Are there still some tensions in the Basque situation of the sort that Canada has moved on from? It would be useful to get a view from the gentleman from there.

I am pleased to contribute to the debate and thank Daniel Johnson for securing it. I acknowledge the acute concerns that the motion refers to and I agree that antisocial behaviour by youths is very much on the increase. That is the case not just in Mr Johnson’s Edinburgh constituency but across my region of Mid Scotland and Fife. The sheer scale is deeply worrying and such incidents continue to be reported.

As we have heard, that was borne out over the weekend in the horrific scenes that we saw in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Dundee, where antisocial behaviour and fireworks became a toxic cocktail and emergency service personnel were once again targeted in their line of duty. It was absolutely appalling and I look forward to hearing what the minister says in her summing up.

Only recently in my region, the Alloa and Hillfoots Advertiser highlighted that police patrols were having to be increased in Tillicoultry and Alloa following a rise in youth-related antisocial behaviour. I am extremely concerned at that rise, and that individuals as young as between 12 and 15 were roaming the streets with weapons. Such incidents of antisocial behaviour have been most prevalent in the high streets and town centres. The most worrying was when young individuals were spotted in the early hours wearing masks and attempting to intimidate workers and people who were making local deliveries. Similar reports have come from Stirling city centre. I have long been a supporter of calls for initiatives to ensure the utmost safety for retail and delivery workers, along with our emergency services personnel.

However, the phenomenon is now moving to another level, and there has been talk of the free bus travel for under-22s being questioned. I have had a number of contacts from constituents suggesting that some individuals might be abusing that facility. However, I believe that it is still a minority of youths who are jumping at the opportunity to travel further and create antisocial behaviour in different areas.

Recently, I was delighted to learn of a Clackmannanshire gentleman, Craig McIntosh, who is becoming a peer mentor with a view to engaging with young people. He is focusing on alternative pathways for individuals who have shown risky behaviour in Stirling city centre. I believe that the post was funded by Stirling Community Enterprise, Go Forth Stirling business improvement district and Police Scotland and that the majority of the funding has come from the Stirlingshire Voluntary Enterprise community justice fund.

That is a real opportunity to show that peer mentoring can draw on people’s past experiences and pass them on to the next generation. That role is an opportunity to help young people to turn their lives around. I wish Mr McIntosh all encouragement as he takes forward that project. It is important that we see further projects like that happening across the community. We have heard about the voluntary sector doing such work and that needs to be advanced.

Police Scotland remains desperately underfunded and undermanned, which risks the force being undermined, as we have heard today. There is a legal responsibility on parents and guardians to ensure that young people in their care are not exposed to likely harm. That harm comes in the form of not only mental and physical harm to themselves but harm to others and antisocial behaviour. Police Scotland also needs to robustly enforce legislation to ensure that individuals who perpetrate any such offences are tackled with the full force of the law to ensure that they stop and that they know how the land lies.

Cabinet secretary, I, like others, recognise the volatility of the situation in which we currently find ourselves and the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding day by day. I pay tribute to the United Nations and to the aid agencies that are trying to unravel that and provide as much support as they can.

The UK Government announced an increase in aid to help, and that has been confirmed. It would be useful to find out what the Scottish and UK Governments are doing to try to increase aid in order to provide support during the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding in the region.

As you identify, there are well-co-ordinated emergency response appeal mechanisms. It is good to highlight that they are there to provide support. Many individuals and organisations—and, as we have heard, areas in Scotland that are twinned with affected areas—want to provide support, so people can tap into that resource and try to support them as much as they can.

However, as with all these things, there are also some individuals and organisations that could be problematic, and advice needs to be given as to how that can be managed. There is an element of that, and it needs to be captured to ensure that we do not end up supporting those organisations, even without meaning to, by ways and means that could be misconstrued in some ways. It would be useful to know whether the Scottish Government provides advice, or whether there is a template, to ensure that there is no such potential.

