgow in particular, has a unique architectural heritage. Its tremendous Victorian buildings are superb, and unrivalled anywhere else in the world. Glasgow also has a vibrant present. The Crown Street regeneration project, and the architectural expo of homes for the future which Glasgow 1999 is putting on, are transforming historically disadvantaged and run-down parts of the city. That is helping us to create a glorious future for Glasgow. The inner city must be made more attractive if people are to be drawn back into it. One of the keystones that I would like to see emerging from this strategy as far as architecture is concerned, and culture more generally, is that it should build on existing achievements. There are many things in Scotland that we do tremendously well. Let us build on these and reinforce them.
One thing in the 1999 programme that I am particularly delighted about is the level of community participation, which has been central. It was a key part of the bid and is one of the key reasons why Glasgow won the accolade of city of architecture and design. It has also been a key element of the delivery: £500,000 has been spent on local, community-based projects; four major community festivals are being run in Glasgow; five major projects have upgraded urban spaces in disadvantaged areas. There will also be a conference on dementia and design at the beginning of October, focusing on the particular needs of that disadvantaged group in society. One of the things that has been crucial to the festival is a strong educational programme, which will influence the curriculum of every primary school in Scotland.
Those members who drive into Glasgow will have noticed the huge sign on the gasometer. It is, I think, a beautiful sign—it is very well done. It depicts the gallus nature of Glasgow. If we look on the other side of the road in the evening, we see the Cranhill water tower lit up. That is also an emblem for Glasgow, for what can be done to recreate and reincarnate disadvantaged parts of the city.
The festival has been a celebration of architecture and design. One tremendously exciting thing about it has been the degree of attention that we have had from people elsewhere in the United Kingdom, Europe and around the world. People have come to Glasgow and seen it in a different way. They have seen its existing architecture and the tremendous exhibitions which we have brought to Glasgow. They have seen the process that we are engaged in of transforming Glasgow and leading it into the 21st century. More than 500,000 visitors have come to the exhibitions; the hotels are full and hoteliers are falling over themselves to build new hotels; the Glasgow collection has helped 58 designers and 35 manufacturers, who have won 15 awards in the process, offering hope for the future of Glasgow's economy.
The key achievement of 1999 has been the Lighthouse, where Rhona Brankin will launch the Executive's architectural strategy later this month. I hope the consultation process that follows the "Celebrating Scotland" document will involve more than practitioners: it must involve them, but must also involve the users of architecture and design, as the users of other forms of culture are involved.
Above all, we need to involve people in their own communities taking control of their own lives. Culture, architecture and design must be a component of that. Let us get away from the idea of culture and architecture being done by somebody else—by professionals in a glass or concrete box. Let people be involved and dictate what they want, and we will carry forward the cultural strategy for Scotland successfully, and build on what we have already done.
I agree with what Rhona Brankin said in the introduction to the "Celebrating Scotland" document:
"Scotland's culture belongs to all the people in Scotland."
I note the compulsory i word, inclusive, in her strategy, but I find the tone of the document a little elitist, presupposing the answer to the question at the top of her list, "What does culture mean to you?" Culture does not exactly mean what is on the list given in her introduction: films, plays, museums, galleries, libraries, historic buildings
and architecture. It is the way in which we live our lives in our communities, and the traditions and activities that underpin those communities.
As we are all giving examples from our diaries, I will let members into what I was doing on Saturday. I attended an agricultural show in Moffat, in Dumfriesshire, where local people were displaying their sheep, cattle, horses and hens. A home industry section displayed baking, knitting and home painting—not the politically correct items that are often trotted out these days. There was also the usual home craftwork.
The level of support at that event, and at shows across Scotland this summer, is a great tribute to people in farming communities. The number of entries have generally been up and the standard has never been higher, despite the appalling crisis which people face in the sheep and dairy industries.
This weekend, there is another show in the tiny village of Bentpath, in Eskdale, where people will come from miles around for terrier racing and fell running, although I will be participating in neither. Smaller shows are happening in one-room village halls throughout Scotland, yet no real reference is made to them in this document. Nevertheless, that is the culture of Scotland that I recognise.
