Welcome to the second meeting of the Constitution Europe External Affairs and Culture Committee in 2023. Our first agenda item is a decision on taking business in private. Our members content to take item 4 in private. Our second agenda item is on the presidency of the Council of the European Union. We are going to take an evidence session with Her Excellency Michaela Cymlund Granit, ambassador of Sweden to the United Kingdom. We want to examine the priorities of the Swedish Presidency for the Council of the European Union, which runs from January until June this year. A very warm welcome to the ambassador and Her Excellency, would you like to make an opening statement? Yes, thank you so much. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen and members of the Scottish Parliament and the European Committee here. It's a pleasure and an honour to be here and to have the opportunity to present to you or inform you about the Swedish priorities of the Swedish EU presidency. Of course, as you might understand, we are assuming the presidency at a very challenging time for Europe with war in Ukraine after the Russian aggression, the brutal aggression. We have a cost of living crisis in most through the EU, increasing inflation and, of course, energy prices that are fluctuating. We are very humble in our aim at doing our part in making the EU greener, safer and freer. This is also our slogan. Sweden has four priorities for the coming six months, security and unity, resilience and competitiveness, prosperity and green energy transition and, fourthly, democratic values and the rule of law. Let me just elaborate very briefly on each of one of them. First, security and unity. Of course, as you might have understood, Ukraine will be our overriding priority. This is an issue that will define not only our presidency, but it has also defined Sweden during the last year. For us, the fate of Ukraine is very much the fate of Europe. Let me also remind all of us about the following that the Russian aggression is nothing less than a blatant violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of an independent country and a violation of the UN Charter and the European Secured Order. I think it's important to remind us all of that. The EU's responsibility this coming month will be very much to in any way try to meet the vast needs of Ukraine, support politically, economically, humanitarian help, of course, and militarily, as well as rebuilding and reconstruction. We will also monitor very much the Ukraine's progress as a candidate country. You can really understand that the EU will continue to stand firmly with Ukraine. This is something that we hope to do as well and continue to do with all our closest partners. Second, competitiveness and resilience. The European competitiveness will be decisive in terms of the EU's economic future, especially in today's difficult situation. We see not only Europe's competitiveness as a prerequisite for growth but also for prosperity and climate transition, because that has become something that is very closely knit. During the Swedish presidency, the EU will also celebrate 30 years of the single market. That work will also continue as will the efforts to improve the compliance of the single market rules already in place. We will also focus much on the opportunity for digital and in the service sector, as well as to reduce regulatory burdens. Our ambition is also to promote sustainable trade relations with the rest of the world, and we will work to support the continued EU's free trade and partnership agenda with the countries in the Indo-Pacific and Latin America. Competitiveness also means resilience, so it's also about not only safeguarding and diversified trade but also increasing our own production to secure the supply chains in strategically important areas. Thirdly, green and energy transition, the climate. The EU, as you know, is committed through its programme fit for 55 package to reducing the EU's net emission by 55 per cent by 2030. Our ambition is to conclude the final stages of the legislative work. I always say that we thank our predecessors to check presidency, who carried this work very well forward. We hope to finalise the last parts of this very cumbersome work, but we are very focused on doing this. That will be a very strong priority, of course. The EU institutions have agreed to phase out all the new fossil fuel cars by 2035. This is also, in our view, a major step in the right direction. Another part that is also important is to hasten the electrification of the EU, especially when it comes to the transport sector and industry. A couple of directors are also looking at that. On energy specifically, we hope to build on the work from last year, continue to cut energy supplies from Russia and to diversify it to other more reliable suppliers, and also continue to make energy more affordable to vulnerable households, EU households and companies and to further drive the green transition. That is all connected in different ways. Fourthly, and finally, the democratic values and the rule of law. As we feel that the democratic values are important in and by themselves, there is also a condition for mutual trust, and therefore the cornerstone of the EU. We feel that it is the duty of the Swedish presidency, as it should be or is indeed for every presidency to keep focused on upholding our common values and the rule of law. We had a tradition in the Scottish Parliament, which is a new Parliament, a young Parliament, I should say, of inviting the presidency of the EU council to attend committee, is something that we have done, but this is the first opportunity that we have had post-Brexit to have a president in front of us. We are very interested in how we can rebuild our relationship and maintain our relationships with the EU, especially given the Scottish Government's commitment through the continuity bill to keep pace with European developments. Do you have any advice to us about how, in a differing relationship with the EU, we can maintain our contacts and keep pace with the developments in the EU? Yes. Of course, the United Kingdom is in large, and Scotland is very important for the European Union, and we see it as partners. I think that many of these things are to keep our connections and contacts and so forth, and to follow what is going on both in the EU from your part and also from our part in the EU, and to keep that up. Let's just keep on building on what we have right now and so forth. We will also always, as Sweden and the rest of the EU, be looking at ways of partnering up. We are very like-minded in so many ways, so that is a natural thing to do, of course, in the support. Thank you. I am going to move to questions from my colleagues. I would like to invite First Miss Bolyak. It is excellent to have you with us today. It is really a follow-up to the question asked by our convener. We had a very good visit to Brussels in June this year, and it is that follow-up rebuilding and resetting our relationships. You have got your top priorities. I was wondering about the other softer power issues, maybe, about culture, education and tourism. You have also talked about trade. Are there ways that we can re-establish connections or not lose those connections with the range of members that you have in the Council of Europe? We also have opportunities after the pandemic, of course. That was something that we felt very much was hindering our co-operation and contacts and so forth, and now that we do not have that anymore, I think that we can speed up that and so forth. Then, of course, you mentioned culture and tourism. That is very important parts, as well. There is great interest, of course, for Scotland when it comes to the culture here and to tourism here. That is also things that we need, of course, to seek all the way we can to deepen that and to forward that. Are there any practical ways that you think that we could be doing that more across Council of Europe or talking to different countries within the network? I think that there are probably both ways, but those are things that you also do very much bilaterally between countries and different countries. That is one of the big things, as well. I know that you opened talking about Ukraine, which I was lucky enough to attend the Nordic Council earlier—the latter part of last year—and, of course, it absolutely dominated the discussions there, as well. We have a few members interested in that area. I thank you, Ambassador, and I echo what the convener has said. However, complex the relationship between the UK and the EU may be. There is a very warm relationship with Scotland, and I hope that we can continue to develop. As the convener has said, a number of us have questions about Ukraine. It is quite difficult to separate when we are talking about Ukraine, talking about the collective EU response and the interest that we have in the Swedish response to this situation. I do not know which issue you want to talk about, but it would be nice to hear a perspective—or both perspectives—on how you have reacted to Ukraine. I started with Sweden on 24 February. It was very much a game changer for Sweden when it came to our security posture. This was such a big and difficult event for us, with having a very brutal aggression towards a country so close to us. Of course, this was such a big issue that you might have followed also that we did, after being non-aligned for over 200 years, together with Finland that submitted our application to NATO. As for Sweden, it has been a very big issue. It has also affected all parts of our society, of course, because we have had a great outpour of solidarity in many other countries. We have taken in Ukrainian refugees, but it has also been affecting Swedish domestic issues, the economy and the energy and so forth. That is for Sweden. It was not only Sweden, but I think that the whole of Europe, the EU and the UK felt the same thing. What happened on 24 February was such an enormous historical event that it was incredible in the sense of how we all came together. I think that the most remarkable thing was the unity. With that unity, we managed to not only work together on getting up to nine sanction packages. We did this also in close cooperation with the UK. We decided to give a macro-financial package of €18 billion, the first tranche being delivered this week. This is the largest macro-financial package that the EU has ever given to a partner country, so just to show the volumes. I think that what was really new in this was from a Swedish perspective, but also a European one, was that it was the first time that we delivered a lethal weapon to another country, since we delivered a lethal weapon to Finland during the first world. You understand the magnitude of what this was. For us to do that is also a big change, and this is also something that the EU and also the UK were quite quick to do. In that sense is where we were. The big things coming ahead, because we all know that this is an issue that will be with us for a long time, so what we see in front of us now is very much to continue to look at ways of supporting, as I said initially, Ukraine and all these aspects. It will also be very much on the reconstruction part and also based on the G7 platform, donor's platform, so that is something that there will continue dialogue on that within the EU. Of course, intensified work on the accountability issues, war crimes and things like that. That is also something that we need to look at right now. There are also another couple of things that are important. For instance, as you might have followed, the Ukraine now has an EU perspective. They are candidate countries, and this is a process that is now starting. There will also be an EU Ukraine summit in the beginning of February, and that is also something that is being prepared. There are a lot of aspects going on now. Of course, looking ahead, a new sanction package is something that will be looked at. I can also say that the most important thing is why we manage it, because of the unity. One of the largest, I would say, tasks for a presidency, because the presidency is a bit different after the Lisbon treaty, when we have a permanent president and a permanent representative for foreign policy. Right now, I must say that it is helping to keep the unity around this. That is really one of the big interesting things that we see there. Of course, Ukraine has also, as we mentioned, had fallouts on the economic situation and energy, and so we need to keep a lot of balls in the air, as we say in Swedish. In Swedish, as we say, you have to be able to chew gum and walk at the same time, so we have to have to keep that. That is, in short, what the perspectives on Ukraine are. Thank you finally, convener. I am sure that others have questions about Ukraine, but you mentioned the sanctions package that has been pursued at an EU level. Will the presidency be seeking to develop that as we go ahead into new areas of sanctions? Yes, I think that this is something that we are also very humble when it comes to that, because we have had a lot of sanctions packages, and we have to also really get the unity around every new sanction package. However, I think that this is something that will be in the cards, and I think that we see that in Sweden, as a member said, that that would be very important. There are many different aspects that one could get into, but we, right now, manage with the