Chamber and committees

Yes. I would like you to think about how we would do that, if we wanted to do it. It is clearly an issue, although I fully accept the complexity around it.

I want to cover our shared interest in culture at the heart of place in relation to town centres. We have heard evidence during the inquiry that culture must be at the table, and we have heard discussions about the extent to which culture can be involved in business improvement districts and so on. We have even heard commentary that bodies such as Creative Scotland should be made statutory consultees. Do you see culture as being at the heart of town centres? What is the Government’s thinking on how it might be able to assist that to be the case as we come out of the pandemic and deal with all the issues that we have covered today?

I totally agree with you about key stakeholders being at the table.

That takes us back to a point that Maggie Chapman made and on which you picked up, minister, about community entrepreneurialism. Arguably, musicians and artists are entrepreneurs. Perhaps we need to start to think about them in that way.

I will not press you for an answer, but I am interested in whether the Scottish Government has considered or is considering ideas that would practically support people who are in culture when we think of it as being at the heart of place. I refer, for example, to targeted rates relief, to go back to some of the points that John Mason made. Rather than thinking about it as a broad brush across the top—culture is good and it contributes to society—are we thinking of it as being at the heart of town centre regeneration and enablement, because it brings in many other things and supports many other types of business as well?

To ask the Scottish Government how it will align its priorities for local government services with future projects by local authorities that are funded through the United Kingdom Government’s shared prosperity fund. (S6O-01228)

Given that the UK Government plans yet another fund that is intended to bypass the Scottish Government and that Westminster’s Public Accounts Committee noted in a recent report that the UK Government does

“not yet have a strong understanding”

of what delivers local growth, will the minister consider legislation or perhaps even guidance in order to ensure that Scottish local authorities must take account of Scottish priorities when bidding for such funds?

They say that change is made inevitable when parties fundamentally diverge based on their values. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is important to contrast our vision, which is based on democracy and ethical values, with that of the failing UK state? In particular, does the cabinet secretary agree that today’s news regarding the willingness of the UK to break international treaty obligations and, domestically, to shield dramatic levels of financial corruption is merely a glimpse of the folly of dependence, while independence is a harbinger of a very different and better future?

Forecasts this week from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development have shown that the United Kingdom is set to have the lowest growth of any economy in the G20, apart from sanctioned Russia. That is a direct result of a Tory Brexit and will have a regrettable direct impact on Scotland, given that the majority of key economic levers reside with Westminster. Does the First Minister share my concern about UK Government mismanagement and will our independence prospectus help the public to understand why it is critical that those economic levers are controlled by Scotland for the benefit of Scotland?

I can absolutely explain it. I can refer directly back to the cabinet secretary’s comment that members on the Tory benches seem incapable of understanding the difference between micro and macro economics. I encourage them to look at exactly which powers reside in Westminster, as that is absolutely the crux of the debate.

If the Tories had a genuine concern about growth or any understanding of economics, the motion would be shouting from the rooftops for Scotland to have full economic powers. I notice, too, that the motion says nothing about the straitjacket that is imposed on Scotland by our lack of borrowing powers, which the cabinet secretary referenced. The Tories complain about highly uncertain forecasts, but they have not mentioned that UK public sector net borrowing was £151.8 billion in the financial year ending March 2022. If it is good that the Government of Boris Johnson can borrow so freely, why is the Scottish Government denied those powers?

The pseudo economics of the Tories also turns a blind eye to corruption and large-scale financial crime, which distorts markets and punishes consumers and businesses that play by the rules.

Craig Hoy rose—

I will take one if the member is going to directly counter my figures and give figures that show that I am wrong.

Let us take the previous 20 years and run an international comparison of GDP growth rates.

Sorry, but I missed the member. I will come back to him.

From that comparison, we find that the UK’s growth was 68 per cent in nominal terms, while the average large advanced economy grew by 93 per cent and the average small advanced economy grew by 138 per cent, which is double the cumulative growth of the UK economy. Scotland is having to pay a heavy price for that UK failure and for being tied to the UK’s economic mismanagement, particularly in comparison with other medium-sized advanced economies, many of which have a weaker asset base than Scotland has.

I continue to wonder. When I was growing up, Scottish Conservatives would often talk about accountability and taking responsibility for creating our own future. Why is it uniquely now that the best that Scotland can hope for is to go cap in hand to Boris Johnson and ask for more money, rather than to create a better future? What on earth has happened to the Tories?