In the document, Hugh MacDiarmid is quoted— a famous Langholm man, and Dr Murray has already alluded to Langholm. We must recognise that in the town of Langholm the most important cultural event is the annual common riding. That is the case in many border communities. The medium that carries culture throughout Scotland's diverse communities is not always—unfortunately for Michael Fry—The Herald. It is much more likely to be the Annandale Herald. In Langholm, it is the wonderful Eskdale and Liddlesdale Advertiser. Try as Elaine Murray and I might to be on the front page, we are invariable outdone by the activities of the local drama group or the rugby club. We must be absolutely clear that we value such activities as part of our culture. As Iain Gray referred yesterday to the fact that health underpins so many aspects of our life, so culture is interwoven as well. The end of sheep farming on our hills would not just be a personal and economic tragedy; it would undermine Scotland's rich and diverse culture.
Many people in rural communities throughout Scotland have a genuine fear that this Government is not concerned about their culture and way of life. I do not think that this document goes any way to allay those fears, but I hope sincerely that the consultation process will. The Government must promote more understanding between town and country areas. We must foster that understanding of different cultures, different ways of doing things, and—dare I say it—different pastimes. We must have a strategy for culture that has the promotion of that understanding of all Scotland's cultures at its heart.
I conclude with a specific plea to give preeminence in Scotland to an individual who genuinely has global potential. I misread Rhona Brankin's introduction, and thought that he had been on her focus group, but as he had been dead for 203 years I do not think that Robert Burns could have contributed to that. Burns is one of Scotland's pre-eminent assets. England does not have a Shakespeare day, but tourists visit Stratford-upon-Avon and spend money in that area to a degree that people in Ayrshire and Dumfries and Galloway could only envy. Let us not only put Burns at the heart of our culture in Scotland, but build on the economic potential that that could bring to the south-west of Scotland.
I want to comment on what Mike Russell and Brian Monteith said. Mike gave the game away when he said that he found it hard to frame an amendment. I agree. I do not think that he had much opposition to what was being said in the document. He tried hard, but I give him five and a half out of 10. I take issue with Brian Monteith in no uncertain terms. I did not like the tone of his remarks at all. I regard them as extremely dangerous in any civilised society. The state certainly has a role in the arts, as does local government. It was rightly pointed out by Robin Harper—who is not present now—that Beethoven and the rest would not have been successful without public and private patronage. I warn members against Mr Monteith's philosophy. It was Hermann Goering who said,
"When I hear the word culture I reach for my revolver".
Let us not go down that laissez-faire, culture- will-happen-by-itself road. Culture does not happen in that way, and I disassociate myself entirely from Brian Monteith's remarks. I assume that, because it is late in the day, he was not thinking about what he was saying.
Other members have referred to the importance of diversity, and that word is in this document. Coming from the Highlands, I am keenly aware of the differences. Mike will know from his visit to the north-west, and Winnie will know from her visit to the Durness games, how different Durness is from Thurso, how different that is from Dingwall, from Banchory, from Lochaber or wherever. As we go forward with the strategy it is desperately important that we guard the rich tapestry that makes up Scotland. Scotland is a diamond with many facets and future generations will curse us if we do not protect and enhance that. So a special plea—please, Rhona, take this on board and
guard the special things.
It is a courageous document early in the life of Parliament and I am proud to be associated with it. It firmly underpins our direction and gives purpose. I know that Rhona has worked hard on it and I have a lot of respect for what she and Sam are doing. I commend the document.
All of us agree that Scotland has a distinct and rich cultural identity. At this stage in Scotland's political development and as we approach the new millennium it is apt for us to take a look at our cultural strategy. In answer to the points that Mike Russell made, I do not see this as a static document but as a tool to show where Scotland's culture is and to give pointers to how it could or should be developed in the future. There was discussion prior to the establishment of a Scottish Parliament on how culture should be represented. The fact that a cabinet minister and a junior minister have responsibility for it shows the commitment of the Executive. The fact that the Parliament has established the Education, Culture and Sport Committee shows how we value our culture and recognise the importance that education can play in taking it forward.
I would like to concentrate on the mechanisms of developing our culture and on education and the Scottish Arts Council in particular. Education very clearly provides a means for arts to be introduced to or further developed in young people's lives. I am not suggesting that teachers and schools will be the only influence. I recognise the importance of community influence. For many young people who live with disadvantage, schools can provide opportunity and enlightenment. It is for that reason that I have some concerns about the way in which some schools that have found their budgets ever decreasing have tried to drop arts and sports from the curriculum. I believe that as a Parliament we should be making it very clear to the education profession that the appreciation and practice of the arts has so many benefits for the learning process that they should not be so easily lost.
