I will add to that. We are all in the same position, in that much of the information about particular concerns in relation to senior management at Historic Environment Scotland has been shared with us anonymously. There is one particular whistleblowing source, and I do not know who that person is. That person has never requested to speak with me. I do not know whether they have spoken with any members of the committee, who might therefore know who are. However, whistleblowing gives people a very important opportunity to share concerns. This is a very clear example of a situation where it has been in the public interest for us to be informed about these concerns.

To underline Mr Hogg’s point, the opportunity has been there for the board and individual members of the board to share their views with the Scottish Government, and they have done so.

That is correct.

In the fullness of time, as some of the issues come out in the form of investigations, I think that it will become clear that we are talking about problems of a different magnitude compared with any other organisation, where there are standard HR issues that come up from time to time. We are talking about extremely challenging circumstances.

As Kenneth Hogg has pointed to, in the sponsorship team within the culture directorate—which deals with the national public bodies in the museums, galleries and Creative Scotland side of things—there is much greater sensitivity to any potential early warning signs of what we believe may have taken place at Historic Environment Scotland. We have no sign of that being the case elsewhere.

We have officials who are very involved, and I have given the committee evidence at some length about the number of meetings and the range of formats with very senior officials informing ourselves about the problems. That institutional memory and understanding within the civil service and with myself would stand us in good stead if there were to be any signs of similar developments elsewhere.

I am not aware of such a range of issues occurring in any other one of the arm’s-length, non-departmental public bodies. I have spoken with ministerial colleagues in the Scottish Government to ask, “Is anybody aware of these sorts of developments, at this scale with this range, and the potential reasons why?” Nobody has any memory of there being such an example. Therefore, we will do everything we can to deal with the matter now, and we will also learn any lessons to make sure that it does not happen in future.

I am keen to build on a number of aspects of cross-portfolio working. As I have said in previous evidence to the committee, there are areas of the cultural space, in relation especially to health and wellbeing but also to the economy space, where there is the potential for us to do more.

I do not know whether the committee has heard from, for example, Scottish Ballet about what it has done, is doing and wants to do in the health and wellbeing space. I highly recommend that the committee hear about that work, because it is absolutely world class. Scottish Ballet is a really good example of a cultural institution in Scotland. It is a national performing company, so it is directly funded by the Scottish Government, and it is doing a lot in the health and wellbeing space, which is paid for out of the culture directorate’s finances.

At the same time, there are other areas in the cultural space, such as the screen sector, in which we can look at significant economic aspects. The committee has been well advised about the ambition for it to become a £1 billion GVA industry in Scotland by 2030, on which really good progress is being made. How does that marry with other parts of Government that have responsibilities? We are definitely doing more to ensure that we get the most out of opportunities. I could move on to tourism, for example, and there are other areas that are, to all intents and practical purposes, not part of my direct responsibility in Government. However, by ensuring that everything works together, we can do more.

Screen is another good example of an area in which we are required to do more. Screen Scotland has direct responsibility for television and film but not gaming, which sits in the economy space in the Scottish Government. Meanwhile, we have a national performing company—the Royal Scottish National Orchestra—that has a significant new source of income in the form of soundtracks for films and games. In painting that picture, I am making your point that cross-portfolio working is absolutely key. I have not even got to social prescribing, which is one of the committee’s previous particular interests and one that I have given evidence to the committee about.

I am cognisant of all the different areas in which culture has a lot to offer. Given that you are interested in the budget element today, I note that the key change that we are seeing at present—Creative Scotland’s multi-annual funding of twice as many organisations as before—is foundational for the delivery of cross-departmental benefits, which might have been harder to achieve in the past.

It was definitely the case that, when there was significant financial distress, especially as we emerged from Covid, there was concern in some parts of the country that certain local authorities might make decisions on the provision of some cultural services that raised the potential for funding to be diverted. The Scottish Government would take very seriously the prospect of the likes of Sistema Scotland or the Youth Music Initiative not being able to continue in one part of the country, because they are an important part of our commitment to helping children in more challenged social and economic circumstances to access music and cultural provision. I have been very alive to that possibility. I have been meeting the cultural lead and other representatives of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities throughout my term in office, and meetings have been taking place more widely with the cultural leads of local authorities.

I am optimistic about learning more from the review of Creative Scotland, which has been looking into the availability of cultural services in different parts of the country, as it is not uniform and there is not a uniform approach. There is one issue around local government and another around the local enterprise companies—we have three in Scotland, and they take quite different approaches to culture. That is another layer of understanding: how are things working in different parts of the country?

We must then add the question of the extent to which Creative Scotland’s decision making is about what is funded and what that means in different parts of the country. Are there gaps? I would be keen to understand whether that is the case. I would say in mitigation that both the Culture Collective and Collective Communities funding streams, which are being provided throughout Scotland, offer important mechanisms to ensure that all parts of the country have the ability to draw down funds to support cultural activity.

Your question, convener, about ensuring that there is provision of cultural services is absolutely right, and there is a whole parallel discussion to be had about libraries, which fits into that context, too.

As the committee knows, I walk a fine line between wanting to ensure that we, as the Government, are doing everything that we can to support local government, the enterprise companies and Creative Scotland and respecting our arm’s length relationships—which exist for obvious reasons, as it is not for cabinet secretaries to micromanage what we might personally wish to have more of, whether on stage, on screen or wherever. I leave that to the experts.