ninth sanction package, so now we are having that kind of development, but this will definitely be another area that we are looking at. Thank you, convener, and welcome, again, Ambassador to the Committees. Delight to have you here with us. You covered some of this already. I was just wondering two things. Firstly, you have spoken about military assistance and economic assistance, but I think that you also mentioned humanitarian assistance. I was keen to ask you to expand on that in terms of what the EU is. I think that humanitarian assistance has been very much geared, not only from the EU but from other partners, to just keep the Ukrainian society sustainable, because, of course, a lot of suffering has gone on when it comes to hitting critical infrastructure, heating, water, and getting access to food, especially in those areas that are by the front. I think that that is on the humanitarian side, but it is very much in close cooperation, of course, with the UN and so forth. On the EU, on this big, as I mentioned, the macro financial package is also very much geared at support, but also reforms and so forth, so that there can be a rebuilding as well, a little more in the long term. Especially now that they are a candidate country, it is also very much, of course, in all of our interests that we rebuild it in a good way and also in a reformed way. There are all those aspects. I think that the donor platform that I mentioned initially is something that is now being developed. It is supposed to get started right now, but the whole idea is to co-ordinate very much what kind of support that Ukraine needs, so that we really do it in an efficient way. I also understand that we will have a conference on reconstruction for the deadline this spring, where those things will be sorted out, because you also need to get the private sector on board to help out, and then you have the humanitarian, the UN organisations, so that we play like in a concert, so that we do not double things, and also that we focus on giving in what the Ukrainians need and when they need it, so time is important there as well. Specifically, there is plenty still an issue around refugees and movement of Ukrainians across the EU. Do you have any observations on that? Yes, I know that we are also looking there at one of those emerging mechanisms to help out when we have refugees, to protect refugees that are fleeing from war, so we have special mechanisms for that, and those are probably going to be very much prolonged.  We have as well in Sweden, I understand here as well, and also in Scotland, so really I think that that's impressive as well. As you know, that they really want to come back as soon as possible, so we have to really help them to keep afloat, especially as long as they can and so forth. Again, I think that the outpour of solidarity from all our countries, the EU, but also here has been amazing, and I think that the Ukrainians also feel that, but we will just have to keep on being solidarity, I would say. Finally, I was fascinated by your comments on the role of the presidency in trying to maintain unity. It's almost a year since the invasion, and I think everyone at the time it happened was surprised at how quickly the EU moved and how unified it was. A year on, do you see any change to that as holding the presidency? Is it a harder job now to keep that unity together? Yes, I think that, and I'm happy that we're coming back to that. I think the unity that we saw was not only that it was a sign really to the kind of like-mindedness that we have in this part of the world, and also the view how difficult this was, and that we shared the same view on what was happening in Ukraine and how much it affects not only Europe, but also the free world, and how the rules of the game in the world. We have been amazed about the unity. I think that the unity will keep on standing, because the sense that I get is that still this is something that is really, it's really, it's very emotional for many people, and people are clearly struck by that, but we have of course a situation also where this is affecting many in an economic field and so forth, so there will be more difficulties to maybe summon people around maybe new sankish packages, because you know some of these packages might you know indirectly hurt some countries more than others, so I think it's going to be more complicated, but the political feeling of unity is there, but we have to be maybe a little bit smarter and understanding that you know the long term makes things more complicated. Then we'll see also what happens with the economy and with energy prices, and the faster we can solve that and find mechanism to keep down pricing and so forth, the easier it will be to maintain the unity, so we have to do all these things at the same time. As for Sweden keeping unity, as you said, we are in the Lisbon Treaty, so we have a different kind of setup, but I think the role of the presidency very much is to be that honest broker and be able to help both the permanent president, the European Council and also the permanent high representative in you know also working behind the scenes and doing diplomacy, so I think that's something that we like to do as well, we're used to doing those kinds of things also in Sweden, so I hope for the best. Thank you, thank you, convener. Thank you, and you could invite Mr Golden, please. Thank you, convener. We've discussed the Ukraine situation, but clearly an impact of that has been on energy security, as you alluded to in your opening remarks, and I just wondered how you intend to approach these issues going forward and any implications there might be for Scotland and the United Kingdom. Yes, well, you're really right. Energy has come very much up to the forefront. I think that when we started planning our presidency a year ago we had no clue that this would be an issue that would come up very much. I think also on the energy field it's been quite amazing to see what the EU managed to pull together because, as you know, the EU was very much dependent on Russian energy, but in eight months we actually managed to cut 80 per cent of our gas supplies from from Russia, and we managed to compensate that without getting any blackouts or anything, and that by diversifying to other suppliers, more reliable suppliers, and of course also to speed up the green transition, and also energy savings. I read somewhere that we managed so far to save 20 per cent, which is quite good, so all these things combined has actually kept us afloat, and also using very much the super profits of some of the energy companies to help vulnerable households and companies to kind of get through some of the rough patches, and then, as I said, accelerating and permitting the green transition has been something that we've been looking at. The gas prices are lower now than they were a year ago. I mean, it has to do, of course, a bit about the weather, and the storages are filled to 80 per cent, so we are in a relatively good place. However, we're not out of the woods, as we all know. On the diversification, I said, there is interest in to see because who were the reliable suppliers that the EU went to? Well, it was very much the US, Norway, but it also was the UK. I know we have this North Sea Energy Renewables Agreement, and that is just the way to do it, to cooperate, because we're all connected in some way. I see it as a very positive thing. But, as I said, we're not out of the woods, and I think what we now will have to be looking at within the EU is how do we, and this is something I think we all grapple with, even here and also in the UK as a large, is how do we keep the energy affordable to these more vulnerable households and companies? That's one of the big issues. The commissioner is also looking at reforming the market design issues, how to do that in some way, so that we get that more well-functionally, and I think that they are trying to operationalise a joint purchasing mechanism where stakeholders meet and, in that way, facilitates the market and changes and so forth. So, a mobilised companies and member states for that platform, and then, again, speeding up, scaling up the usage of renewables. We have to double that. Green transition is not only about climate change anymore, it's about the security issue and energy independence. I think that's also something that you follow very much here in Scotland. This is the future. I tell all the young people, if you want to do something interesting, get into this renewal business because that's where you have the jobs, so I think that you're very, very placed in that. Of course, 55. I mentioned also, of course, what I said, electrification is very important, and I know that we are also looking at directors for renewable and efficiencies and things like that, so that's really in short what I think is really ahead of us. There are a lot of these processes, and as I said, our job is very much to support, but we do also chair many of these meetings where these issues are moved ahead, 2,000 meetings, and we have one on a 50 different conferences in Sweden as well, so we'll do what we can there as well on that side. Thanks for that, and I think that the response to the energy security crisis has been a positive one. However, it's also been a reactive one, and I wonder whether, in terms of critical raw material security, that is something else that's on the radar, because clearly individual nations will need to work with each other to have a critical raw materials recycling plan. It's not something that one nation can do due to the economies of scale, and I'm sure I'd be delighted if that plan was hosted in Europe or indeed in Dundee here in Scotland, but I just wonder how if that critical raw materials security, how high that is up on your risk register? I think that you're really right, and one of the reactions also to the crisis we've had is also the realisation that it's not only about competitiveness, but we need resilience, and with that resilience it's really what you say. The raw materials and also the rare earth issues, semiconductors, and this is really our weak spot. So there is action actually on that. I understand that the commission is also looking at the directive of semiconductors, because this is key also to the electrification. So there is work forward looking and so forth, and in this sense I also would like to mention that, I don't know if you follow that in the papers, but there was a big deposit found in northern Sweden just the other week where we, with an enormous amount of rare earth deposits, I think it was over a billion tonnes or something like that. So there's another focus now, I think, before we didn't really understand that, but we've been made very aware also that there are some countries, especially China, that are on top of these issues, so we have to make ourselves resilience by also safeguarding that component in the green transition. So I do really see that there's a big realisation and I'm very happy that you bring that up, because that's the other side of the coin in the green transition of course. Okay, thank you for that. Back to you, convener. Thank you, convener, and thank you Ambassador for coming to the Scottish Parliament and welcome to Scotland. I noticed you've commented a couple of times on partnership and being like-minded. We are in the process of moving towards a new agricultural bill in Scotland and I noticed that that agriculture is some of your priorities within your six-month term, so I wondered if you could expand a bit more on where you see agriculture moving in food production. Yes, well to be honest that is not one of my forties because it is of course very important agriculture and it has to do with food security and all that, but this is not maybe, we've had to have a couple of priorities here and so that one is something that is, we're working, I know the commission's working on it and I think it has become also an issue which we have been realised is very important because not least because of Ukraine and its role for food and agricultural things, so that is of course something that has now also risen on the agenda and it's also an issue that very much affects not only us within the EU but maybe more our third partners, especially countries more south than I know many of countries such as Egypt and African countries are very much dependent on that and of course in that sense I see that we can have also major problems further down the line, so there's a lot of thinking on that and so forth but I cannot firstly give you any details on exactly those different things but I would be happy to follow up if you want to, I would do that. Okay, thank you very much for that offer and I think that your response there really emphasises the connectiveness between Europe, the partners and the rest of the world and I was kind of reflecting on connections between Sweden and Scotland and I would suggest that Scotland is very much a southern Nordic nation and I, one of the connections that we're talking about as Mr Golden was asking about new technologies and how we're moving forward, if we think back to engineering and canals then Thomas Telford was involved in the canal between Gothenburg and Stockholm, so those connections go back a long time and further back than that. If I may, could I ask about in your role as ambassador for Sweden, if you could make some comments about how you see the Nordic Council going forward and how