In my constituency, Linlithgow, a number of children and young people attend West Lothian Youth Theatre, a very productive and enthusiastic company. I doubt that all of them will follow in the footsteps of Ewan McGregor or Sean Connery—I do not doubt their skills, but the opportunity might not be there—but they are, through taking part, learning confidence, teamwork and the ability to think beyond the more obvious premise. Those are very important life skills and should be part of a fully rounded education.
My concern is about people's access to the arts and culture, which brings me to the role of the Scottish Arts Council. Each year it makes project funds available through a wide range of schemes to individual artists and to arts organisations throughout Scotland. The SAC has also assumed responsibility for distributing a share of the National Lottery funds for the benefit of the arts in Scotland. The National Lottery Act 1998 requires the SAC to produce a strategy explaining its priorities for distributing those funds. I raise that point because the role of the SAC is to emphasise the importance of resources being made available to all areas of the arts.
The SAC's report "Scottish Arts in the 21st Century" highlights the need to get rid of unnecessary distinctions between so-called high arts and popular culture, between the amateur and the professional and between art forms that celebrate diversity and those that create false barriers.
Wind up, please.
I do not want to suggest that the arts and culture can be furthered only by injections of large sums of money. Practically, we have to acknowledge that the moneys that are available have to be used for the widest possible access.
In conclusion, a cultural strategy for Scotland should belong to all the people of Scotland. Access to the arts and our heritage can be assisted by education and by adequate and sensitive funding.
I welcome this strategy. As Mike Russell said, it is right that there should be more consultation. This document is a stepping stone. It is a start. I would have been shouting at the top of my voice if it were a thick document telling us how the arts should be delivered in Scotland, but that is not what it is about; it is about starting the debate and getting people together to look for a way forward.
I am sure that people will not be surprised to learn that I am particularly interested in traditional music. Do not worry: I will not sing, I will speak. It is important that we examine traditional music, and not just singing, but story telling. Music is performed in Scotland that tells the story of our family histories. History and culture in Scotland are handed down in our music. In farmland areas, fishing villages and the inner cities, a host of songs tell us what life was like for the people who sang and wrote them. Traditional music is important, and perhaps on another day I will sing some of the songs to you all.
Traditional music is an important part of our heritage. Any cultural strategy should nurture and support communities' participation in that music, because traditional music is handed down by our grannies, our grandpas, our aunties, our uncles and all those folk who have gone before us. We must hold on to that.
It is important that we recognise artists and those who entertain, but it is important also that the strategy recognises the people of Scotland. Ours is a people's culture and not something that is imported. We recognise the importance of an international culture, but let us dwell on the importance of the people's culture and those who perform.
Community is important in Scotland. It plays a vital role in education and in encouraging people to develop their skills and to feel pride in their language. I was pleased to see reference in the document to the Scots language. I hope that we see an end to the chastisement of bairns for using their Scots language—the language they learn in the playground, in their communities and in their homes.
Local authorities play a vital role in delivering the arts and working with arts organisations, and I hope that the culture policy will take that into consideration.
I urge the minister to ensure that the consultation meetings are not for the great and the good to talk about nice arts in Scotland. The meetings must take place around the country, allowing people to participate. The minister must ensure that the structure of the consultation makes participation easier, so that people can come along and think, "Somebody listened to what I had to say and the way I said it. My voice is important." If we can achieve that, we will have something to be proud of. Mary said that the strategy will grow and change; that it is about confidence and about celebrating Scottish culture.
I will not sing, but I will read this poem by Liz Niven:
"We'll ken whaur we cam frae an whaur we ur gan
We'll aw hae a say each wumman an man".
Let us celebrate our language, as well as our culture.
I read the document and I am afraid that I thought it was gey thin soup but, with a bit of luck, following the range of contributions that we have had today, it will probably evolve into a decent broth fit to stand on.
I am particularly concerned by any move towards the prescriptive management of culture in Scotland, in particular by the various lobby groups that seem to have been created artificially to satisfy the needs of funding bodies. We will have to watch that.
