Chamber and committees

That is correct.

I did act and I decided that the chairman of the board of Historic Environment Scotland should not remain in office.

The timeline is important, and I am sure that Mr Kerr will want to reflect on that. When the issue became as serious as it did and it was no longer the kind of human resources issue that might be common in organisations, but a profound breakdown, with grievances having been submitted in different directions of the organisation, it would have been totally improper for me to meet—

It is, no doubt, the view of the former chairman of the board, but it would also be fair to point out—and this goes to the heart of the difficulty that the HES leadership had got itself into—

This may be helpful to Mr Harvie, because he is trying to understand where things were at that point and what that led to in terms of how we should act in such circumstances. Bearing in mind that the accountable officer has to be an employee of Historic Environment Scotland, after our first priority, which was the return to work of the chief executive officer after periods of illness, the second option was to consider whether any other senior staff member of HES—an employee of HES, because that was a requirement for being an accountable officer—could have been the acting accountable officer with those responsibilities. If a permanent finance director had been in post, or if a chief operating officer role had existed at the time, the Scottish Government could have considered that person as an acting accountable officer. However, that was not the case so it was not possible. That is a very important fact.

Neither were other senior staff members of Historic Environment Scotland available to be appointed as accountable officer, because of their own involvement in on-going internal processes. Ultimately, therefore, no suitable internal candidates were identified by either the HES board or the Scottish Government. That route, therefore, would not satisfy the wish of the Scottish Government, as identified by the Auditor General in his report. Efforts were undertaken to consider external candidates, and interviews also took place for a fourth external candidate, who was recommended by the HES board as an acting accountable officer.

My point in sharing this information is that there has been a suggestion or implication that efforts were not undertaken to find an accountable officer, given the then suspension of the chief executive; however, I assure Mr Harvie and the committee that the Scottish Government made such efforts.

My first reflection is that I am unaware of a similarly complex situation that has thrown up significant issues in relation to HR and potential legal challenge. How does one help an operationally independent organisation to find its way through such difficulties? That will no doubt be a doctoral thesis at some time by someone, but, in the meantime, it is good that we have somebody of the experience of David Martin looking at it right now.

Regardless of the exact circumstances of what happened, beginning with the chief executive’s absence and then the new phase with the board not allowing her to return to work, it caused the Scottish Government and the board of Historic Environment Scotland to act. It is very important for there to be an understanding that efforts were made to identify somebody who might be able to fulfil the responsibilities of chief executive officer and accountable officer.

I think that Mr Brown is correct, and that is why the Scottish Government has changed the constraints under which Historic Environment Scotland previously operated, thereby freeing it up to find new income streams, because the estate—and everything that it is responsible for—is very popular and has the potential to be even more popular. No doubt all of us who visit sites that are run by Historic Environment Scotland recognise that there is more potential that can be reached. The first thing is that the Government has already made that change.

09:30

In many respects, it is groundbreaking for Historic Environment Scotland, and other organisations have been knocking on my door asking for similar freedom to make income in more ways and have an entrepreneurial approach to their operations.

I reflect that we now have a chairman of the board and a chief executive officer who have come with such a background from the National Trust for Scotland. The freedom that they, together with new board members, have been granted by the Scottish Government is very much the direction in which the leadership of Historic Environment Scotland wants to go.

Keith Brown mentioned the detriment to an organisation because of what has been going on in the leadership. That has taken up a significant amount of my time as well as that of civil service colleagues. We should never lose sight of the fact that Historic Environment Scotland, and the many people who work for it throughout Scotland, do a tremendous job. As an organisation per se, it has, in many ways, been an early adopter of change in this space and others. I will be delighted when it emerges with an understanding of the difficulties in which it found itself, the lessons that have to be learned and any changes that the Government may need to make to ensure that such things cannot happen again in the future.

I have asked for it to be so, and I have no reason to doubt that it will be the case.

The record will show that Mr Halcro Johnston said that I “should” have been having a meeting with the board. I totally disagree—we can have a difference of view on that.

I have been forthcoming in explaining the serious nature of the investigations that were under way at that stage, involving the chairman of the board and other board members. Unequivocally, it would have been totally inappropriate for me to have met the board in that context. Had I been aware of invitations for me to attend a board meeting in that context, I would have declined, for those reasons.

I do not think that any minister, from any political party, in the situation that I found myself in, and find myself in now, would have acceded to that request. It would have been totally inappropriate.

I am sorry, but I totally refute that, because it chooses to ignore the fact that we are operating in relation to an organisation that was created by statute. There are legal restrictions on what we can do.

The record will show that, at the earliest opportunity at which I was empowered to make decisions, I made decisions in relation to the leadership of Historic Environment Scotland. We can already see that those changes are having a significant impact on where HES is today compared with where it was last year.