perhaps that ties into your role also with the EU and then also how Scotland can be involved in that as well? Yeah, well thank you. Well first of all I really would like to underline what you're saying, it's so much fun to be here in Scotland because I've been here now and a couple of times and the commonalities that we have. This is, as you say, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Scotland, it's the same, but we have so many historical connections and I was actually having dinner with our honorary consul who also reinforced and gave us an even closer background all these ties from the big war, the third year of war from a long time ago. From then on we had Scottish, Scots and Swedes coming to Scotland versus Sweden and so there's a lot and also on this the innovations technology and I think if you look at today's version of that it's really all about the green tech, the green transition, offshore wind and so forth. So all this is following and now we have a new historical kind of setting for this that we're talking about so now I really would like to underline that. On the Nordic Council this is something that is very intense of course and it involves all the Nordic countries and it doesn't really figure so much into the EU presidency in itself. That being said we have a very good cooperation within the EU among the Nordics that are part of the EU and we have a very strong Nordic but also Nordic Baltic co-operation on all levels on regional levels. I meet with my Nordic Baltic ambassadors very often for instance so the council of ministers is I would say a format very much where you have issues more of a cultural side and discussion and so forth and I think also there that we've had had discussions also with you from Scotland and so forth so I think it's a very good format. I worked a lot with those issues before and we also have the presidency of the Nordic council ministers and that's our time we have it every fifth year and that's where we can put priorities within that framework and I know that it is always a big ministerial by then and we're also I know we have Scottish representatives and it's very much appreciated so let's keep that up I don't see any that we will lose any interest of that I would say would have even more interest of that. It's been great having you this meeting here this morning and I wanted just to go back to the issues of energy and the fit for 55 package as that is now being implemented and you outlined earlier Sweden's role in finalising that. I'm interested to know how that policy will reach out to countries that are perhaps on the periphery of European membership or EEA countries in order to meet European energy needs within the European Union and I was in Reykjavik last year with the Arctic Circle Assembly and it was a lot of very interesting discussion around the potential for green hydrogen and renewables with sub-arctic countries there and industry and governments and academics so I was interested to know how particularly on green hydrogen and with Europe's hard to obey energy sectors how Europe will reach out to those countries who've got renewable resources to try and draw those in to meet Europe's energy needs. No thank you no I think that this fit for 55 we are not there yet I mean I think we will need these coming months to kind of finalise the legislative parts of that hopefully it will be done by this summer and so forth and this will be an enormous I would say impulse on all these issues impulse for the green transition and impulse for doing that that will definitely effect I would say all our partner countries in the EEA countries because of course our markets are very much interconnected and it's also a way of being competitive as well that you will you see that also that many people companies and so forth they want to follow the green trend so of course if you have a big market like the single market the EU is doing that I think that will give natural effects and inspiration to to many of these other countries and I know for instance with with Reykjavik and then on the technicalities specifically that I would have to come back to you on but I think it's going to be a major effect on all the all everyone dealing for these issues. Are there particular challenges with countries that so Norway's EEA win outside of the European Union? There will be countries like Sweden of course are in the European Union. Are there particular challenges in trying to devise an energy policy that incorporates draws on the resources of all these countries but also tries to design rules that that can ensure that energy needs are met? Yes and no I think that's that's really a very very important question and I think that's why we're quite happy that we managed to get this negotiations through because there's so many national of course interests also very many levels even within the EU where some countries have come quite far like Sweden but others maybe not and you have to also see to that you compensate that so that you don't have a green agenda pushing through too hard that it will be difficult to for some maybe economies to follow that so this is a very as you know lots of negotiations and trying to find the middle way and all of these things and this is what the use about so things that could seem a bit cumbersome is just a way of trying to getting it right and I think that we have really done an enormous job in getting where we are right now and of course doing this when you have also this energy situation as a fallout of the the Russian aggression in Ukraine many were a bit worried that this would slow down this ambition on the climate side and so forth but we are here that where we are so it's we're keeping to the timetable and but you know it's constant work and trying to find in the right way so that everyone feels the compromise yeah i'm aware there's been strong debate and discussion around the taxonomy and the inclusion of gas and nuclear with it exactly exactly but yeah okay thank you yeah thank you um any further questions i wonder if i could finish ambassador you've mentioned young people quite a few times in your contribution and my experience at the Nordic Council showed me how much the youth from each of the countries involved in the Nordic Council would include in the whole process and were part of the plenary sessions and fully involved. We were a very active country in terms of Erasmus exchange across Europe and I wonder in considering the economic challenges and where you see the growth areas for young people going forward how education establishments and how young people can still engage and do that kind of exchange across Europe albeit out with the European Union. I think that's one of the things that I think at least that we very much missed that the Erasmus is not part of the current corporation framework and so forth but I hope and think that this will change eventually because young people and this how generations need to meet from young age all over Europe is extremely important and we will have to do everything we can to you know simplify so that we come back to a situation that we had before because you know it's also it goes both ways I mean there are a lot of Swedes that you know used to come not only to Scotland but also to the rest of the UK and it's with it's dropping and that's something that you know I myself is one of those that I travel a lot as a young person as well and that's when you forge your your relationships and that's when you see the world for what it is and you learn about that so I think that that's something we just have to look at and improve in every way we can and do everything we can so this is something that for us is very very important as well. I remit in the committee it's a long committee name with constitution external affairs but we also have culture there so earlier last last year rather we had an international culture summit and we had a special day focused on Ukraine and the culture of Ukraine and who we might be able to sustain their cultural identity and help them maintain their collections but also to support Ukrainian culture and we had performances during the Edinburgh festival from the Ukrainian freedom orchestra and from the freedom ballet here in Edinburgh so I wonder what is the European Union doing to support Ukrainian culture at this time and to celebrate it as we as we continue in this dreadful situation of the war in Ukraine? Yes I think that there's a lot of efforts being done in order to support Ukraine very much on I think every level just on the basic level for instance we also as ambassadors we were we also want to work with the Ukrainians you know here in the UK doing things but I think within the EU and in Europe there are many examples of this I don't I'm not aware of any specific program but in all these I would say reconstruction and financial support and so forth they're always a kind of a cultural component because the culture is actually what keeps things together so if there's anything that is extremely important it's the cultural side so I think that's also something that is very high up in our awareness that and it's also about to supporting Ukraine culture also in a time when it's maybe difficult as well in Ukraine so no so it's very important that you keep that up and I think it's good that it's cultural you have that in a committee like this which are very important issues because that is really underlines the importance of us and it's the basics for politics and economy and so forth so thank you thank you very much for your attendance at committee this morning it's been really helpful to us and I hope we can look forward to continuing to have the presidency come to our committee going forward and and we can maintain those connections with the european union going forward so thank you on behalf of all of my colleagues for your attendance this morning I'm going to suspend shortly just to have witnesses change over thank you thank you a warm welcome back and we now move to agenda item 3 which is to take evidence as part of our budget scrutiny on the culture spending portfolio for 2023-24 and we are joined this morning by Angus Robertson MSP cabinet secretary for the constitution external version culture and he is joined by Rachel McEchnie deputy director of major events and themed years in the scottish government thank you both for coming this morning and cabinet secretary could invite you to make an opening statement morning convener thank you very much for this opportunity to make some opening remarks i think we'll all agree that the scottish government's budget for 2023-24 which was published on the 15th of december last year takes place in the most turbulent of economic and financial contexts that most of us can remember as the deputy first minister set out in his introduction to the scottish government budget the cumulative effect of war in europe of surging energy prices of raging inflation of damage to labour supply and trade due to brexit along with the spectacular financial mismanagement of the united kingdom government creates the most difficult set of conditions in which to set a budget after stress that our ability to respond to the cost crisis is limited by the inactivity of the UK government and the financial restrictions of devolution our budget is largely fixed our reserve funding fully utilised and we have no ability to borrow to increase our day-to-day spending since our last appeared before this committee we've continued to work with the culture sector to identify barriers to immediate and long-term recovery the scottish government has now convened hybrid round tables with the culture sector in glasgo in vernes and yesterday in dumfries and in addition we convened a round table in november with culture sector public bodies these round tables have helped explore ways organisations can best work together to develop shared solutions i'd like to reassure the committee that we've been listening to the intelligence provided by the sector at these round tables and that will continue to do everything within our powers and resources to help those most affected by the current economic crisis the 2023-24 budget required us to make extremely hard decisions and to prioritize spending as i said in my response to this committee's report on culture funding we will invest 278 million pounds in scotland's culture and heritage sector next year this will include continued investment in scotland's screen industry with nine and a quarter million pounds for screen scotland and 72.7 million pounds for historic environment scotland to ensure that it can continue to care for our heritage in communities across scotland we're also providing an additional 2.1 million pounds to support increased costs in the national collections we're also committed to maintain spend in other areas of the culture budget including local museums public libraries the national performing companies youth music and community based culture in order to make these commitments hard choices have had to be made over the last five years we've provided creative scotland with over 33 million pounds as an additional element of funding in response to a downward trend in arts funding from the national lottery at a time where we now face incredibly difficult decisions about government funding and with creative scotland able to draw on its accumulated lottery reserves we've discontinued that element of funding i'm grateful that the creative scotland