Chamber and committees

I am glad that we got the joyous, optimistic and positive version of things from Shona McCarthy—I am not sure that I could have withstood a negative one.

There are a couple of things that I—as a new member of the committee, perhaps—do not have a grasp of but which have not yet been mentioned. First of all, I understand the point that what we are really talking about is the country’s long-term cultural impoverishment, given the changes that have been made and the reductions in choice and diversity that have been going on for some time. As has been pointed out, the Government understands where the sector is coming from and the pressures that it faces, and that is really important. However, apart from Anne Lyden’s contribution, I do not get any sense that the sector understands where the Government itself is coming from. Anne mentioned the financial crash in 2008 and 2011 as the key years when things changed—that is, when austerity came in.

In our last evidence session on this issue, I mentioned that we had no comparison with other devolved Administrations—the comparisons that we were given were not relevant. The dialogue has to be genuine, because if you do not know where the other side is coming from, you will not be as effective as you might be.

Maybe I am getting this wrong, though—perhaps there is a recognition of where the Government is in the discussions that people have with it. Energy costs, staff costs and inflation—most of which the Scottish Government cannot control—have been mentioned, but I am looking for a bit of reassurance that those things are acknowledged when you have discussions.

I would also note something that has happened a few times in my experience as a committee member. I think that the convener mentioned innovation and entrepreneurialism, but there has been virtually no other mention of them. I appreciate that they will apply to different extents in different parts of the sector, but surely, given the gravity of the public finances, they should be focused on much more eagerly. I think that somebody said that they had been tried, and I think that Mr Bibby mentioned wishful thinking, but to be honest, I do not know where we can get to if we do not have wishful thinking. Are entrepreneurialism, innovation and new sources of funding for those who are able to pursue such things being taken more seriously? We have not heard a great deal about that. Does anybody want to have a go at that question?

I see that an increase of about £12 million in the funding for “Other Arts” is proposed for this year.

Could you explain the point about the national lottery shortfall?

It is not really about this year’s budget, therefore, but how it is going to play out in the next few years.

I am happy to hear from others. If anyone wants to submit any written evidence on the efforts that individual sectors are making in respect of innovative and entrepreneurial funding, it would be really helpful. I do not know whether anyone else wants to come in on those points.

On a personal note, I hosted a Ukrainian family for six months and was able to get them both permanent accommodation and a job—in fact, two jobs. We have stayed in contact—they are now in the minister’s region—and their real worry is about what happens now. They see the 18-month deadline looming. Their home in Nikolaev was destroyed, and they have no idea where they would go back to. Having taken the opportunity to get a quite specialist job and having settled, after moving from Killin to me to where they are now, they are still really worried. Is the UK Government giving any reason why it will not confirm what its intentions are?

Secondly, given the possibility—I will put it no higher than that—that there could be a change in Government next year, and I know that you will have Government-to-Government relations, is there any indication of where the Labour Party stands in relation to the three-year visa?

It was not the ideal way for people to come, but it was necessary at the time and, like the convener, I have to say that Clackmannanshire Council did a superb job, as did Stirling Council in Killin. Is any work being done to look at how that might be kept as an infrastructure, almost like a resilience facility? The committee has talked about whether people coming from Gaza could be accommodated in a similar way. Are we keeping that infrastructure? I have not heard a word about the scheme since the family left and I wonder whether we are thinking about how we might use it for the future.

I have one small point to make, which is that we should always take refugees because they are refugees; we should need no other reason. However, although this may sound a little cynical, I wonder whether any part of the argument that you are making to the UK Government to move on with the visa extension—if that is what happens—is informed by the skills needs that we have in Scotland and the skills that the refugees who have come here have. Are you making the case that those skills are very important to Scotland?

Ms Forbes said earlier that she did not want to comment on political events, but you work in a political environment. Things have changed since I first came into Government and this is probably the most difficult time for external affairs and SDI that I can remember. I can support that by citing the letters from Alister Jack and David Cameron, which are a cross between a juvenile huff and some control freakery and really set the context for the environment in which we have to work.

My memory is that, despite that, civil servants in the Scottish and UK Governments managed to work together pretty effectively. I am interested in whether that is still the case, whether the relationship is constructive and whether there is a difference between the locations where the Scottish office is located within a UK embassy and those where it is not. There may not be, but I am interested in whether that makes a difference. I would like to hear comments on how the civil services of different Administrations work together.

I acknowledge the work that you do. If you could mirror the success that we had in Canada by getting haggis reinstated as an import to the US, that would be good, too.

Katrine Feldinger, do you have any comments?

We have been given a really good briefing from the Scottish Parliament information centre, which includes details on the number of people who left the two ships, Ambition and the other one. In each case, quite a small number of people left to go to hosted accommodation. I think that the figure for the other one was 1 per cent and for the Ambition, it was 7 per cent. Do you have a figure for how many people generally—by which I mean not just the people on those ships—went to hosted accommodation?