I agree with Jamie Stone that Scotland has a rich tapestry of regional and sub-regional cultures. Those are expressed through music and verse, through literature and especially through language. Many regional tongues have a structure and a traditional use spanning back over the centuries. My family roots are mostly in the north-east, with a little smattering of border blood.
I wish to make a plea for the Doric, which has been already been mentioned today. I know Sandy Stronach well and appreciate the work that he does. The Doric tongue is spoken daily by many in the north-east, especially in the rural areas. As a boy in Aberdeenshire, I spoke two languages: Scots English and Doric. If I had not done so, I would have been isolated from the community. There are distinct differences in Aberdeenshire in the Doric. There is a range from Kincardine up through Deeside and Donside. As for Buchan, I am sure that Mr Salmond will remember the learning curve required when he first stood there as a candidate.
Doric is a rich and expressive language. Every member can talk about expressions of style and accents from their areas. People talk about the differences in the dialect between different villages. We have to remember those differences, which carry over into music and verse. We think of the bothy ballads of the north-east, fiddle music and accordion music—every one of us can think of something that we remember from our youth, that may be suppressed today or not encouraged enough.
We should expand the cultural diversity at community level in schools and homes and encourage children to be proud of their local culture. When they have confidence in their local culture they can take on board other regional cultures and take part in cultural exchanges. That will make Scotland an even richer place. If Scotland is nothing else, it is the most magnificent hotch-potch of culture in a small landmass, which people find easy to visit and regularly come back to. I think that we will all agree on that.
I hope that the Executive approaches the consultation in a way that will enable it to come to conclusions that establish a base to bring real support and encouragement to the freedom and proliferation of the different aspects of our culture. I was particularly taken by Mike Russell's comments and passion about the chaos that can
give rise to a natural generation of culture. We do not want an artificial straitjacket of conformity that requires things to be stylised and to fit in a dictionary. That is not what our culture is about.
I know that members of the Executive are listening and I welcome the fact that this document has come before the Parliament today. I make one plea to the Executive: I hope that it will ensure that every aspect of Scottish tradition and culture has equal access to support and encouragement. I do not hear calls for a minister for Doric or a minister of Lallans. I appreciate the wonderful force that the Gaelic speakers have brought together to push their cause, but that is only one aspect of our country and I ask that we have uniformity of support for our future culture in Scotland.
I congratulate the Executive on initiating this debate at such an early stage in our programme. The advent of the Scottish Parliament should itself mark a new phase in the confidence of Scotland's culture. I have no such confidence that the document under discussion today will deliver this revitalisation, despite the fact that it was introduced by a surgeon with undoubted skills in the theatre.
I want to examine one or two of the gaps in the strategy. I accept that the document is not meant to be prescriptive, but the Executive could have taken the opportunity to give tangible commitments to some aspects of arts and culture.
The Executive has professed its credentials in joined-up government. In culture policy, that must mean a clear set of objectives to ensure that arts policy engages with education. "Celebrating Scotland" gives no real explanation of how the Government sees Scottish culture being promoted in schools. I suggest that there might be some good ideas in the as yet unpublished report on Scottish culture and the curriculum, which successive Scottish Office ministers have suppressed.
Still on education, the Executive has made much mention of social inclusion. However, it is not clear how far the abolition of student grants and the imposition of tuition fees extends access to Scotland's culture.
On language, although we have heard a couple of lines of MacDiarmid, there is no evidence to indicate that the Government takes at all seriously the issues surrounding the Scots language, which probably receives less state support than any other minority language in Europe. Over the past four years, the Scottish Office and the Scottish Executive have received continual representations from academic and cultural bodies on the pressing need for a census question on Scots, which would make planning and provision possible. "Celebrating Scotland" gives not the slightest indication that the Executive is committed to making progress on this or any other issue relating to the Scots language.
The key to the future of the arts is the economy. For the strategy to be effective, we need to create a suitable financial climate. This is a question of investment, not subsidy, because the arts create more wealth than they consume. The Government and, by implication, the Scottish Arts Council should not continue to dictate terms purely because of the strength of their funding role. We need a radical rethink of the funding situation.
The Executive talks a great deal about community, and I suggest that it would be better if the balance of financial power were shifted in favour of local authorities, which are more responsive to and supportive of distinctive local initiatives. There are some good examples of local authority support for grass-roots projects in which value to the community is given as much priority as pure profit.