board took the decision on the 19th of December to use lottery reserves to guarantee to their regularly funded organisations that their funding will remain the same for the next financial year. convener i know that the committee has concentrated on the culture budget in its pre-budget discussions but i'll also be happy to answer any questions on other areas of my portfolio and i'll touch briefly on external affairs and the referendum budget for external affairs aspects international engagement continues to be essential to successful delivery of the national strategy for economic transformation and our net zero transition we're committed to being a good global citizen and to playing our part in tackling global challenges including Covid-19 climate change poverty injustice and inequality in particular through our international development fund and this budget continues to support that important work one of the key priorities for 2023 and where additional funding has been allocated will be the delivery of the new talent attraction and migration service which will bring together and expand services for employers and for individuals the service will help employers use the immigration system to meet their skills and labour needs it will provide good quality information and advice to people who are thinking of moving to scotland or have just moved here scotland must be able to attract people from all over the world to work and study here without excessive barriers and migration policy should support mobility collaboration and innovation on referendum costs in order to help our most vulnerable citizens we intend to utilise the finance earmark for a referendum on independence which was 20 million pounds to make provision to extend our fuel insecurity fund into next year. Thank you very much and i stand open to any questions. Thank you very much cabinet secretary one of the themes that has come out in our deliberation on the budget has been the aspect of mainstreaming across different portfolio areas. I just wonder if the round tables that you have been having and the information have brought forward any other themes and any other commonality of how cultural organisations might be supported at this time albeit within the budget constraints? Well the first thing I would say I think the process itself has been exceptionally valuable with very significant participation from right across the sector and it is a continuation of an approach that was taken during the Covid pandemic whereby having regular discussions with representatives from right across the culture and arts sector one was able to understand themes concern needs interests concerns expectations of people in the sector and obviously during Covid much was linked with the extreme circumstances of the lockdown and the income difficulties faced by individuals and organisations in the culture sector. Now we've obviously moved on and organisations are able to perform and tour and people are trying to bounce back from the Covid pandemic. There's a broad range of themes that are emerging which still needs to be brought together in a report form and no doubt we'll be able to share that with you and other committee members. But as you might expect with the range of participation from individual freelance performers or people involved in other aspects of culture and the arts all the way to larger organisations I should say incidentally also a meeting held last week with the national performing companies there are a very broad range of issues that are being flagged up which are reflective of the underlying factors. How can organisations continue to operate in circumstances where the squeeze on their income because they perhaps have not yet recovered fully to the number of ticket sales or visitors to pre-pandemic levels, the additional costs because of heating overheads, inflation which as we know is officially at a national level is just over 10% but what we are hearing back from participants is that inflation in many areas that impact directly on culture and the arts can be a factor of that. I've heard figures up to 30% inflation impact on organisations and as one might imagine those that have property so theatres and the like obviously have really significant overheads which are squeezing their finances. Then on top of that other income streams that traditionally have played a significant role some of them are reporting that that too is being impacted the amount of financial support through philanthropy for example is proving challenging for some organisations and then public funding is of huge importance to the culture and arts scene in Scotland as it is in most countries in the developed world. As we've discussed at committee here before, for individuals and organisations to have the greatest possible certainty is a request that one hears often. The intentions of the Scottish Government to support multi-annual funding horizons for individuals, for organisations is something that we hear quite a lot of support for and that is a direction of travel that we are in. I have to say there is a very strong theme coming back across all of these meetings that the culture and arts sector wants to work collaboratively through these difficulties. There is an appreciation that that is not going to be something that improves in the short term given the economic circumstances that there are and there is a willingness to consider what it is that they and no doubt suggestions will be made about what we and I say that we in the broadest of senses what can the Scottish Government, what can agencies such as Creative Scotland or Screen Scotland, Historic Environment Scotland, all of these different stakeholders do to make sure that we get through the most extreme of circumstances having protected and supported our culture and arts community. One factor that I have been hearing more of, which I think that we all need to reflect on, is people saying that it was personally hugely challenging to get through the pandemic and funding was there for that specific period. Now, with the ending of that support by the UK Government, one hears people saying that the level of personal challenge to them remains as acute because of the uncertainty about the medium and longer term future. I think that reflecting on the pressures that people are operating under, the responsibilities that they have, whether to themselves or a small organisation or to larger organisations, and I think that everybody is very cognisant the fact that we have examples and have seen them recently of organisations, beloved organisations and venues. Finding themselves in existential financial difficulty is obviously making others concerned about what the future holds for them. As soon as we have a worked-up read-out from across the round tables, I will make sure, convener, that you are able to see that because, together with the evidence that you have been taking here at committee, I think that it will help your deliberations, as it will ours. Thank you very much for offering to do that for us, cabinet secretary. I am going to move to questions to the committee, and I could invite Mr Cameron first. Thank you, convener, and good morning, cabinet secretary. This committee warned about what we described as a perfect storm facing the culture sector before the budget. As we have seen, the budget for creative Scotland has been cut by more than 10 per cent. In stark evidence to the committee last week, we heard from a number of witnesses, most notably the chief executive of Creative Scotland, Leon Monroe, who warned that, due to the cuts, I quote, a quarter to a third of the current 120 RFOs are at risk in the months ahead. If the cuts last into the years ahead and we do not have national lottery reserves to offset them and we end up passing them on to the sector, I estimate that probably no more than 60 out of those 120 RFOs will be funded. Why have you chosen to cut the budget for Creative Scotland, thus endangering the future of up to 60 of our cultural organisations? The first thing is that I always listen very closely to what Creative Scotland says about the state of the cultural sector in Scotland. It is a hugely effective organisation that we are keen to support financially. I think that your question conflates two different things. One, the medium and long-term challenge that Creative Scotland and the funding of organisations and individuals in the culture sector may face because of budget constraints. It is important as I outlined in my introductory statement to understand that Creative Scotland is in a position to maintain its levels of funding this financial year, which will provide stability to regularly funded organisations. However, I hear very loud and clear that beyond that time horizon, there is a concern about the funding of organisations. It goes beyond just the regularly funded organisations because, of course, if there is a financial constraint, it impacts much wider than the RFOs. That concerns me, and it is something that I am keen to work with Creative Scotland to make sure that we can maximise the funding that is available to it. As I have already made clear to the committee, there needs to be an understanding about the scale of the financial constraints under which the Scottish Government operates. If Mr Cameron is in a position to identify significant areas of funding from elsewhere in the portfolio or the Scottish Government budget, that could be transferred. I would be happy to hear that, but I am appealing for the committee to have an understanding that, given the level of constraints that we find ourselves under, it is a good thing that Creative Scotland is able to maintain its level of funding this financial year. I will be very intensively working with them to understand the dangers that they foresee in the years beyond this next financial year. I want to make sure that Scotland's cultural organisations are able to flourish rather than to face existential concerns that Ian Monroe outlined to the committee, which are of a concern to me. Thank you for that. To be clear, he said that even this year, using the national lottery reserves, he said that a quarter to a third of the RFOs are at risk, I think was his words. I hear what you say about the financial constraints, but, as you said in your opening comments, hard choices have been made. Hard choices have been made within the whole of the Scottish Government's budget. If you look at Spice's analysis, only three portfolios saw a decrease in cash and real terms, and one of those was yours. In fact, yours saw the largest decrease of all the portfolios in cash and real terms. Within your own budget, hard choices have been made. You spoke about external affairs, and that has seen an increase and culture has seen a decrease. Moira Jeffery, last week from the Scottish Contemporary Art Network, spoke about the jobs that are involved. She said that RFOs support about 5,000 jobs in direct employment, and she said that once those jobs have gone, they will not come back. In the light of that evidence, have you reconsidered the cuts to create a Scotland given those jobs that are at stake? There are two parts of Mr Cameron's question there. It is important in understanding the budgetary process for this year compared to last year, that, going forward, we will not be incurring the same level of costs within the portfolio related to the census as was the case last year. That is an important part of the understanding of the global position within the budget, that anybody would be facing risks to their employment status in culture or the arts is of concern to me. As I have said before to the committee, there is an additional concern which is of people not becoming active in the sector to start with. It is not just what do the economic pressures currently being faced impact on organisations and people in employment. It is those who might seek to want to start a career in the culture sector. I am extremely seized of that matter. I am doing everything that I can to underline that the cultural and arts community in Scotland is of import not just for arts sake but as an extremely important part of our economy. It is also fair to add to Mr Cameron's justifiable concerns that, at the same time, there are parts of the culture sector that are growing considerably at the present time. If we look at the screen sector, for example, we learned last year that its value to the economy is now over £1.5 billion and on current trajectories will be worth over £1 billion by 2030, with a significant increase in the number of people working in that sector. It is absolutely fair to point to the constraints and the difficulties caused by the broad economic circumstances and Scotland's budgetary constraints. It is also important to highlight that the culture sector is moving ahead in these difficult circumstances and that some parts of it are doing extremely well. For those of us who have a responsibility to work with those parts of it that are facing difficulties that the Scottish Government and our agencies, such as Creative Scotland and Screen Scotland, do everything that we can to support them in these difficult times. Can I ask finally about the issue of multi-year funding that you touched on? In the 2021-22 programme for government, the Scottish Government committed to providing three-year funding settlements. In evidence last week, Sir John Layton said that it is highly desirable multi-year funding, but it is not in