Chamber and committees

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am sure that you agree that it is very important that, in this chamber, we speak the truth. It is important for the benefit of the people in the gallery, for every member of this chamber, for the reputation of the Parliament and for the wider public—not least to try to stem the tide of misinformation and disinformation that we see all the time.

Today, Russell Findlay—[Interruption.] That is coming from those who have tried to speak against or shout down the truth.

During this parliamentary session, Russell Findlay has already had to apologise to the chamber for falsely accusing me of misleading the Parliament. Today, he sought to mislead the Parliament by stating that a majority of people in Scotland pay more tax than their counterparts in the rest of the UK, when, in fact, the truth is that a majority of people in Scotland pay less tax than people in the rest of the UK. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts. In order to help to build trust in this place, can Mr Findlay be offered the opportunity, when he eventually returns to the chamber, to correct the record and apologise for misleading the Parliament?

To ask the Scottish Government when the housing secretary will meet with those constituents from Tillicoultry affected by reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, following the commitment to do so that was made in early August. (S6O-05024)

The issue goes beyond Clackmannanshire Council. As the cabinet secretary will be aware, the United Kingdom Government was aware of the risks of RAAC before devolution. Given the previous convention in many other areas for Westminster to cover pre-devolution legacy costs, is the cabinet secretary disappointed that the UK Government has not taken responsibility for RAAC and is making no contribution towards resolving the issue, which I agree is very important for my constituents in Tillicoultry?

I am delighted that some Conservative members have managed to stay in the chamber instead of running away in terror when I raise a point.

First, does the minister, like me, find it surprising that Audit Scotland’s report makes little mention of the impact of rising national insurance contributions—in the case of Forth Valley College, it is £600,000 a year straight on to the wage bill—the cost of living crisis or the continuing effects of Brexit? To what extent is he able to factor into the Government’s assessment of the financial sustainability of our colleges those extraneous but burdensome factors?

As the minister has indicated, the effect of the jobs tax has been to put £600,000 on to the wage bill of Forth Valley College. As the Alloa campus of Forth Valley College is vital in ensuring that young people and adult learners in Clackmannanshire can access further and higher education close to home, what action is the Government taking to protect the future of that campus in the face of the funding challenges?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I was unable to connect. I would have voted no.

I acknowledge what has been said about the increase in funding for the cultural sector, which is absolutely welcome. Witnesses have welcomed it as well. The point that we get from stakeholders is that they want to ensure that they can have an audience with decision makers across the Government. Education is one example of where that is happening, and social justice is another. I will not look for further answers on that point just now, but it would be good to be kept up to date with examples of stakeholders being able to see across the Government.

My second question is about Creative Scotland. My experience is that this year has been a bumper year for Edinburgh in particular, because of the festival and fringe attendances and the Oasis and AC/DC concerts. You are both a cabinet secretary and a local MSP, so can you share information—if the Government has it—about how successful the year has been? It seems that it has been busier than any time since the 1980s.

To be honest, I do not think that you had to have a ticket for Oasis to hear every word of every song from the south side of Edinburgh.

I have a narrower question about the timing of this year’s budget at Westminster, which will obviously have a knock-on effect on the Scottish budget. Is that presenting any particular issues for the stakeholders that you deal with?

I do not think that the Scottish Government will do that; it will see setting a levy as a local authority power.

It is likely that the budget at Westminster this year will not be produced until 26 November and that there will, therefore, be a potential delay to the Scottish budget. Does that have any implications for what you do or for the organisations that you support?

I will come back to the budget in a second, but I will first jump back to the discussion about the Edinburgh festival and so on. It strikes me that I have never seen Edinburgh as busy as it was this year—at least, I have not seen it as busy since the 1980s. It seemed extraordinarily full. Of course, there were the AC/DC and Oasis events and so on. I know that you are not directly responsible for this, but are you getting feedback on the impact of all of that? For example, it seemed as if the Americans were back in numbers for the first time in many years—local hotels have shown how busy it was as well. Have you had any feedback on the impact of the cultural activities in Edinburgh over the summer?