Infrastructure, Investment and Cities
Good afternoon, everyone. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions.
Road Network (Renfrewshire South)
To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to invest in the road network in Renfrewshire South, including access to and from Glasgow airport. (S4O-04638)
The completion of the M74 in 2011 has already made a significant improvement to journey times to Glasgow airport, but we continue to invest in Renfrewshire’s strategic roads through maintenance improvements and we are exploring how the capacity of the M8 can be better managed using intelligent transport systems. In addition, we are investing £500 million to an infrastructure fund through the Glasgow and Clyde valley city deal, which includes proposals to improve the road network around Glasgow airport.
The cabinet secretary’s colleague Derek Mackay will be well aware of some of the road issues in Renfrewshire, and not just in and out of Glasgow airport. One of the important roads through my constituency is the A737. Does the cabinet secretary accept that the A737 is in need of investment and improvement, and will he commit to that?
We have a rolling programme of improvements to roads. I mentioned the £500 million for the city deal, so there is also a role—in addition to the relevant council’s role as the roads authority—through the city deal to carry out improvements in the area. We also have, through the roads maintenance agreement with local authorities, the idea that we can work jointly with local authorities on such programmes.
We have a programme of improvements to roads. That has now been set out for a number of years. Of course, we look at any proposals that come forward or any requirement to invest in additional roads infrastructure, and we will do that in relation to the A737.
Does the cabinet secretary consider that the investment that is being made in the east end of Glasgow on the M73, the M8 and the M74 will also benefit traffic that goes right through to Renfrewshire and Glasgow airport?
That is a good question. I think that everybody who uses the M74 has seen the benefits over recent years, but the additional works that are taking place on the M74, the M73 and the M8 will also provide significant journey time savings and improved journey time reliability for businesses in central Scotland. That will also help to support sustainable economic activity for existing and future businesses including those in Renfrewshire, building further on the improvements to the M77, the M80 and the M74, as I mentioned.
Rail Freight Transport
To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to encourage rail freight transport. (S4O-04639)
The Scottish Government recognises the importance of the rail freight sector in moving vital goods and materials across the country and beyond in a safe and sustainable way. A transformative programme of investment including a dedicated £30 million strategic rail freight investment fund will support significant improvements in the capacity and capability of the railway infrastructure for freight services.
Looking ahead, the Scottish Government expects to launch a public consultation to inform a refreshed rail freight strategy in the near future.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the Government’s continued investment in rail freight is necessary to ensure that we continue to decarbonise our freight industry and build a greener economy?
Yes. Our track record on investment demonstrates that. Rail freight produces about 76 per cent less CO2 than road freight, and each train can remove up to 76 heavy goods vehicles from the roads, also improving safety and efficiency and reducing congestion.
Of course, it is also true to say that we cannot act on this alone. It requires a firm commitment from the rail freight industry, and from industry more generally, to work with us and to invest towards growth.
Question 3, in the name of Hanzala Malik, has not been lodged. A satisfactory explanation has been given.
Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the progress of the Aberdeen western peripheral route. (S4O-04641)
The Aberdeen western peripheral route project is on track for completion in winter 2017, which is earlier than originally programmed. Construction is well under way, and the Craibstone and Dyce junctions are expected to be open by autumn 2016, followed by the Balmedie to Tipperty section in spring 2017.
The opening of the Craibstone and Dyce junctions will be welcomed by businesses in the area.
The Queensferry crossing has generated huge savings since its budget was first announced. Have any lessons from the Queensferry crossing project been applied to the western peripheral route project?
Yes, indeed. We take the opportunity to learn from all the major infrastructure projects. Perhaps the most critical lesson in relation to the AWPR came through the representations that we received and the concerns that we had about the diverting and laying of utilities. A great deal of preparatory work was done on that because it can impact on timescales and was one of the reasons why we were able to bring forward some of the elements of the project.
In the AWPR, we are also taking on one of the largest communications exercises on any major road construction project to date. As I am sure the member is aware, that exercise includes meetings with community councils and elected representatives as well as the provision of a community liaison team and a contact and education space that is similar to that of the Queensferry crossing project. That space can be used as a learning resource by local schools and colleges. We have also undertaken routine communications with communities and road users via e-zines, website updates, newsletters, flyers and public exhibitions.