sight at the moment. He commented that it is harder to imagine shorter term cycles of funding, given that he had to set a budget now for a financial year beginning in April. Is there any realistic progress towards multi-year funding? Yes. That is constantly being worked on by officials in culture but also in discussions with other parts of the Scottish Government. There has been significant budgetary instability, if I can call it that, given events off the past year. In particular, we have seen tremendous budgetary instability when looking at the UK Government. Given the constraints that we have and that instability, one must make sure that, if one and when one move to multi-annual funding rounds, that people can depend on the projections of their funding situation. It is understandable, given the instability but also the constraints. That is an area where more work needs to be done because, for the people that have been mentioned already but many others, that is going to be a very important development. I hope for the better, because, as I am sure you have heard in evidence, there are many people who run extremely effective, efficient organisations and have to spend what they view as a disproportionate amount of their time every year making funding applications and have to make considerations about how they maintain their organisations. We understand that, but it would not be responsible to change from the current funding model to a new funding model until we can, with absolute confidence, say that this is how it will work, this is what it will provide and give people the certainty that they want. However, I want Mr Cameron to understand that we are committed to doing this, and as soon as we are able to do that, I will be happy to update the committee on how we are able to do that. I am extremely keen to give the sector the assurances that they have asked for, and understandably so, so that they are able to focus more on what they are supposed to do, which is delivering for our national cultural life and perhaps spend less time having to be involved in the annual cycle of financial applications and reviews. Cabinet Secretary, you mentioned the issue of where does the money come from, and I just wanted to note the fact that there are solutions that have been suggested. The tourist visitor levy per cent for art scheme, which your manifesto said could generate £150 million a year, social prescribing, but as with multi-year funding, they are not here now and potentially years away, so does that not take us back to that perfect storm, so we are needing to save organisations now? That came across incredibly strongly from Creative Scotland last week, but also lots of organisations lobbying us individually. If you take the film house, I know that you will not be able to comment, but to look at the issue that we have enough organisations with investment that could keep the film house going, but it went straight into administration with no public discourse, with nobody knowing about it, so there is something about keeping our organisations open, the doors open, that is what Sir John Layton said in September to us. How do we support Creative Scotland now, rather than cutting them? Yes, cross-government support, potentially business support, economic advice to organisations now, but as Creative Scotland was clear to us, those organisations potentially go under without support now, so it is two things, it is support now in terms of funding through Creative Scotland, but also advice and support, and avoiding that culture of doom that was talked about last week, how do we keep organisations going when there are potentially donors, funders and organisations locally that, faced with a crisis, would come together? I know that you cannot talk about the film house, but there are two weeks to go. There are people out there who have resources that would be up for making that organisation, which is not just a local issue, it is the national Edinburgh International Film Festival. What do we do now? So there is a lot in Sarah Boyack's question and commentary there, most of which I completely agree with. I think that one of the particular challenges that we have learned by the circumstances relating to the film house but also dance base, and I think that Sarah Boyack and convener and members will appreciate that I am constrained in what I can say in general, but also in specific terms, as the constituency member for Edinburgh Central, and my culture minister, colleague Neil Gray, takes the lead in those areas. Speaking in general terms about the challenge to organisations, and this is something that I have discussed with Ian Munro and colleagues at Creative Scotland, we all are going to have much more and much earlier insight into any particular concerns that are relating to organisations. If one wants to maximise the potential intervention and support that Sarah Boyack has highlighted in her number of those, and I concur with her about those, one needs to be able to do that before organisations get to a stage where they cannot trade. Is it just a statement of fact? If it does get to the stage that organisations then announce that they are not able to trade, it is then beyond anybody's ability, whether that is Creative Scotland or the Scottish Government, to try and help to maintain those organisations, because it then becomes a legal process and administration, and then there is another set of challenges and potential interventions, but in some respects the ability to keep organisations standing and going is reduced. One of the things that I have discussed with Creative Scotland, and this is where they are so much closer to the organisations, because that is the role that they have, and members will appreciate the reason why we have a culture and arts organisation like Creative Scotland, because it is not for ministers to manage, to micromanage the interface with individual organisations, but I think that there is a general understanding that we need to know where are the greatest risks. Donald Cameron has already mentioned the evidence given to the committee about the concerns that Ian Mundrow has about specific organisations. It is going to be in and around that space that if it is necessary to help, to assist, to support particular organisations, then I am keen that we are able to do that, and I use that we in the sense of Creative Scotland, the Scottish Government and other agencies. Yes, it is going to have to take a cross-agency approach to make sure that we are doing that as properly as possible, but I think that time is the key thing in understanding. You will appreciate that it is not something that I would keep a running commentary on for very obvious reasons of commercial sensitivity, but that is already happening. That is why there are organisations that have been able to make changes, and that is with the support of others, because people have put their hand up in time to be able to intervene and support, and in certain organisations cases to make the most of the likes of philanthropic support that they have received in the past, but have been able to secure that to continue operating in the circumstances that they find themselves in. It is following on from that. It is thinking about what practical support could be available and that there is support to organisations through Creative Scotland. One of the things that is clear is that, if you are using reserves, that is actually difficult for organisations, because they have those reserves for very good reasons, which could be about legal obligations in terms of the organisation, but it is support now. That issue about the going back to the cuts to Creative Scotland is that message of health and wellbeing, jobs, economy, tourism. It is not just the cultural aspect, it is the wider impact on the economy.  Their budgets have actually been standstill since 2016-17, so there is something about how we support our organisations now. Part of it is through funding, but part of it is challenging Covid hesitancy. That was spoken about by Donald Smith last week. What is the Scottish Government doing now to actually get people back into culture? We have a crisis cost of living, but what more could the Scottish Government do now to actually get people back into culture and to support those organisations now? First, I would say that there has been specific funding which has promoted public support for a return to the arts. That has already been happening, but people have their own degree of hesitancy for their own reasons. We need to build confidence and our cultural organisations have been doing a superb job in giving people assurance and reassurance about why it is safe to return to galleries and theatres and our other venues and other events. Is there more that can be done? Absolutely. I am looking forward to going to the opening of Celtic Connections tonight. I unashamedly use this opportunity to anybody who is watching to take the opportunity to support events such as Celtic Connections. Where tickets are available, please go and attend theatres and festivals and events. That is observation one. There has already been support for that. Is there more that can be done? Absolutely. Sarah Boyack asked a number of other points in her previous question, forgive me, at which I was not able to come back on, where she was asking about potential new funding streams or different ways in which resource could be allocated. Those are notwithstanding all the pressures and all the constraints. Are still things that we in Government are keen to make progress on, she mentioned, percentage for the arts? Absolutely. The visitor levy again? Absolutely. Better understanding how social prescribing can operate are things that are under ongoing discussion within Government and across portfolios, and which we will be reporting back on to Parliament in our culture refresh in the spring of this year. Having said all of that, I would not want to miss the opportunity to say that there is some extraordinarily good practice and progress going on. Sarah Boyack mentioned our national performing companies. I do not know if everybody on the committee has been able to see the report this morning on Scottish Bally and what it is doing in terms of health and wellbeing, which is exemplary. Its dance health team is a UK first and opening a national dance centre that is going to be aimed at helping people in relation to health and wellbeing, dementia and long Covid. Those are exactly the things that we have been talking about in general principle terms, and we are seeing that being taken forward. I am sure that there will be more of that, going back, convener, to some of the experience from the roundtables that we have been having, one of the participants in our Dumfries meeting that I attended virtually this week was somebody who was reporting on the work that is currently under way in hospitals and in nursing homes and in care homes. It is important to appreciate that a lot of that, which we are aspiring to be even more in terms of scale and reach, is currently happening. There is innovation and there is outreach, and culture is delivering much, much more beyond art for art sake. Even in the narrow economic benefit sense for the Scottish economy, it is already delivering in areas such as health and wellbeing, which we have talked about before, but it is something that we are wanting to widen and grow and notwithstanding the constraints that we are working under, I still am very ambitious to help to deliver that in a much broader way. I very much welcome that response, and of course I have seen that announcement that you talked about this morning. If there is something that we are going to be able to look forward to in terms of an acceleration of the tourist visitor levy or a percent for art introduction, that would be good. It is just that the last response that we had from yourself to the budget said that it is years away, 25-26. It is not a current solution, and that is why the pressure is about creative Scotland's budget this year. I agree with Sarah Boyack that the quickest that we can bring in innovation, and the same goes for the answer that I gave to Donald Cameron, is part of the solution to how we move from where we are currently now to the better place where we have introduced other funding streams. I think that there is also incidentally, and I have mentioned this to the committee before, there is an opportunity for greater coherence around philanthropic support for culture and the arts. There are tremendously generous individuals and trusts and organisations and private sector companies that do an incredible amount to support the arts. I think that that is another area where, by working together across agencies with Government and the philanthropic sector, with the national companies, we are mentioned in terms of what it is that we can do to help and support their international and touring efforts. There are a wide range of ways in which we can help, we can support. Yes, some of it will require finance but some of it will not. Some of it is about the convening power of Government or the convening power of agencies like Creative Scotland to think anew about how we do things. It is one of my biggest takeaways from speaking with the sector in these round-table meetings. There is an understanding that doing nothing is not an option, that we are going to have to face up to the scale of the challenges that we are in. I fully acknowledge