Having said all of that, and referring back to the question that you posed, convener, I would say that there is a role for Government in using our convening power and the best possible information to ensure that we have cultural provision across Scotland that can by accessed by people of all backgrounds. In general, that is working well, and I am interested to learn, through the review, whether there any areas where we could be doing more.

I can see a very subtle hand movement from Lisa Baird, who may, I think, want to add something.

I am delighted to represent Edinburgh Central, which is home to all Edinburgh’s major festivals and to Murrayfield, where AC/DC and Oasis played. Mr Brown will be aware that there was some media coverage about capacity being a concern, which I appreciate. I had the good fortune to be at the Oasis concert and see how tremendous and popular it was and how people came from the rest of Scotland. Mr Bibby is nodding, so I assume that he was in the audience and can attest to that. Murrayfield, which is a tremendous venue, both for rugby and for cultural events, coped with the challenge. Public transport worked very well, even though the gig happened at the same time as the Edinburgh festivals, which are the third largest ticketed events in the world.

If, by extension, the question is whether too much is happening in Edinburgh rather than elsewhere, I cannot really answer that, because I am a great supporter of festivals in other parts of Scotland.

First, I thank Mr Adam for helping me to understand the history of punk in Paisley and Renfrewshire more generally. That was not part of the briefing notes that I prepared for myself.

I am very sorry that Mr Adam was only able to ask this question right at the end of the evidence session, because I could—and will be delighted to—talk at great length about this. What has been happening with the Scottish screen sector in general has been extremely positive in recent years. The economic impact studies prove that to be so: it is heading towards being a billion-pound-a-year industry in Scotland.

Looking at what Isabel Davis, David Smith and other colleagues at Screen Scotland have been able to do, I would like to pay public tribute to them. They are understood in Scotland to be world class; in addition—I have seen this, most recently when I attended the Gothenburg film festival with them to showcase what is happening in Scotland—Screen Scotland is seen internationally as being a world-class screen agency, helping to promote Scotland as a place where one can film, where there is outstanding talent and where opportunities abound. The key part of Mr Adam’s question is how we maintain that, because we are, in effect, emerging from market failure.

Due to the concentration in the past of broadcasting and film production in London and south-east England, everyone has pretty much had to agree that we have to undertake a new way of doing things to ensure that the nations and regions are able to get a fair slice of the cake, for example when it comes to the commissioning of public service broadcasting. We have also had to move from the market failure of having next to no studios in Scotland. As Mr Adam and other committee members know, we now see film studios opening up and being used literally right across Scotland.

We have been bucking international trends. There was the strike in the States, which had a major impact on film production schedules, and there has been a downturn in output for streaming services, yet the direction of travel in Scotland has still been positive, and I am confident that we will see figures shortly that will confirm that that trend continues.

To ensure that it does, we need to deal with the other elements of the market failure that we have not been able to deal with thus far. Education is a key example. How do we ensure that young people in Scotland learn the requisite skills so that they can work in front of or behind the camera and be part of a screen sector in Scotland that, frankly, until 20 years ago, was exporting its brightest and best? We are tackling that exact question through education, and we are the first country in the world to do this. Screen Scotland came up with the curriculum and has helped to deliver it, together with the Scottish Government, and the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and I lay great store in that being part of the way in which we maintain the direction of travel.

I am very confident that the screen sector in Scotland will continue to go from strength to strength. We have to ensure that, when we hear of countervailing news, such as the announcement that Mr Bibby raised today, we take those challenges seriously, so that the general momentum continues in a positive direction.

If I can take the virtual microphone back for a second, I will add that, in parallel to that, the decisions that we have been able to make with expo funding and in being able to support festivals beyond Edinburgh and Glasgow, working in parallel with the strategic partnership for Scotland’s festivals that we now have, provide another example of our trying to ensure that we have benefit throughout the country from the available funding.

I am looking at Mr Halcro Johnston, who has, I know, an interest in culture in the northern isles, which is a very good example of a place that has tremendous festivals. The Orkney folk festival is an example of that. If we have a tremendous model, as we do through the expo funding route—which really is first class—why would we not want that to be able to support festivals in the rest of the country? We agree with that point.

That is a good example of our trying to add value right across Scotland.

I look forward to hearing about progress on that issue and on all the outstanding issues that Mr Kerr has raised. He will appreciate that some matters lie in the human resource space.

Certain procedures are currently under way, so it would not be appropriate for me to comment on them, save to say that I have confidence that the appropriate processes are being gone through and that, with a new chair, the issues that Mr Kerr has highlighted and that others, I know, will want to highlight, too—I am perfectly happy to take any follow-up questions from colleagues who might want to raise them—will be dealt with. I want people to have confidence in the core delivery of what Historic Environment Scotland manages to perform in Scotland; after all, it is in all of our interests that issues to do with the management and governance that have been raised with members of this committee directly, and with me, are dealt with by the incoming chairman of the board.

I look forward to learning any conclusions that emanate from the HR process and other inquiries that will be undertaken, and I give a commitment to Mr Kerr, and the rest of the committee, that I would wish the committee to be fully informed of all of that. We all need to have confidence that Historic Environment Scotland, which, as Mr Kerr has pointed out, does such important work, is operating as it should.