The cabinet secretary will be well aware of the on-going discussions between the Scottish Futures Trust and the Office for National Statistics about the funding model that was used for the AWPR. Can he give us an update on those discussions? Will he assure us that the local government partners in the scheme will not face additional revenue costs? If there is the prospect of additional revenue costs, will they be fully funded by the Scottish Government?
Thank you. I call Alex Salmond. I beg your pardon; I should have called Keith Brown.
As the member said, discussions are being held between the SFT and local authorities along with others who are involved in hub projects. It is very important that such discussion takes place. Some of the projects that had been programmed are not ready because the local authorities or others have not reached financial close in relation to the project.
It is important that the financial discussions keep going at this stage, and that is what is happening. I know that the SFT is involved with those discussions because I have seen it happen. A continuing dialogue is being held with the ONS and Eurostat to see how we can resolve the question of additional revenue costs. The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Economy reported to Parliament on 9 September and has undertaken to come back to update Parliament as soon as we get further information. In the meantime, we will continue with the dialogue that the member mentioned.
I now call Alex Salmond.
I could answer the questions if you wish, Presiding Officer.
On the relationship between the AWPR and the Inveramsay bridge on the A96, could the minister say a word about the benefits that that will achieve and the timescale? We in the north-east of Scotland have been waiting for 30 years through ineffective and useless Liberal Democrat representation, and the Scottish Government and my friend Dennis Robertson have achieved the Inveramsay bridge—
Question, please.
Can the minister give an indication of the benefits of that major infrastructure improvement and its relationship to the AWPR?
The member is quite right to talk about the delay of the Inveramsay bridge, but it is also worth bearing it in mind that people have been campaigning for the AWPR for the best part of 50 years. It has taken this Administration to bring that scheme to fruition.
The AWPR is the largest road scheme of its kind, and the Inveramsay bridge will bring huge benefits to Aberdeenshire by reducing congestion, improving journey time reliability by avoiding the existing bridge, and enabling the free flow of traffic. Once again, the current Administration has delivered real improvements for local people.
In recent weeks, I have had talks with members of the North Kincardine community council and with landowners in the Stonehaven area about the liaison between the contractors and those who live along the route of the AWPR. Given that the reports that I have received from those people are not as positive as the ones that the minister has laid out, will he undertake to look at the way in which that liaison is conducted and ensure that we live up to the high standards that have been achieved around the Queensferry crossing?
I am not sure from his question whether the member is saying that the method of engagement has not been as positive as some of the participants expected, or whether negative feedback has been coming through it. Either way, I undertake to look at the issue.
The other communities that have been affected seem to have had a very positive experience so far and we applied some of the lessons learned from the Queensferry crossing. Whether the member thinks that some concerns are not being addressed through the process, or whether the process itself could be changed to adapt to local concerns, I am more than willing to look at it and come back to the member.
Elgin High School
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Scottish Futures Trust about the completion of the new Elgin high school. (S4O-04642)
The Scottish Government engages regularly with the Scottish Futures Trust about a range of issues, including the delivery of the Scotland’s schools for the future programme. The Scottish Futures Trust, on behalf of Scottish ministers, is working closely with Moray Council and other project partners to ensure that all possible steps are taken to progress the delivery of Elgin high school.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Can he tell us when decisions have been made and when we can expect the high school to be built? Like Lewis Macdonald, I would like to know whether the Scottish Government will meet the additional costs of the delay.
My response to the latter part of the question is the same as my response to Lewis Macdonald. There is a discussion going on just now with Moray Council. The point that I made to Lewis Macdonald was that had Moray Council been able to proceed with the project when it was meant to proceed, it would have happened well before the European system of accounts 2010 ruling. The school would have been built—or, at least, work would have been started—well before we had the ESA 2010 ruling. That ruling is the measure that has brought uncertainty to the programme.
The Deputy First Minister has said that he will come back to Parliament as soon as he has hard and fast information, but it is our intention to make sure that the school is built at the earliest possible opportunity.
Given that a recent report stated that every month’s delay in building Elgin high school would add £100,000 to the costs, can the cabinet secretary guarantee that the additional cost, which is no fault of the local authority, will not fall on Moray Council taxpayers?