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Fire Brigades Union’s report “Firestorm”, which reportedly warns that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service is in “crisis”. (S6O-02673)

On Tuesday, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service’s publication of new statistics indicated a rise in fatal fire incidents and an increase in non-fatal fire casualties, which amount to just under 1,000 in one year. The data illustrates the dangerous consequences of having an underfunded fire brigade. How much worse does the situation need to get before the Government looks at the statistics and provides the resource that the fire brigade deserves to support it?

I am delighted to wind up for my party in this excellent debate. There has been really good interaction across the chamber, which is very welcome.

The public participation inquiry was one of the key pieces of work that I was able to contribute to in my time as a member of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, and I got the opportunity to go on the world tour.

The Parliament has long strived to be a place that is welcoming and open to public participation. As such, it is to be welcomed that “Citizen Participation” was added to the committee’s remit at the beginning of the current parliamentary session.

The public participation inquiry has followed a number of different avenues since its launch early last year. We have heard about some of the engagement work in this debate. However, the most important aspect of the inquiry has been the citizens panel on participation. I was pleased that, through the panel, the committee was able to deliver not only some hugely positive, productive and helpful recommendations but an experience that deeply engaged those who were involved in the process. All those who took part in the panel’s work had positive things to say about the experience. The panel member Ronnie Paterson said:

“None of us was well versed in politics or academia, but we came up with the recommendations 100 per cent as a group ... The fact that we came up with those recommendations together shows the power of deliberative democracy.”—[Official Report, Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, 14 December 2022; c 4.]

That is excellent feedback from a group of individuals who were brought together to represent us and to have their views and opinions expressed. They got the opportunity to do that. That showed the success that we had.

The panel was a success, and the committee carried out further engagement to see what we could add to the report. Earlier this year, as many members have indicated, a number of us had the opportunity to go to Dublin and Paris and to see, experience and hear about first hand how people had gone about things. It was two years ago this month that Paris city council voted to establish its own citizens assembly, which was formed by drawing on experiences of international practices. That assembly continues to find its feet and is delivering its first recommendations.

I am grateful to the participants and elected officials who provided my colleagues and me with very helpful insights as we went to those locations in other parts of Europe. I thank the committee clerks, the Scottish Parliament information centre and everyone who supported us to ensure that that happened, because they had to do a huge amount of work to ensure that, in the timescale that we had, we got information that was beneficial to us all.

This afternoon, we have heard some excellent contributions, which have shown the calibre of debates that we can have in the chamber on a topic such as this one, when members have the opportunity to express their views, interact and become involved in the debate.

My fellow member and convener of the committee, Jackson Carlaw, spoke about the reputation of this Parliament; the perceptions that we had about where it should go; the feedback on the recommendations; and the success of the whole process. There is no doubt that the process has been successful.

The question whether we will enhance or undermine that reputation was discussed, and has come out in the recommendations. The public understand that, but they still have a problem when they are talking about what is the Parliament and what is the Government. They get confused.

Yes—there is a lesson for us all as to how we in Parliament are perceived, and how we represent ourselves, and also how the public perceive us as representatives of them. There is currently an imbalance there, which needs to be talked about.

There is a lot of feedback as to where we are. The pilots that will be taken forward will give us an opportunity once again to evolve the model and work together to ensure that we can help one another.

The minister talked about the real challenges that were mentioned in the report, which we have to deal with as we move forward, and I think that that is the case. The vision for this Parliament is that we want it to be engaging and get the right balance, because that balance is important.

Maurice Golden spoke about the themes of the report, and talked about questions and answers, and how that element is managed and perceived in the chamber and in the community.

I do not have time to go through everybody, but I highlight the excellent contributions from Martin Whitfield, Ruth Maguire, Edward Mountain, Michelle Thomson and Kaukab Stewart. They all spoke with passion about what they see in the Parliament and how they want it to be represented.