Sarah Boyack's point about spending constraints with Creative Scotland and saying that reserves are not a long-term solution to spending constraint. One of the challenges that we have picked up in conversations with artistic organisations is that they themselves have been spending their reserves, and that means that when one is in a storm, trying to proceed through a storm, that if one's ability to use reserves is denuded, that is obviously a challenge as well. I totally accept that, but without making the point at great length again, we are not in normal financial circumstances. We are going to have to find a way through this storm and I am sure that we will do it. There are lots of good examples of innovation that is happening. Incidentally, I am also interested in hearing from others who are facing similar circumstances. I was pleased to finally meet with my UK culture secretary opposite number, Michelle Donilon, a few weeks ago. She is having to face many of exactly the same problems within her portfolio areas in relation to the funding of culture and arts and the pressures that there are people in the committee who will be aware of theatre closures in England, for example, because of the same financial challenges and post-Covid impact and so on. I am keen to work with colleagues in the rest of the UK, but also further field as well. Are there learnings? Are there approaches that others are taking that we can learn from? Maybe there are things that we are doing that we can share. I am keen to work with colleagues collegially. I was happy to support the call from the culture sector in relation to the tax treatment by the treasury in relation to theatres and other venues. I have subsequently written to the Treasury to try to underline how important it is that, when tax decisions are made in the circumstances that we are currently in, it does not worsen the situation. Where it is possible to work together, I am absolutely up for doing that. I am doing it, and there are more opportunities to learn from elsewhere. I am also very keen to do that. Mr Raskol. I just check that we have the same understanding of the pressures that are being faced by the smaller regularly funded organisations at the moment, particularly in relation to reserves. Most of those organisations are charities, therefore they are regulated by OSCA. If they dip into their reserves to the point that they can no longer afford to pay people redundancy payments or pension payments, then they are acting outside of charity's law. We are being told that there is an issue not for next year but for this year, even though there is some funding this year from Creative Scotland out of their own national lottery reserves to keep those organisations going. Those organisations boards are having to look at sustainability now and about whether they should keep going now, even though they are getting money because they are dipping into their reserves, because of energy costs, having to pay staff an increase with the cost of living and other issues. Is that description? Do you agree with that? Do you understand that issue? Is that in your— It is definitely on my radar screen. That is a reality being faced by organisations right now. That is why Ian Monroe was right to highlight the concerns that he has because of the feedback that he is hearing from the sector. Different organisations are at different stages of financial challenge. That is the point that I was reflecting back to Sarah Boyack about how it is that agencies—Creator Scotland in this case—or Government can best help. It is by having the best possible relationship with organisations that are going through these challenges so that there is some time to understand if and how it is possible to intervene. Mr Ruskell is absolutely right to say that there are organisations that are facing existential concerns right now. He mentioned reserves. There are other types of constraints and other types of financial challenge, especially given the cyclical nature of significant parts of the cultural sector, where there are different times of the year, when one is taking in money and other parts of the year where one is making less money, and so on. I have got all of those complications, but I think that it is going to be really, really important for Creative Scotland and the regularly funded organisations. Others beyond that, I think that it is really important that we do not forget that there are really important cultural organisations and people operating in the arts community in Scotland who do not come under the RFO umbrella and we need to think about them at the same time. The same goes there. How can we help everybody that is involved in the arts and cultural scene in Scotland to give as much advanced notice as possible about particular funding but other problems? Creative Scotland is very keen to help. The Scottish Government is very keen to help, and the other Government agencies are likewise. Time being aware of the scale of the challenge, which is why I gave the answer to Mr Cameron right at the start. I recognise the scale of the pressures that the culture and arts community is under. It goes without saying at a great length, but those are pressures that are also being felt elsewhere in the economy and beyond culture and the arts, but we are talking specifically today about that. One of the big jobs that we are going to be having to do is to try and help regularly funded organisations and national companies as well. We have made announcements in relation to their funding but also those that are supported through other funding streams but are not regularly funded organisations are important as well. That is good to hear, but can I stick then with the particular pressures that are being faced by those regularly funded organisations or those that are in a similar position but maybe get their funding from elsewhere? The evidence that we heard last week is a disproportionate benefit that they bring. Relating to the national performance framework indicators that the Government has set, the indicators there are attendance, participation, growth in cultural economy and also the number of people working in arts and culture. We had an example last week of an arts organisation operating in Huntley where they get £100,000 a year, they support 50 artists and they put on 200 events a year and that has a wider economic benefit and spin-off to not just that town but surrounding rural communities as well. On all those indicators, that is an organisation that is hitting all those indicators and is strengthening our performance in culture. Do you think that there will be an impact if even a small number of those organisations go to the wall? I think that there is a very strong case to be made that it is some of the biggest impacts that might be felt, might be through the endangerment of the smaller and smallest of organisations, because one mentions a rural or semi-rural communities where there is a much smaller population. This may be the only arts and cultural outlet that there may be in smaller communities and if and when they were to close, there would be nothing. Is that a serious situation? Absolutely, of course it is. It is absolutely right that we are doing everything that we can and Creative Scotland is doing everything that it can. For us, in terms of directly funded national companies, regularly funded organisations through Creative Scotland and then others and smaller organisations for which the Scottish Government and Creative Scotland has responsibility, but there is also a local government dimension to this as well, where funding and support for culture is from local government. That is an area where we are seeking to work more with our colleagues in the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and particular authorities. My culture minister, colleague Neil Gray, has been meeting with culture leads. We need to be very cognisant of the importance of the value. I think that I have said twice that it is important for art's sake, the economic benefit and the broader benefit that we have been talking about before the committee. We all agree that the prize in linking up culture with the wider governmental and societal benefits of mainstreaming culture and going backwards is obviously not a good thing. I am very seized of making sure that we have the time that I was highlighting before, where there are particular risks, where the warning mechanisms around particular groups or organisations and what kind of interventions can be made to reduce the risk of that. Will that be successful in all cases? I hope so. I am certainly minded to work very closely with our colleagues in Creative Scotland and in local government to make sure that that is the case. Can I move on? We heard some evidence from grassroots music venues that there is a need to ensure that the big economic drivers in stadium gigs and the big shows that are extremely profitable, that there is a transfer of some of that wealth and value that is created through down to grassroots music venues in particular. I suppose the same could be said for screen productions in Scotland as well as increased investment into screen Scotland. That is great. That will certainly drive growth in the cultural economy, but how do we get the value from those big productions, those big gigs, down into the grassroots again? It could be ticket levies, it could be some form of payment for those who are perhaps making Netflix movies in Scotland. The first thing is having an open mind about all of these is important. I certainly do and I know that Creative Scotland is going through a process of updating its funding approach towards things. I am sure that Creative Scotland will have been listening to the points that you make. If there are particular suggestions about that, I would encourage you and others with an interest in that to take that up directly with Creative Scotland, who has the responsibility for that. That is where we have this and for very understandable reasons, a degree of arm's length between government and the funding of a particular project and who prioritises what one thinks is important and the relative value of all of these things. I am struck by talking about screen, for example, that yet there have been some amazing box office success of big budget film productions in Scotland in recent years. That is tremendous and it is a good sign of the ending of market failure in the screen sector in Scotland and moving in a positive direction. The thing that is particularly heartening is the success of the more independent and smaller scale productions that we are able to see at the present time. Look at After Sun, for example, voted best film of last year supported by Screen Scotland, perhaps not considered by some to being traditionally a box office type film, but tremendous nonetheless. The benefits that that brings by having more screen output being produced in different parts of Scotland, so we were able just in what we can anytime I suppose because we can stream it, but seeing the rig shot in in Leith, seeing Mayflies, tremendous, tremendous BBC production by Glasgow-based production company, by a cutting edge Scottish author, filmed largely and significantly in Ayrshire, and so that is one of the great things about screen going in the direction that it is. It is getting to a scale where it is getting beyond the studio space that we have, filming in locations that are not traditionally filmed locations, which gives significant economic benefit to the areas where those projects take place. Is that something that Screen Scotland and Creative Scotland think about? How is it that we make sure that we can support culture and the arts right across Scotland and not just in larger population centres or where particular facilities are concentrated absolutely? Are those things that they are thinking about at the present time? Yes, it is. I have got one more question. It is about the world athletics indoor championships. With the world cycling championships, the Scottish Government has largely funded that understanding as there has been no contribution from the UK Government, even though it will be seen as a GB event hosted in GB. Can I ask about the world athletics indoor championships? Is that something that the Scottish Government is wholly funding or are the contributions from the UK Government in that regard as well? Again, that will be seen globally as a GB event. I can speak more about the world cycling championships than I can the athletics, but I can make sure that we can update Mr Ruskell who has asked a question about that if memory serves me correctly at a previous committee event. He is absolutely right to draw attention to the fact that the Scottish Government is making very significant financial contributions to the world cycling championships. For those who are not aware of this, this is an event that is taking place in Scotland. It is the first time that there is ever an event of this kind that brings together the cross-disciplines that there are in cycling as a sport. They will take place at the same time in Scotland at different venues in different parts of Scotland. It is an event that is going to be larger than the Commonwealth Games. This is amazing. This is happening this year and there is a lot of thought and effort going into how does one make sure that there is genuine community benefit and societal impact in encouraging people to get on their bikes. I perhaps need