All I can say is that discussions—both on costs and timescales—between the SFT and individual partners on the project will continue. I point out that the delay that has occurred is not the fault of the Scottish Government, either. The same has been true in many public-private partnership projects that other Administrations have taken forward. There are now serious concerns in the United Kingdom Government about the impact of the ruling on some of its programmes, and the ruling has also caused real concern across Europe. The situation is not the Scottish Government’s doing; it is because of a change that came in in late 2014.
On costs and the timescale for delivery, all that we can do is ensure that we have the earliest possible resolution and that we have continuing dialogue between the SFT and, in this case, Moray Council.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that all projects from September 2014, including Elgin high school, have not reached financial close and therefore have been affected by ESA 2010. Can he confirm that that is correct?
Not all projects have been affected: some that would have been affected have been given the go-ahead, as the Deputy First Minister has previously reported to Parliament. It is quite right to say that other projects have not gone ahead. If they have not reached financial close, we want to wait to resolve the issue because to agree to the projects in the meantime would introduce a level of risk that we do not want. We will continue to have the discussions, resolve the issue and then move forward.
Public Transport Links (West Scotland)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it plans to improve public transport links in the West Scotland region. (S4O-04643)
We are, as a Government, committed to improving transport links in West Scotland. Examples of that include rail, in which we have already provided enhanced passenger services, including four trains per hour between Ayr and Glasgow Central and 38 new class 380 trains, providing 130 additional carriages, through the Paisley corridor improvements.
The Scottish Government is also providing funding of up to £40 million towards the fastlink bus route and up to £246 million for modernisation of the Glasgow subway. In addition to that, as I have mentioned, we are investing £500 million in a £1.13 billion infrastructure fund via the Glasgow and Clyde valley city deal, which includes proposals to improve public transport across the region.
Recently we have seen completion of the Borders rail link, but now it is time for the Scottish National Party Government to seriously invest in the West Scotland rail network. The Glasgow crossrail scheme would provide economic and transport benefits to Renfrewshire, as well as to Inverclyde and Ayrshire, by connecting those areas directly with central and eastern Scotland. That issue was raised with the minister, Derek Mackay, at a recent meeting of the cross-party group on rail.
Question.
Would the cabinet secretary be willing to look again at the merits of Glasgow crossrail? If not, can the cabinet secretary provide clarity on why he and his Government do not support the Glasgow crossrail scheme?
I have listened to those who are proposing that scheme, including the railquest group and others that have mentioned and promoted it. We have looked at the scheme in the past. Previous Administrations also looked at it; perhaps that is why previous Administrations and local councils did not take it forward.
The scheme does not, in our view, provide benefits that would justify the cost. Of course, if local authorities want to develop infrastructure proposals of their own, they can do so. We have said—in relation, for example, to the city deal that I mentioned earlier—that we will try to ensure that both Network Rail and ScotRail provide as much assistance as possible with regard to information about the impact of any rail improvements. However, we do not believe that the Glasgow crossrail project would provide benefits that would justify the cost.
Infrastructure Investment Plan (Low-carbon Scotland)
To ask the Scottish Government how it will ensure that its infrastructure investment plan will help to deliver a low-carbon Scotland. (S4O-04644)
The “Infrastructure Investment Plan 2011: Progress for Report 2014”, which was published on 17 March, highlighted the various ways in which the plan is supporting delivery of a low-carbon Scotland.
Does the cabinet secretary agree with the report from the Scotland’s way ahead initiative—which is chaired by Sarah Thiam of the Institution of Civil Engineers—which concludes that public sector investment in low-carbon infrastructure can deliver multiple benefits for Scotland?
It is worth mentioning that our ability to achieve climate change targets and to address climate change challenges would be greatly enhanced if car manufacturers were honest about the emissions that come from the cars that they produce.
I agree with Angus MacDonald that our capital investments over the next decades will contribute to our emissions reduction, energy efficiency and renewables targets. They will also help to encourage innovation, to demonstrate best practice and to support businesses and skills development. They must also be adaptable to future climate change. They should not lock in high-carbon activity that would make meeting climate change targets more expensive and disruptive in the future. Our investments need to be fit for a low-carbon Scotland.
