To ask the Scottish Government how many police officers there currently are in the Edinburgh divisional area. (S6O-02038)

I will just pretend that I am Foysol Choudhury.

In the run-up to the 2021 elections, more than 100 organisations lobbied us to deliver legislation on wellbeing and sustainable development so that we can get the joined-up decision making that we have been hearing about this afternoon. Therefore, as the Deputy First Minister leaves his current post, will he be tempted to commit to my member’s bill on wellbeing and sustainable development, so that we can not only take this debate further but put it into legislation and get the transformation that our future generations need?

Given the recent welcome press coverage that has been received by the campaign to save the Filmhouse, which is still working to save that cultural asset—which is not only vital for cultural cinema in Edinburgh but has played an important role as the key venue for the Edinburgh international film festival over many years—can the minister give us a commitment that the Scottish Government will do everything in its power to use its leadership to save that asset, bring it back into use, and provide cultural cinema, jobs and new opportunities for young people into the future?

Can I—[Inaudible.]

First, I thank Jenni Minto for her speech and for securing this fantastic debate. The fact that the BBC in Scotland is 100 years old is definitely worth celebrating. It is one of our most important institutions, it is part of who we are, it has kept us informed and entertained, and it has kept so many cultural artists and workers in employment over the years.

Is also really important to us, as a democracy. Over the years I have had occasional criticisms of the BBC’s coverage of politics in here, but that is to be expected. I suspect that, if we went round the whole chamber, we would all be able to cite an example of the coverage of something that we did not like. It is important, however, that our news is impartial and that it has to meet high standards.

We should be celebrating the BBC journalists who bring us that news, reflecting on those who live in challenging places across the world and providing us with brave, accurate coverage that we otherwise would not see. Where there is conflict or humanitarian disaster, BBC journalists do not just give us news; they give a voice to those who have been impacted. The BBC also provides news to other countries across the world, and in different languages. Again, the principle of impartiality is central to that, and I am personally very proud that we, as licence payers, contribute to the work of the World Service.

The BBC is facing challenges. There has rightly been huge coverage over the past few weeks about the need to ensure political fairness and impartiality, not just in coverage but in the management of the BBC. We must not just assume that the BBC will always be there; we need to ensure that there is adequate funding right across the nations and regions and across all the precious cultural choices that we all want to access, ensuring that the BBC is fit for purpose in a massively changing world. During the pandemic, it kept us informed and entertained, and it kept many people who were isolated—particularly our older population—connected. We must never forget that.

I take Stephen Kerr’s point. It is clear that there are challenges. There is also the point about the decision to close the BBC Singers, with the loss of 20 full-time-equivalent musicians and administrators’ jobs.

Last month, the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee had an evidence session in which concerns were raised about the rescheduling of classical, jazz and traditional Scottish music, the impact of the digital-first agenda, how we need to continue to support young and emerging talents, and the vital role of BBC Scotland in delivering that.

As we celebrate the 100th anniversary of the BBC in Scotland, it is vital that we ensure that the investment that is needed is provided and the pipeline of investment is maintained so that the BBC in Scotland can continue to create and commission the fantastic range of programmes that are so important to us.

One area in which we need to see that investment is support for Gaelic broadcasting. I was really glad that Jenni Minto mentioned that in her speech. Gaelic is a national asset, but we need to see increased funding to continue the programmes that are needed and in order to enable Gaelic to secure its place in the digital world. With funding for Gaelic media remaining almost static since the inception of BBC Alba in 2008, it is clear that it is being held back from delivering for its audiences and wider communities. We know from research that every £1 spent on MG Alba generates a £1.34 return and that that money supports 160 jobs in the Western Isles and Skye. Those are really important jobs.

We are in a world of change, and we need to be able to ensure that everybody continues to be able to access the BBC, whatever their generation and whether that using their TV or radio or through BBC Sounds or the iPlayer. That means that continued investment is needed. It is therefore worrying that the licence fee is potentially going. The licence fee is £159, or 43p a day. That is incredible value, and it supports jobs throughout Scotland. However, the National Audit Office has warned that if the United Kingdom Government imposes funding cuts, the BBC could be forced to replace high-end drama and natural history programmes, as Jenni Minto suggested.

In Edinburgh, the BBC is absolutely key in supporting our international festival, our book festival and the fringe. It keeps Scotland on the world stage. That is something that is worth defending and something to be proud of. If anyone has not seen “The Women Who Changed Modern Scotland” yet, they should take a look at it on the BBC iPlayer. It is fantastic. The BBC needs money. Let us work together to support the BBC going forward.

That is very helpful. I am thinking about things like community wealth building, municipal ownership of energy and how the national grid works. There is something about best practice, and there is potentially something about whether the actual framework suits different parts of the UK in not only a subnational sense but geographically, in terms of different opportunities. It does not feel like there is political support for a more cross-Government approach—at not just the UK devolved nations level, but the local level—to tackling the climate emergency that could make the big difference that we really need.

Akash, do you have a view on how we can embed a more decentralist approach, moving decision making out of Whitehall and towards local communities, as well as to our devolved Parliaments and institutions?

What you said about revenue raising at the local level and what powers councils have is really interesting.

I was also thinking about the cross-UK issues. If you look at energy production, for example, you see that there are intergovernmental issues that are not being addressed. The UK Government sets the legislative framework and the management framework for the national grid. The Scottish Parliament and other devolved Parliaments have significant powers over renewables, but, at the local level, the councils have to get on and do the heavy lifting. There are interesting issues about intergovernmental work that should not just be seen as being parliamentary.

On your earlier comments, Nicola McEwen, do you have short-term and longer-term views of what needs to be fixed? You mentioned Sewel a lot, which is a subject that has come up in a lot of our evidence. What are your priorities for the short-term fix? What longer-term issues need to be addressed?

I picked up on that in the Welsh constitutional work that is going on, which is not just about more powers for the Welsh Government and changing the Parliament but about relationships with local government. It feels like the centralisation agenda, which John Denham picked up on, is quite powerful in terms how governments work. The people at the centre have that view of the world, rather than a more consultative approach.

That was really helpful. Thank you very much.

I want to reflect on the conversation that we have had today about the top-down versus co-design way of government and the need to change post-Brexit, because what was a convention is now being swept under the carpet. What are the short-term and long-term solutions to change that? I am interested because, underpinning that, there is a centralisation issue that came out in some of the evidence that we have had.

Professor Denham, you talked about ministerial accountability in an English context. Is there not also an interesting issue to do with centralisation? When you look at the House of Lords, you see that the majority of lords are London based. We have similar tensions in Scotland on centralisation. Is there an issue that it is to do with moving from what we have now, which Professor Jim Gallagher nicely summed up as “constitutional carelessness” last week, and refreshing how accountability works in the UK and in the House of Commons? What are your short-term and longer-term priorities? I will kick off with you, Professor Denham, and work round the other witnesses.