Although we are all agreed that local authorities are best equipped to promote such initiatives, the problem at the moment is that funding is difficult to source. Since the reorganisation of local government, there is no longer a duty on councils to ensure adequate provision of facilities or cultural activities for the inhabitants of their areas, although councils were given a new power to give grants towards the expenses of any organisation providing cultural activities. The Government- imposed cut has, of course, led to a sharp decline in the expansion of this aspect of Scotland's culture.
We need a better structure for the investment of public money in the arts and we need to encourage private investment. Why not encourage the arts community itself to take the lead in such developments? Creativity now has a value. Artists should be encouraged to develop their entrepreneurial streak, capitalise on the interest that exists and seek commercial support. Links between chambers of commerce and arts groups have proved successful in Europe and there are all sorts of ways in which arts groups can engage with business. One such project exists on the Royal Mile. Dom has brought together under one roof a range of artists, sculptors, poets and scholars. By creating its own core finance through the provision of services relevant to the commercial sector, it manages to support less lucrative aspects of its work while retaining its creative independence.
The Scottish Parliament can help to create a climate of partnership between the arts and business to promote self-sufficiency. However,
financial incentives need to be supportive. Nothing in this paper indicates that the Executive has any of the ambition that was shown by the Irish Government in providing state allowances and tax breaks to outstanding artists, musicians and writers. How wonderful it would be for Scotland to pioneer such innovations and for Governments across Europe to take note.
I want briefly to mention some major elements of the Scottish cultural scene. Traditional music is very wide-ranging. The Scottish Parliament has a role to play in supporting the fèisean movement, for example. However, it is not enough to support musicians; we need to make an effort to retain the ancillary jobs that are supported by the music industry. Despite the success of our bands and the achievements of some small recording companies, the critical mass of permanent jobs in the popular music market, for example—production, sales and recording—is located outside Scotland. Music industry investment needs to return to Scotland.
Crafts workers need a special mention. There is no support system for individual craftsmen and craftswomen. We need to promote the quality of our design production and encourage people to come to Scotland to buy.
The construction of the new Parliament building is a tremendous opportunity to make sure that a high profile is given to the skills of Scottish crafts workers. The European Parliament has a scheme to ensure that artists from all European countries are commissioned to provide artwork for display in the public areas of the Parliament building. Michael Russell has commended the scheme to the Holyrood project team, which has agreed to examine it. We must also ensure that as many as possible of the commissions for the internal decoration and fittings of the Scottish Parliament go to Scottish designers and artists and that Holyrood becomes an exemplar of Scottish design and achievement.
The role of Government is to support the arts and to allow them to evolve, not to impose a strategy whose effect will be to limit and inhibit creativity.
I will deal with points that were raised in today's debate, starting with those of Mr Russell. I thank Cathy Peattie for voicing some of my concerns about Mr Russell's speech. He does not seem to have grasped that the Government's document is small because we hope to involve people in a consultation process about what the national cultural strategy should be. The document does not comprise the national cultural strategy; it is the first stage in developing it. It is kind of the
SNP to say that it will wait and see but I had hoped that it would contribute to the process.
We will be inclusive. I thought that Mr Galbraith explained that well. We have said that the document is meant for all the people of Scotland. I would welcome it if those who have expressed concern about inclusiveness would suggest ways in which we can best consult. We want to consult community arts groups and people in remote areas. In reply to those who have sought assurances that rural Scotland will be involved, I give categorical assurances—as one who lived in rural Scotland for 25 years—that that will happen. We have been asked to go to Thurso, we will go to the national Mòd in Fort William to consult our Gaelic-speaking colleagues and we will go to all parts of Scotland. That is central to the consultation process.
Although Mr Russell claimed not to think much of the document, it was interesting that half his speech was made up of quotes from it. One of the reasons why the line by A L Kennedy, which he quoted, appeared in the document was that we thought that it was marvellous. Of course artists have to be involved in the process. If Mr Russell knows artists who feel excluded from the process, we would like him to get in touch with us.
Mr Russell spoke about sport. We already have a national strategy for sport, which is detailed in the document "Sport 21: Nothing Left to Chance". Sport plays a vital role in our culture and we need to examine how culture and sport can link together—I know that our shinty-playing colleagues will contribute to the consultation process. However, there was no point in initiating another massive consultation on sport when that document had already been produced.