Alford Community Campus
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Scottish Futures Trust about progress being made on the Alford community campus. (S4O-04645)
There is regular engagement between the Scottish Government and the SFT about the schools programme. Construction of the new Alford community campus started in May 2014 and the project is due to be completed on programme in October 2015.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that positive answer. I am sure that the families of Alford are absolutely delighted with that new development because it will bring a community library and a swimming pool. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that superfast broadband will also go to the Alford community campus and the wider Alford community?
I certainly hope that, as Dennis Robertson suggests, local communities will welcome the new campus. I am also happy to confirm that the Alford community campus is fully connected to broadband and has wi-fi throughout. In relation to the wider community, the Deputy First Minister is taking forward on-going programmes on digital connectivity.
A9 Dualling (Disruption to Residents and Motorists)
To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to minimise disruption to local residents and motorists during the A9 dualling. (S4O-04646)
We recognise that the A9 is vital to delivery of sustainable economic growth in Scotland. We are working closely with local authority partners to ensure that the A9 and the local roads network continue to operate, and that local access is maintained in the meantime.
The A9 dualling is welcome. We have been waiting a long time for it, but the experience of too many of my constituents is that past repairs and improvements to the A9 have been held at the busiest times of the day, week and year. Given the importance of the A9 as a tourist route, how will Transport Scotland ensure that the upgrading works are scheduled as carefully as possible in order to minimise disruption to local residents and tourists?
Murdo Fraser is right that we have been waiting a long time for the A9 dualling—decades, I think. Again, this Administration is taking that forward, unlike previous Administrations. He is also, of course, right to say that there will be disruption and that there can be frustration among people who are affected by it. However, I assure him that Transport Scotland, the operating companies and the contractors for the dualling works are experienced in such matters and will take into account when the heaviest traffic flows are likely, and try to minimise disruption as best they can.
In addition to the dualling works, we have some improvement works going on—a particular incident is causing some traffic disruption. However, we try to minimise such disruption, although we are well aware of the extent to which communities in Murdo Fraser’s region and along the length of the A9 are affected by the works. In the end, it is important that we carry out the dualling.
Culture, Europe and External Affairs
City of Edinburgh Council (Cultural Investment)
To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions regarding new cultural investment it has had with the City of Edinburgh Council. (S4O-04648)
I met councillors and officials of the City of Edinburgh Council on 5 August 2015 to discuss the council’s vision and strategic priorities for cultural capital spending projects. Scottish Government officials had a follow-up meeting with the chief executive and the executive director of culture, city strategy and economy on 11 August.
I welcome that engagement. Does the cabinet secretary support the proposal from St Mary’s music school for a centre of excellence in the old Royal high school, which would be a win-win for culture? Will she support the development of a tourism levy so that the council can invest in the historic buildings and arts venues that the city needs if it is to retain its status as a global centre of cultural excellence, given the 8.5 per cent reduction in funding for local government that was noted by Audit Scotland this year?
I understand that the subject of the member’s second point is part of the proposals for an Edinburgh city deal that the council has put forward. That would be subject to discussion with Cabinet colleagues across Government. There is some strong resistance to a tourism levy, which Sarah Boyack will be aware of, but it is important that we address the cultural engine that is Edinburgh and think about how we can drive forward that agenda.
I hope that Sarah Boyack will appreciate that, as I am the minister with responsibility for Historic Scotland, and given some of the issues around listed buildings, it is not possible or appropriate for me to comment on her first supplementary question.
Refugee Crisis
To ask the Scottish Government when it last discussed the refugee crisis with the United Kingdom Government. (S4O-04649)
When the First Minister and I met the Foreign Secretary, Philip Hammond, on 21 September, we welcomed the UK Government’s recent decision to take more refugees and made the case for the UK to go further than it has and set out a clear timetable for meeting its current commitments. On that date, I also met the UK Government’s newly appointed minister with responsibility for Syrian refugees, Richard Harrington, to discuss in detail the practical actions that are necessary to co-ordinate the arrival of refugees.
Furthermore, representatives from the UK Home Office attend the refugee task force, which last met on Wednesday 23 September. The most recent weekly teleconference between Home Office officials, local government officials and Scottish Government ministers and officials took place on 25 September.
