Chamber and committees

I will say a bit about the bigger picture. Mr Bibby read out a lengthy list of quotes, but he did not quote any of the evidence that we heard about the cause of the issue being not the Scottish Government but inflation, Brexit and huge increases in energy costs, all of which were itemised. There were also quite a number of positive comments, as well as the fact, which was quite surprising to me, that in Scotland, some parts of the sector have higher wage levels than those in London. I mention that for context.

One thing that I find a bit murky is that the tenor of today’s evidence is very different from what we heard last week. Crucially, in relation to the issue of reserves, which is central to a lot of this, I asked Creative Scotland whether a single penny of the reserves had derived from the Scottish Government, and it said no. That seems to be at odds with what you said, cabinet secretary.

From what I read in the evidence, the Scottish Government has continually topped up a reducing level of funding from the national lottery. For clarity, is it your view that the Scottish Government has contributed to the reserves, which are quite legitimately being used in this situation?

I asked about the comparison with England and Wales, and you said that the figure is equivalent. Were you saying that the average for England and Wales, or for the UK and Wales, is equivalent to the European average or to what is spent in Scotland?

You mentioned the UK context, which you said is important for the sector. We have had 13 years of austerity, in which budgets have declined. There is some pretty challenging stuff in your submission, and in what you have said about the Scottish Government. Do you think that the sector is—in the words of Alexander Stewart—being attacked by the Scottish Government or seen as “expendable”? Do you think that you are being treated differently from other parts of the budget?

May I ask a final quick question? I am trying to view the situation from the point of view of a member of the public. For 13 years we have had cuts to the global budget because of austerity. As you said, we cannot take the issue in isolation; we must look at the context. Such cuts have the cumulative effect of wearing people down over time. Do you think that the public would be surprised to find out that it takes until, say, year 13—I am not sure that that is the case; you can tell me if it is not—for you to think about starting to use reserves to address such issues? I realise that reserves can be held for various purposes, including for a rainy day. Do you not think that, after 13 years of austerity, the rainy day might have arrived? How might the public perceive that?

I am quite new to the committee, and I am stunned by how unremittingly bleak the experience has been, although it has been made lighter by the high-quality analogies that have been used. There have been aquatic ones and ones about climate change, which have been better than those I have heard in any other committee I have been on.

The international aspect of the financial pressures is interesting. We heard about high interest rates, inflation, Brexit and a 400 per cent increase in energy costs. You brushed over the implications of that quite quickly, but there will be implications for the Scottish Government across the board, not just in relation to culture.

In relation to the festivals, we are pretty much done—the international reputation has gone, to the extent that people who come here are shocked and want to give us an aid package. I have heard people elsewhere say that we still have an excellent reputation, but I take it that that was for the non-festival sector.

A couple of examples from Canada and South Korea were raised, but they are vitally different from Scotland in important respects. They do not have financial pressures to the same extent, and they do not have Brexit. They do not have devolution, so they do not have a predetermined budget. There was also reference to London, which is not as relevant as it might be. Rather than giving answers just now, if people were able to provide information in writing on what the situation is in Europe or the rest of the UK, that would certainly be useful.

I turn to Mark Ruskell’s question on the transient visitor levy. There is potential there, but I wonder whether it might end up having a very unequal impact, given what the likely dividends would be for different local authorities across the country. I would not be averse to trying to safeguard the dividends. We heard that there is real danger that they might just go into core funding. There are ways in which they could be safeguarded. Local authorities would rail against ring fencing, but perhaps there could be some agreement through the Verity house agreement or others. Would the levy strengthen areas that are already strong and do very little for more rural areas with dispersed populations? I am interested in hearing the panel’s thoughts on that.

I have a few quick questions related to the last point that you made, when you made the comparison between Scotland and the European average. Do you know the relevant figures for the rest of the UK? What percentage of the UK’s total expenditure is on culture, and can you include Wales in that?

Okay. With regard to your reserves, I think that you said—you can correct me if I am wrong—that the entirety of the reserves comes from national lottery funding, and that no part of the reserves has been contributed by Scottish Government funding. Is that right?

This will be my final question. Last week we heard that there has been a 40 per cent reduction in local government funding at UK level, which will have a consequential similar effect in Scotland because of the UK Government’s cuts here.

At no point in my memory of the past 13 years has an amendment to the Scottish Government’s budget asking for more funding for the sector been proposed by any other party. We will hear from the cabinet secretary next week, but how would you describe your relationship with the Scottish Government just now?

I am keen to find out whether the Scottish Government could do anything else with the powers that it has, which are quite different from devolved powers in Quebec and Catalonia on taxation and other things. Are there things that the Scottish Government is not doing that it has the power to do, and are there analogies, whether they portray the Scottish Government favourably or unfavourably, that could give us a better picture of what it could be doing? If anyone was able to provide that information in writing, that would be useful.

Thanks for the contributions so far. I spent two-and-a-half hours in Edinburgh central library yesterday, which means I spent more time in the library than at a Scottish Premiership game this week—that is unusual for me. For me—I am a new member of the committee—context is quite important here. India Divers made a point about the fact that we have seen eight councils go bankrupt south of the border, and there has been a 40 per cent reduction in funding to local government. The issue of assets being sold off in Wales was also mentioned. The idea that Scotland can be immune to that is a nonsense debate, as far as I am concerned.

Much of what has been said today has been said for at least 35 years. When I first joined local government in 1988, the same discussions were taking place, with words like “cliff-edge” and “crisis” being used. I think that, as Duncan Dornan said, we have seen continued managed decline in that period. In fact, it goes back to the mid-1970s when the Government had to go to the International Monetary Fund to get funding, but we have had managed decline in public services over that time, and 13 years of austerity does not help.

It is useful to understand the context. For example, Duncan Dornan’s submission says that there has been a 36 per cent decline in public library services between 2010-11 and 2020-21 and a 22 per cent real-terms decline in museums expenditure in the same period. It would be useful to know how that compares with the rest of the UK. The comparison is valid because the same funding underlies much of it. I would like to know where the Scottish Government is doing something good—I would not expect to get too much of that—or where it is doing something that is neglectful of or impinging on the cultural sector, which it could change. Liam Sinclair has made a couple of suggestions of potential ring-fencing and other things. I think that it is part of this committee’s role to reveal the context for what is going on and a feel for where the Scottish Government could improve or where it is doing well and it should do more of it. That is probably more relevant and useful to me in trying to get a handle on some of these things.