I will deal with Mr Monteith next. He appears not to think that Government should be concerned with culture but that is because he misunderstands the role of Government in culture. We agree that decisions on funding should be at arm's length but we disagree with the free-market approach to culture of Mr Monteith and Mr Fry.
As Sam said, we have a healthy creative industries sector worth £5.3 billion, which creates 91,000 jobs in Scotland. That is important, and Government has a key role in supporting culture and our creative industries.
I agree with James Douglas-Hamilton about the importance of the film industry in Scotland. We are putting an extra £1.8 million into Scottish Screen over the next three years. Recent tax breaks mean that the production costs of British films of up to £50 million can be written off in the first year. Film is a vital sector and we are committed to promoting and supporting it.
The Scottish National party tells us that the
document is too prescriptive, whereas I am told by Ian Jenkins that it is too open. The document is intended to stimulate debate and to encourage people to become engaged in that debate. I agree that it has to be geographically inclusive and that it has to look at how we can foster talent in our children.
Richard Lochhead asked whether arts and culture will be properly resourced. We are putting in an additional £31 million over the period of the comprehensive spending review. He mentioned that the focus group was not representative. Realistically, if the focus group was representative of everybody in the arts and culture sector in Scotland, it would have a cast of thousands. Donnie Munro is a performing actor.
Order.
Ian Welsh and Elaine Murray mentioned the important role of local authorities. Local authorities have to be key partners in this strategy. We already spend more than £200 million annually on culture and leisure, and local authorities are key partners in delivering social inclusion.
I come now to Lloyd Quinan's comments. We are happy to talk to the producers, and Lloyd talks about the unions that are involved. Yes, I will be holding meetings with those unions—it is important that we speak to them. The best way of supporting artists is to support the creative industries. That is where we will be creating jobs, which will be a key plank of any cultural strategy. However, practitioners are important and we must never lose sight of the fact that a national cultural strategy is for the people of Scotland.
Will Ms Brankin give way?
No, I have an awful lot to get through.
Ms Brankin has the last two minutes.
Thank you. I am delighted to have stimulated so much interest.
I agree with Robin Harper. I have worked in the Scottish theatre sector and recognise its importance. I will be having discussions with that sector.
Mr Monteith mentioned a national theatre for Scotland. I realise that there are many views about that, which will provide for a heated debate. We are not afraid of having that debate; indeed, we will have it during the consultation. welcome Des McNulty's contribution on architecture and social inclusion. I assure him that we intend to build on Scotland's—and indeed
Glasgow's—achievements in architecture. We see community involvement as a key element of any national policy on architecture.
Mr Mundell talked about the definition of culture. We could spend a month talking about that. As somebody who has lived in a rural area for 25 years and has competed in the Black isle show on many occasions, let me tell members that the culture of our rural communities is a central plank of any policy on the rural economy. That is a perfect example of why culture needs to get into other areas of government, and I thank Mr Mundell for raising the matter.
Having heard Cathy Peattie sing traditional Scottish songs on many occasions, I was sorry that she could not sing today. I believe that it is against standing orders to sing in the chamber, which is a great pity, as it would have been nice to hear her.
We must be inclusive. A national cultural strategy is not for the great and the good; it is for everybody in Scotland.
I agree with Irene McGugan that education is central to any cultural strategy. That is why it is right that culture and education are going hand in hand.
The main aim of the consultation process is to establish a set of clear, understandable objectives. I hope that members will talk to people in local papers and broadcasting, and to people in their communities, whether in the performing arts or in community arts projects. Members know the people at home and in their communities, and should get out and talk to them.
I ask people in the media to do that as well. They should tell people about our consultation document and encourage them to tell their friends and families about it. Above all, the media should urge people to think about the consultation document and send their responses to the Scottish Executive. With the help of all members and all people in Scotland, we can deliver a cultural strategy that is fit for Scotland in the third millennium.
Before we move to decision time, I inform the chamber that the clerks have been able to provide the result of this morning's vote on motion S1M-110, on the timetabling of the Mental Health (Public Safety and Appeals) (Scotland) Bill, which we had to take on a show of hands. The result of the vote was as follows: For 107, Against 2, Abstentions 0.