I share the minister’s view that the UK should take more refugees than is currently planned. Has the Scottish Government assessed councils’ capacity to take more refugees, and does he believe that the capacity is there for us to take more than Scotland’s so-called fair share of what we both agree is a pitifully small number for the UK as a whole? If so, has he told the UK Government that our Government is willing to provide for more than our fair share, in order to boost the overall UK number?
I acknowledge the member’s interest over a number of years in refugees and those who seek asylum in this country.
In the three years that I have been in government, I have never before seen such a good effort as has been made by local authorities, the Scottish Government and the UK Government—particularly the Home Office—to work seamlessly together to co-ordinate our efforts across this important issue. That is positive. The response from local authorities has been overwhelming.
On the detail of the capacity in each local authority area, I know that the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is collating that information. It would be wrong to breach any of the confidences that COSLA has shared with me, but I can say that I am confident that, if refugees were to arrive tomorrow, we would be in a good place to provide them not only with appropriate accommodation but with the appropriate wraparound services. I am happy to keep the member up to date on that.
As for increasing the number of refugees that we will take beyond the roughly 10 per cent that is regarded as being our fair share of the UK number, it should be said that, if we can do more, the Scottish Government has never been found wanting in its response to refugees.
Although the UK Government has committed to taking 20,000 refugees over five years, the minister will know that there have been calls for a front-loading of the number of refugees. Has the minister discussed with the UK Government the possibility of Scotland front-loading the number of refugees we are looking to support?
That is an important point. The member will know that the Scottish Government does not disagree with her proposal. I discussed the issue with the minister with responsibility for Syrian refugees; he is actively considering it and the Home Office is thinking about it. I do not think that I would breach any confidences if I said that the Home Office understands that this will not be a 4,000-a-year or 5,000-a-year job. It is thinking about how it can immediately help. We would be happy to consider any assistance that Scotland can provide, including taking people immediately.
Refugee Crisis
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its response to the refugee crisis. (S4O-04650)
The First Minister convened a refugee summit earlier this month to bring together a wide range of stakeholders. At that summit, she announced the setting up of a task force, which I chair and which has now met three times and established two sub-groups—one is looking at refugee accommodation and the other at refugee integration. Both those sub-groups met for the first time last Tuesday.
The Scottish Government has made available an initial £1 million to ensure that services across Scotland are prepared to deal with the arrival of refugees. The response from local authorities has been positive and we are ready to assist refugees as soon as they arrive.
Will the minister give us a further update on any numbers that have been agreed by local authorities and on whether any additional central support has been requested to assist with issues that might arise, such as language difficulties?
The member makes an important point. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is collating that information, as I mentioned in a previous answer. We need to give it the appropriate time to do that.
The refugee emergency summit was convened just over three weeks ago, so we are moving at a heck of a pace, but Willie Coffey is right to say that local authorities will have to think about the financial pressures that they are already under and the financial pressures of taking in refugees. The tone of the discussions between the Home Office and local authorities, in which the Scottish Government is also involved, has been positive and constructive from all sides.
There will be gaps in service provision in particular local authority areas. Glasgow has a lot of expertise and has the integration services, but that is not the case for local authorities across Scotland. Where gaps exist, the Scottish Government, the Home Office and local authorities will work together to plug them.
Since we previously experienced a comparable refugee crisis, the structure of public housing in Scotland has changed significantly. Will the minister undertake to ensure that, when the decisions are made about where refugees will be housed, we will avoid two key errors—first, housing too many people all in the same place and, secondly, creating a situation in which local authorities are forced to provide housing in pressured areas where there are already people who have been on the waiting list for a long time, who might feel alienated by the process?
I thank Alex Johnstone for raising a couple of important points. It is important to recognise that, when refugees arrive here, they will have the same rights as anybody else under the homelessness legislation that we have. The points that Mr Johnstone makes are well understood by the task force that I convene. We do not want, in effect, to create ghettoisation, which we know is not conducive either to the refugees or to the communities in which they end up being housed. We are aware of that and would like refugees to be dispersed across a wider area.