to follow that. In junction with myself a little bit more, he confesses to the committee. That is something that I have been involved in. I chaired the board that brings together, so I am very closely involved with appreciating how big an event this is and anything that can be done to magnify it and support the understanding of this as an event that is taking place in Scotland would be much appreciated. In terms of the specifics of the athletics event, I am joined by Rachel McKenzie who works on the event side of things for the Scottish Government who may want to add something after my comments. I am happy to write back to Mr Ruskell. I appreciate that he is making a point that, if it is a GB event, why is it that the Scottish Government might be carrying substantial costs, but I will update him on what the situation is with that. We are involved in supporting events with the UK Government in other sporting contexts. In terms of the EuroBid, together with other home nations, that is an area where we are working with Government and Governments in London, in Cardiff, in Belfast and in Dublin. I think that we are making progress there, but specifically on the athletics. Rachel, do you want to pitch in? Of course. Thank you, cabinet secretary. Thank you, Mr Ruskell, for the question. We are a contributory funder. We are not the primary funder for the World Athletics. Glasgow City Council is the primary funder. UK sport is also part of that kind of coalition, which brings in that UK dimension. I will fund in for World Athletics next for 2324, which will be £800,000, but we can write and provide some more information around the event, if that would be helpful. I take the opportunity of supporting that event as well. I asked last week at the round table about the impact of the difficult decisions that have had to be made with regard to the culture budget about the impact on Scotland's international standing. Sir John Layton in his previous evidence session had talked about every piece of art that is loaned or artifact that is loaned is a mini ambassador for Scotland or for Scottish culture. We got evidence last week that kind of touched on the importance of Scottish culture through tourism, through international partnerships and also more generally across soft power. Morah Jeffries talked about being at the Bien Allee every two years and also artistic collaborations. I am interested to hear what work the Scottish Government is doing in light of those budget reductions to ensure that Scotland's cultural standing isn't lost from an international perspective. I would love to do an entire session on this, convener, if there is ever a short list being put together of what the committee might want to discuss. I would be delighted to come back to speak at this at a great length, because this is what I spend a significant part of my time and my efforts involved in, because I recognise the point that Jenny Minto is making. I am very much a glass half full person in this respect. I think that there are huge opportunities that build on the first-class work that is done by the likes of the national companies who do tour internationally, but many others besides who also perform and tour elsewhere. What is it and how is it that we co-ordinate, that we work together, that we do as much as we can to support one another? In that respect, the Scottish Government has a role to play. Yes, it does in funding terms, but it also does in convening terms and also in certain of the assets that we have. It is a really good example of how we are currently using those assets. Committee members will be aware that we have offices in a number of capitals around the world, and those are used for cultural promotion. I was delighted to speak at Scotland House in London at the launch of the Scottish Cultural Assets report, which I would highly commend to members. I do not know if members have been able to see both of the documents that form part of that report, which reflects in significant part on how Scotland is perceived in cultural terms, and how people are able to enjoy the broad spectrum of Scottish cultural offering. As an example of what is happening in this particular area, this was the subject of the conversation that I had with the national companies about tours that are taking place. There was discussion about being in Washington DC for a run of performances. I am very keen that we are doing everything that we can, so the Scottish Government office is doing to support that. It does not take a lot of imagination to understand the potential spin-offs in terms of tourism in particular, but other forms of collaboration and co-operation that might emerge from that. I know that that is being thought about a lot in festivals in Scotland as well about how we make sure that we are getting maximum benefit from the shared experience of others, but also those institutions that have international reach. That includes the Scottish Government, that includes Scottish Development International and others. I will be happy to come back to the committee to report in greater detail, but there is current work under way within the Scottish Government specifically in relation to the international cultural priorities that we have to make sure that we are making the most of the cultural and artistic sector, who are very keen to work with Government agencies to make sure that we are doing just that. That will impact in different ways, because there are different countries where there are particular cultural focuses. It is one of the reasons why I was delighted to see the Scottish Government office open in Copenhagen particularly, because I think that there are huge lessons that we can learn, for example in the screen sector, from what Denmark and the other Scandinavian nations have been doing, countries the same size as Scotland. Speaking languages which are not as widely spoken as English but have been able to become incredibly successful. Jenny Minto's question opens up a really broad range of opportunities, and I am keen that we grab those with both hands. It is one of those areas where, yes, money is important and funding is very important, but the intangibles as part of this process, the goodwill, the willingness of organisations and host countries and host organisations to play a part in that is hugely exciting, which is why having an international network, having talented people who are there to promote Scotland and the broad ways in which they do, is hugely beneficial. Everybody else does it, and I think that we should be very proud of what is happening already, but I think that there is more that we can do to support the culture and art sector domestically in the UK and internationally as well. Thank you for that. I think that you will know that we had the ambassador for Sweden in committee prior to you. One line that really struck me that she said was that culture is what keeps things together. I think that that is something that we need to remember when we are looking at budgets and the importance of culture to the rest of the economy. I would like to follow on a bit, if I may, from my colleague Mark Ruskell's point. About culture and creative people coming up with different ideas in a difficult time, and I think that it was Sir John Layton that said that culture is the answer, it is a solution, it is an asset that needs to be exploited. Chris Sherrington from the Music Venues Trust, as well as suggesting the levies for tickets, also talked about and you have touched on the importance of buildings, but also the expense of buildings. Ideas that are happening in England and also in Wales about owning our own venues, where communities can raise funds through community benefit. I am interested to know if you could expand a bit more. You have talked about your round tables, how the Scottish Government, your officials, are discussing with creative organisations how they can become part of the solution and what ideas that you are thinking about that we could run with. That is the process that is currently happening. The conversations are happening. They happen directly, organisations might, as the national performing companies did last week, said that we would like to meet and discuss things from their particular point of view, given how they are funded, how they are structured, what it is that they do, how it is that they can fit in so that conversations are happening at that level, conversations are happening through these round tables, which involve everything from venues to organisations to different parts of our cultural and artistic community. In the widest of senses yet the performing arts, but design, we are discussing this week, among design and architecture and other aspects of the sector as well. People who are freelancers, small organisations, there is not a single aspect to this and there is not a single solution to all of it. It is going to be multifarious and we are going to have to be open to new ideas and I will be happy to come back to report to the committee when these different considerations and suggestions have been worked through. Some of those are things that the sector and organisations are going to be doing themselves. They are doing it already. There are others that will rely on support and assistance and one of the interesting things to come out of these round tables that struck me is the number of times I have heard from people saying that it is really good that we are meeting so one is also getting to know other people who are involved in their world that they did not know before or were talking about what they are doing in their organisation which can be shared. That is one of the intangible benefits of having this kind of process and I think that it is a reflection on the great advantage of being in a country the size that we are that it is possible to do this and we are doing a hybrid approach where there is a significant number of people in the room and then there are others often from other parts of the country who are joining in these conversations as well. The discussions are happening at the present time. The solutions, as Jenny Minto has put her finger on, will largely come from the sector itself. It is not government—I have said this again to the committee before—it is not government that does culture. It is the cultural sector and it is people in the arts community who do that and it is for us in government and agencies who are there to support and can support. If there are ways where there is greater coherence that can be given from government and through agencies, I am all ears because we are all going to have to carry some of the burden of getting ourselves through these challenging times and if that means we have to change how we are doing things then we should be thinking about that as well. If there are solutions that you are hearing as a committee, my officials pour through the evidence that is given to this committee and I look at it as well myself, but if there are things that you are hearing through visits, through conversations that you are having that you think we may not be aware of or that agencies are not aware of, please make sure that we are hearing them because we need to be looking for good ideas, some of them will be new ideas, some of them might be older ideas, but especially at a time like this we cannot quote somebody who has been a part of this process, the idea that we can simply hold our breath and then come up in two months or two years time and think that where it is going to be business as usual it is not. Are there things around physical infrastructure and ownership? Yes, perhaps, but I would draw attention to the fact that we still had problems in Aberdeen in terms of the Belmont and a facility that is per view of the council. Yes, ownership may be part of the solution in certain circumstances, but I think that the pressures that are being felt by everybody no matter what the ownership structure is, what type of organisation it is, but I think that that then reflects back to our government and agencies that we have to be nimble enough to, with the notice that I am stressing, to be able to respond and bring in help, support, advice that we can, and there is a lot of help and support out there. It is not simply what falls within the purview of my ministerial responsibilities, there are other government agencies that support the economy for example, would be an example of that, Scottish Enterprise and so on. There are other agencies, there are other bits of government and other organisations and we just need to make sure that we are all part of this process. I think that we are doing our best to do that. If anybody feels that they want to be a part of that, who feel that they have not been a part of it yet, but would want it again, please let yourself be known and we are definitely interested in ideas from wherever they come. You have mentioned some of the undoubtedly harsh budget context from the UK when we talk about the culture part of that. You touched on Creative Scotland and how it might be compensated for reduced lottery funding. Can you say a bit more about what it is that the Scottish Government has done in that area? In terms of lottery? The Creative Scotland pointed out to us in the previous evidence about that issue, but am I right in thinking that the Scottish Government has compensated for generally reduced lottery funding or have you? Yes, so funding was put in place to make up for the reducing return