A healthy level of public participation should be a key ingredient in the way that we deal with democracy in our systems. Through the public participation inquiry, we have clearly identified a number of ways that we wish to improve the process of participation in Scotland. It has contributed positively to where we are going.

In conclusion, much work has been done in the inquiry so far, and I look forward to seeing the progress that will be made in the coming years. The report talks about the timescales for 2023-24, with a report to be published in 2025. That report will set out the way in which democracy might become institutionalised in our whole Parliament and how we can work across the chamber to address the challenges.

I look forward to seeing some of the ideas being debated today being put in place at the start of the next parliamentary session. I also look forward to seeing this Parliament take another step towards becoming the inclusive, dynamic and engaging institution that it wants to be and should be.

The National Museum of Scotland has said that it is facing its toughest financial crisis ever, with fears over the ability to pay staff to maintain the museum. Without a proper plan in place, the solution might involve having to cease some operations. What further measures can be put in place to maintain, retain and sustain such operations for Scotland?

I am delighted to open on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives.

The motion rightly speaks about the importance of the arts and culture sector and the numerous challenges that it faces, which have only been exacerbated by what the SNP Government has been doing. As such, the Conservatives will be happy to support Labour’s motion.

In his recent party conference, the First Minister said a number of warm words about the Scottish culture sector. He spoke about Scotland being rich in culture and the arts, and about how it is important to look far beyond the economic impact. Such words would have been very welcome if only they matched the Scottish Government’s record on the issue, which has been one of continually leaving the sector short of the funding that it is crying out for.

The additional arts and culture funding announcement by the First Minister in his speech is welcome, but let us not forget that it has been only a few weeks since the SNP U-turned on its own U-turn and reimposed a nearly £7 million budget cut. To say that the sector has been left struggling to trust the Government would be a major understatement. Speaking about the issue, the chief executive officer of Creative Scotland said that there was an erosion of faith and trust. People are exhausted trying to keep the show on the road—literally.

There is also a complete lack of clarity about where and when the newly announced funding will be distributed. On that issue, the sector has been left with more questions than answers. The Campaign for the Arts has warned that funding needs to be put in place quickly in order to ensure that jobs will not be lost in the sector.

Given the potential job losses, my amendment speaks about the need for the Government to take a more proactive approach to protecting the arts, music and culture sector in Scotland. As my amendment suggests, 2,000 jobs and 26,000 art opportunities will be at risk if the Scottish Government does not implement such an approach. That could be achieved by the introduction of an arts bill, which would introduce a more sustainable and long-term financial planning model. Scotland’s creative industries contribute £5 billion to the Scottish economy every year, so it is important that the sector can properly plan the finances for its future. The recent fiasco around Creative Scotland’s funding has demonstrated the need for multiyear certainty on budgets. That would give clarity to the organisations and greater security for the employees, for which they are crying out.

If one thing should be taken from today’s debate, it is that the Government’s record on the issue is not one of empowerment; rather, it is one of a non-committal approach and uncertainty. That non-committal approach and uncertainty continue. Sector organisations the length and breadth of the country are struggling to come to terms with what the Government says on the one hand and then what it does on the other. The Government is not supporting the sector; it is leaving the sector to look after itself. If it were not for the Creative Scotland reserves, there would be massive cuts and job losses.

The Scottish Conservatives are committed to listening to the Scottish sector and to ensuring and safeguarding its contribution to society and our economy. It is high time that the Government put the warm words into action and took the same approach. If it did that, we would see something happening in the sector and it would not continue to wither on the vine.

I move amendment 10917.1, to insert at end:

“; notes warnings that, if the £6.6 million cut is not restored next year, 2,000 jobs and 26,000 artist opportunities could be at risk, and calls on the Scottish Government to implement a more proactive approach to protecting the arts, music and culture sector in Scotland through, for example, the introduction of an Arts Bill, which would introduce a more sustainable long-term funding model to provide multi-year certainty around existing budgets.”