I have been overwhelmed by local authorities across Scotland offering to take in their share of refugees. We understand that we will have to work closely with communities before refugees even arrive, to ensure that there is community buy-in, so the points about housing and housing pressures are well made. The refugee task force is conscious of the issue.
Is the minister open to considering the use of accommodation that is not local authority or social rented accommodation in dealing with the situation?
There have been plenty of offers of accommodation, and the Government’s preference is to work with local authorities to find the most suitable accommodation. If we can manage to do that within existing social housing stock, that will be the preference not just for the Government but for all the partners that are involved in the ministerial task force.
There have been generous and kind offers, and at the moment we are exploring and collating as much information as possible. I can tell Mr McMillan that, if specific offers have come in to him, he should forward them on to us. We will keep an open mind on all those issues.
Traditional Arts (Funding)
To ask the Scottish Government how Scotland’s traditional arts are funded. (S4O-04651)
The Scottish Government supports traditional arts through a number of its public bodies. For example, since Creative Scotland opened up its project funding in October last year, it has awarded £1.4 million to 156 applicant organisations and individuals, with a success rate of 37 per cent, which is significantly higher than that for other art forms. That is in addition to the £7 million for 2015 to 2018 to Creative Scotland’s regularly funded organisations that work in traditional arts. On 15 September, Creative Scotland published on its website a full list of its support for traditional arts.
There is Scottish Government funding for the traditional arts from Bòrd na Gàidhlig, our youth music initiative, the festivals expo fund and BBC Alba. In addition, Radio nan Gàidheal has given significant exposure to traditional music and has contributed to its funding.
Generally, the Scottish traditional music sector has seen big improvements in its status since 2007, under the current Scottish Government. However, the Scottish Government’s traditional arts working party agreed that an equivalent to national companies should be explored for the traditional arts in order to give parity of esteem. Is that proposal being taken forward?
That is an important issue, particularly in relation to parity of esteem, which the Government has worked hard to achieve. The concept of a national company might not suit the traditional arts. Nevertheless, I am interested in the member’s proposals and will ask officials to look further into them. The member is right to refer to the idea as one of the proposals from the traditional arts working group. Although many other recommendations from the working group have been taken forward, to date that one has not.
In evidence to the Education and Culture Committee, the Traditional Music and Song Association of Scotland said that it was having serious difficulties—in other words, it was unsuccessful—in accessing funding to support young musicians to develop their careers as well as to bring their music to diverse communities in Scotland. It was asking only for less than £15,000. Why did it not get that funding?
The member will be aware that ministers do not consider individual applications at that level for funds that Creative Scotland administers. She may be familiar with the fantastic work of Fèis Rois in delivering the youth music initiative. I visited Eden Court theatre in Inverness, which contains one of the new youth arts hubs that have been set up as part of our youth arts strategy. Fantastic traditional music activity is taking place that is being led from there.
I am aware that, on 15 September, Mary Scanlon raised the issue of support for traditional arts in the Education and Culture Committee. The Scotsman published an article that quoted her, which was subsequently withdrawn. An apology was published from the editor to the chief executive of Creative Scotland about the article’s contents and the accuracy of the full picture.
Victoria and Albert Project Dundee (Audit)
To ask the Scottish Government whether the V&A project in Dundee will be audited by Audit Scotland. (S4O-04652)
A decision on whether to audit any aspect of the V&A Dundee project would be entirely a matter for Audit Scotland. The Scottish ministers have no role in any such decision.
I hope that Audit Scotland may take that consideration very seriously, then, and that the cabinet secretary may do all that she can to encourage that in whichever way is appropriate. She will know as well as I do that there are concerns about the spiralling costs of the project; there are also concerns about governance. The V&A project fits exactly into Audit Scotland’s definition of an arm’s-length external organisation.
Will you come to the question?
I will. Audit Scotland requires ALEOs to consider governance at the outset, to scrutinise performance and accountability and to monitor cost, performance and risks. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the V&A project is indeed an ALEO of Dundee City Council?
On governance, the McClelland report identified a number of areas, particularly in relation to the original budget costs to which the member referred. The underestimates in the original budget were one of the key aspects of the increase in the overall budget costs.