from national lottery to the arts. I should say that conversations are on-going with funders like the likes of the national lottery to try and make sure that we are able to protect the amount of funding that goes towards the arts. The funding was made available to Creative Scotland to offset what was going on with the national lottery. Creative Scotland was able to build up reserves as a result of that, and that is out of those circumstances that, through this financial year, there will be funding stability. However, as I have said to the committee, unless there is an economic upturn or an end to some of the financial pressures, there is still a medium-term challenge going beyond this financial year. Finally, have the decisions that the UK Government has made around ending Covid recovery funding and the timing of those decisions, had any impact on the situation in Scotland and how you have had to respond to it? I think that it has been unhelpful to see a cliff edge of funding in terms of Covid support. For the reason that everybody has been very focused on trying to recover, bounce back, deal with the diminution of reserves being held that were spent before and during the Covid pandemic, and to see the substantial ending of funding has been problematic. This was pointed out to the UK Government. There has been some intervention in relation to energy and energy costs, but again, that is coming to an end now, although the bills still remain extremely high. It is a matter of concern that, just when we have all of these pressures, it endangers the ability of cultural and arts organisations to genuinely bounce back. As we have discussed in the committee, public behaviour, among other things, is not something that has immediately snapped back to pre-Covid levels. Although we are seeing very good returns from venues in Scotland, including museums and so on, we are still not in largest part back to where we were before. To go from Covid pandemic circumstances to we have not seen the economic recovery nor have we seen the return of the public yet, and we are encouraging that to happen as quickly as possible. We have seen the ending of funding before that recovery has taken place, and that endangers the recovery. That is problematic. I would like to ask the cabinet secretary around Historic Environment Scotland, who currently has 60 or so sites that are closed or partially restricted. I would expect that the number of sites where access is restricted to be reduced over the next 12 months, but I wonder whether you concur with that, and if there is a specific number that you would be able to commit to in that period or have asked Historic Environment Scotland to do so? It is fair to put on record when discussing Historic Environment Scotland. The particular challenge that they are having to deal with here is that we have recognised that in Government, their operational budget is rising by 18 per cent to £114.5 million. That is going to play a part in what is happening with the maintenance of property, but it is also fair staff pay and a number of other areas that are very important. I am pleased not only do we have the good news about Scottish Valley and what it is doing for health and wellbeing, but we are also beginning to see some good news of different sites that are opening. I see that St Rul's Tower at St Andrew's Cathedral is reopening on Friday 20 January. Every opening is a significant positive milestone for communities for whom a particular place is of intrinsic and tourist and economic value, but at the same time, Mr Golden and colleagues will appreciate that, for Historic Environment Scotland, it is really important that they are only able to reopen facilities when they can have the confidence in the safety of people attending. Mr Golden has asked me to give him a number, but I cannot give him that. I will be happy to ask Historic Environment Scotland to give the latest update in relation to facilities, but in terms of the committee's deliberations and today's subject being where are things with the budget, I think that the commitment that the Government has made in terms of the budgetary situation for Historic Environment Scotland reflects an understanding that this is a big challenge for them and it will be an on-going challenge. I am glad to see that facilities are reopening and the more that that can happen safely. I would also like to ask you about net zero and climate change. In particular, around the cultural heritage sector, around building infrastructure and more sustainable energy sources, we heard from Alex Paterson that part of the problem is skills. He said that we will not achieve what we want to achieve as a nation without skilled people who we need to deliver those things. Clearly, the other part is about funding, but I think that there is a role for Government both in terms of feasibility studies and assessment to assist the sector, as well as potentially providing a road map to the sector involving not just Historic Environment Scotland but the wider sector, so that we can begin, despite the budgetary constraints, to see how and what is possible among the sector. I just wondered if you would give any consideration to that. The first thing I would say is that there is an extremely sensible reflection on the circumstances that we find ourselves in. In the context of understanding why net zero and targets are challenging, it is particularly challenging because one is talking about how can one, in large part, retrofit buildings and facilities that were built at a time when one did not even conceive off the challenges that we now face in climate and environmental terms. So how does one retrofit a castle or an older building and facility? Then, to Mr Golden's point, how does one do that in a way that involves a workforce that is able to have the skills to do that in a way that is appropriate? Historic Environment Scotland is one of those areas that still have stone masons to be able to protect and restore the historic. One needs traditional older skills, skills that are perhaps less part of the mainstream economy. I was hearing about that in the Dumfries Roundtable in relation to leatherworking. It is something that would have been a mainstream skill going back 100 years, 150 years, which is now very much in demand in the equine sphere but also in fashion, which is a multi-billion pound industry. I heard the point that was made in evidence to the committee and I hear very much what Maurice Golden is saying about matching the skills to the requirement that we have in this particular part of the sector. Given that this is something that has just been raised to your committee and you are raising with me now, Mr Golden, I definitely want to make sure that we are doing everything that we can that we can help those in government who have responsibility for skills and training. It is exactly the same as the opportunity stroke challenge that we have had in relation to screen. We suddenly have this booming part of the economy and we require people with the skills to support that industry to be able to find the appropriate training courses and opportunities to learn and then the route map into that particular industry. There is a direct parallel here. It is something that I want to look at more and I will be happy to report back to Mr Golden and colleagues, but I think that the point is extremely well made. Thank you for that response, cabinet secretary. I would finally like to ask you about climate change in the creative sector. Ian Monroe of Creative Scotland said last week that the creative sector informs and influences public opinion and behaviour, but we need investment to achieve that. I wonder how concerned you are with regard to that statement.  Does the arts and culture play an important role in helping to communicate that reality to which the answer is undeniably yes? I saw a lot during COP26 that involved arts and cultural representation of the climatic and environmental circumstances that we face. It does not take a lot of imagination to see the role that it might play in schools. That goes back to the broader point about mainstreaming culture and the arts across government. Education is one that comes to my mind immediately. Perhaps Mr Golden has some other ideas in his mind. Is there more that can be done, undoubtedly, so that goes back to the how are we making all of that mainstreaming piece work? Quite a lot of this does happen, so that is a good thing. Perhaps we need to do more to publicise it. I will look at what Ian Monroe was saying and be happy to speak to him about whether there are any specific areas that we are missing that perhaps we can do more. I will be happy to look at that. However, I get the impression that that as an issue is one that is increasingly being reflected in an arts and culture context. Spoiler alert to anybody who has not seen the rig yet. I am looking at you, Mr Golden. Have you seen the rig yet? No spoilers. It is fair to say that it is a cultural product. It is a series on a streaming platform for which the climate dimension to things is reflected inherently in the storyline and what it is all about. It makes the point that culture has a really important role to reflect the challenges that we face as a society, as a world. It is happening now. Is there more than we can do? Yes. If Mr Golden has any specifics that he thinks that we need to be doing more of or less of or differently, please let me know. I appreciate that. I think that you would make a wonderful new barry norman, if you do not mind me saying. Back to you, convener. Thank you very much. I wonder if I could follow up a liner question from both Ms Mintle and from Mr Golden. It is actually about elsewhere, cabinet secretary, but you have mentioned Mayflies and the BBC production as being an exemplar from Scottish BBC Scotland. We have a large media concern from people who are key to our festivals and key to our cultural output in Scotland. Tommy Smith from the Jazz Festival, Nicola Benedeti, now leading the Edmund international festivals and also from our piping community about proposed cuts to BBC Radio Scotland's output in classical jazz and piping music. If those go ahead, what impact would that have on the ability for emerging talent and for excellent exemplars of leading people in jazz and classical piping to be able to showcase their work and ensure the future of those areas? I think that one of the great strengths that BBC Scotland has is that it has a remarkably broad offering to people's tastes, whether it is musical or sporting or news or talk. It seems to fit in an amazing breadth of content. As a general observation, any reduction in that breadth has to be a matter of concern. When talking about certain musical forms, such as piping or jazz, those would not traditionally be thought of as being mainstream musical offerings. Where else are you going to hear Scottish Pipe music? Where else may one hear various forms of jazz? Certainly in Scottish radio terms, but even in UK radio terms and now in this digital age where one has a global access to radio. I remember growing up hearing Radio Scotland and the Pipe music programme coming on. I like jazz, I should declare an interest. I went to school with Tommy Smith and he is one of our greatest musical exports. When people in the arts community say that they think that something like that will have a major and negative impact on performers and a new generation of pipers or jazz musicians, that needs to be taken seriously. I hope that Radio Scotland will listen to what people have been highlighting to them. I look forward to continuing to be able to hear Pipe music and jazz music on BBC Radio Scotland with a bit of luck. Thank you very much for that answer, cabinet secretary. I think that concludes questions. Did you have another question, Ms Boyack? It was a very brief follow-up question. It was good to hear you talk to local government representatives, cabinet secretary. Every time I do that, they just remind me of the cuts they've experienced over the last decade and the fact that culture is taking the biggest cut. If there are new issues that could be put on the agenda to support culture, an artist in particular, reflecting on your last comments, potentially artists working in school or cultural people working in school, that would be very welcome. I have been able to see over the years, but before I had responsibility for this area in the Scottish Government, and I should perhaps declare an interest, I have friends who have worked as arts workers in local government, that I understand the value of the jobs that they were able to bring to schools, to classrooms, to kids, and I was able to see the ending of that support. I am talking in that context about Muryshire, and I think that it was a hugely retrograde step, and I said so at the time. I would encourage colleagues in local government to try as best as they can, as we are trying as best we can to continue to support arts and culture. I think that realising the importance of all levels of a Government that have a responsibility for culture and the arts to co-ordinate and work together is important, which is why we are having this conversation and probably the more of that, the better. I am going to close committee on that note, cabinet secretary, and Ms McKinney. Thank you very much for your attendance this morning. I will now move into private session with no break, please, because we are very tight for time now.