On reporting and corporate governance arrangements, the McClelland report also concludes that more frequent direct reporting on the V&A to members would have been helpful. Following adoption, the council has taken forward the project board since 2015 in order to ensure that there is more openness and transparency. I am sure that the council will listen to Jenny Marra’s points. However, when she comes to the chamber, she must always remember to champion the V&A as a great project for Dundee. Those on this side of the house seem to do it; she seems incapable of promoting the V&A.
Will the cabinet secretary outline what benefits she believes the V&A will bring to Dundee, the north-east and, more generally, Scotland?
It is great to hear one of the members from the north-east promoting the V&A. It will act as a magnet for Dundee’s regeneration, help inward investment, promote tourism growth and give the public access that will help their understanding of the extent of design collections, both from the V&A and from across Scotland’s design heritage.
Importantly, also fundamental to its mission will be the fostering of creative design thinking among businesses to improve innovation, profitability and opportunity. It is very important to the economy of Dundee and all of Scotland.
T in the Park 2015 (Financial Assistance)
To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it provided financial assistance to T in the Park 2015. (S4O-04653)
T in the Park is one of the most popular and successful cultural events in Scotland’s annual events programme. It delivers significant economic impact, drives additional tourism and supports jobs. In 2014, the event generated £15.4 million for the Scottish economy.
The event faced unanticipated costs and reduced returns, and the funding was to support a successful transition to the Strathallan site and to support the format at that site in 2016 and 2017.
There is a clawback provision should the event not take place in Strathallan in 2016 and 2017. The detail and timeline of events that led to the one-off grant payment being made are contained within my answer to parliamentary question S4W-26910, dated 14 August 2015, and in my evidence to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday.
I think that after the cabinet secretary’s appearance at the committee yesterday, there are more questions than answers. Therefore, I ask the cabinet secretary whether she will agree to come before Parliament to provide a full statement and be open to questions before the full chamber.
I also ask her to confirm that T in the Park made a profit and, as such, to explain why £150,000 of taxpayers’ money was used to support a venture that was making a profit and a company that has made multimillions of pounds in profit.
The member may not be aware—clearly from his question, he is not—that I provided answers during an extensive session with the committee yesterday.
The member is correct in identifying that the overall company is a profitable one, but companies judge whether to hold events on a case-by-case basis. If they see that there are unanticipated extra costs that will lead to reduced revenues, they might want to change the set-up. That might have meant that Glasgow would benefit from more individual single-stage, single-day concerts run by that company, but I do not think that that would be the T in the Park that many, many people across Scotland have grown to love and that many, many people appreciate.
As I mentioned earlier, there was an economic impact of £15.4 million, which was not just on Scotland’s economy but on the local economy. We want to make sure that festivals are celebrated and enjoyed across Scotland, not just in our cities.
In relation to the timeline associated with the financial assistance, which the cabinet secretary provided to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday, can she confirm whether ministers or their officials had any meetings or were engaged in any communication with DF Concerts beyond the completion of the T in the Park festival on 12 July?
I would need to check and come back on that point. However, Liz Smith will be aware that some of the major issues, which I believe it was she who raised, were about transportation and exit at the event, so I would expect that, particularly in relation to transport, there would have been some communication and contact.
After the event, we expect to get the reports that we required as part of the grant conditions. They will come to ministers at the appropriate time.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that DF Concerts hosted a series of concerts in Glasgow this year—the Glasgow Summer Sessions. Is the cabinet secretary aware of any funding from the public sector for those concerts, and who provided it?
The Scottish Government did not provide DF Concerts with financial support for the Summer Sessions in Glasgow. However, we understand that Glasgow City Council provided £200,000 to provide delivery of the series. It was funded, through a commercial arrangement, in order to establish the Summer Sessions on a level commercial footing so that in future years it would generate money for the city.
Having reflected on the exchanges at yesterday’s meeting, can the cabinet secretary confirm whether she asked her officials to establish what, if any, additional contribution DF Concerts had requested from the lead sponsor, Tennent’s, to cover the additional transition costs?
There was extensive scrutiny from officials and the Scottish Government’s state aid unit, part of which involved looking at the revenue and projected budget of DF Concerts. People would like to see the content of that, but commercial confidentiality has restricted their ability to do so.
Next
Employment