Good morning and welcome to the 24th meeting of the committee in 2018. I'd like to remind members and the public to turn off mobile phones and any members using electronic devices to access committee papers should please ensure that they are switched to silent. We have received apologies today from Kenneth Gibson and Tavish Scott. Our first item of business today is an evidence session on pre-budget scrutiny and I'd like to welcome our witnesses today, Fiona Hyslop, Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Tourism and External Affairs, Karen Watt, the director of external affairs, Jonathan Price, director for culture, tourism and major events and David Sears, head of sponsorship and funding for the Scottish Government. I'd like to invite the cabinet secretary to make an opening statement. Thank you very much, convener. I thought it might be useful for this first session of what is a new budget scrutiny process to update the committee on progress with the delivery of this year's budget and its priorities. The budget is being delivered as planned. The most substantial element of the autumn budget revisions is planned transfers to Creative Scotland's grant and aid. Those comprise the additional funds to offset reductions in national lottery income that you'll be aware of, the first transfer of the additional investment in the screen sector and the annual routine transfers for the targeted funding, including the youth music initiative. Other portfolio budget changes are more minor and technical. To explain the three main elements of my portfolio, the first one that I'll talk about is culture and historic environment. The culture priorities for 18-19 remain, as I indicated at the time of the draft budget proposals last December, to highlight the following. We've increased investment in Scotland's culture by 10 per cent, including the additional funding for Creative Scotland of £6.6 million in order to maintain the quantum of funding in the face of decreases in national lottery income. The £10 million planned additional investment in the screen sector is under way, with the launch of Sweden Scotland in August, a larger production growth fund and a new broadcast content fund. That was detailed in my recent letter to the committee. We've protected free access to Scotland's national collections, and we've seen record visitor numbers. For example, the national galleries have recently reached a landmark figure of over two and a half million visitors a year. Earlier this month, Scotland celebrated the opening of the V&A Dundee as an exciting addition to our world-class collection of museums and an international acclaim, and that's been supported by a substantial government grant in this opening year. We're investing £9 million in the youth music initiative during Scotland's year of young people. In March, I launched a report that explained the benefits that young people have received from the initiative in all 32 local authorities. Historic Environment Scotland is using its additional income generated by record visitor numbers to invest in the historic estate, and I'm pleased to be able to maintain Hez's external grants at £14.5 million for a further year. A second element of my budget is the tourism and major events lines. We're committed to increasing sustainable tourism across Scotland, and the funding priorities reflect that. We've increased our capital funding for tourism infrastructure, so we're spending £500,000 in the south of Scotland and a further £300,000 in Ayrshire to help those areas to develop as tourist destinations. The £3 million for the rural tourism infrastructure fund will help to deliver improvements to support sustainable growth in rural tourism hotspots. On major events, we hosted the inaugural European Championships. It was a new event bringing together the championships of six major Olympic sports, and golf here in Scotland. That was an investment of £63 million over five years, and it was complemented by Glasgow City Council's investment of £27 million. It really was a triumphant success. Over half a million people attended a range of free and ticketed events. There were 20 million viewers enjoying BBC coverage, and the international coverage, as I've heard from the EBU, was really quite staggering. They're still trying to collate all the information, but it was very much higher than they even anticipated, so that was a great success. The fact that we've played a key role in Scotland in making this new and innovative highlight of the European sporting calendar is a reflect of our capability in the events arena for Scotland. With the completion of the European Championship commitment, the major events budget will reduce substantially in 1920, so that's something to look out for with the draft budget. There will be a substantial reduction in that budget line, but that's because we've just completed what was a major spend this year. The year of young people continues to fulfil its commitment to celebrate the very best of young people through cultural education activities and co-designed with young people. It's using the £3.46 million over three years for programme delivery. Finally, on external affairs, the third strand of my portfolio, the external affairs portfolio has key priorities in the budget, and those remain constant and consistent. Consolidating our network of offices outwith Scotland, including London, Berlin and Dublin, which are funded from the economy portfolio, will mature and evolve as we seek to deepen our relationships and strengthen our impact in those priority locations. Clearly, Berlinfall and the European Championships are a great opportunity for us to follow through in that relationship. As you've seen in the programme for government, the network will be working to identify and create opportunities for our Scotland's culture and creative provision, complementing trade and investment and influencing activity. We're continuing to play our partner in addressing global challenges through our international development funding, and we're seeking to support the attainment of UN sustainable development goals outside Scotland and clearly embedded in our national performance framework. Our inaugural contribution to international development report, which was published earlier this month, sets out practical examples of how that has been achieved more widely across Government. Maintaining a key focus for this Government is on migration. That focus isn't confined to my portfolio of responsibilities, but it's absolutely the case that the ambitious plans that we have for Scotland can't be delivered without growing our population and attracting a skilled and talented workforce to come here and to make Scotland their home. Therefore, that will be a considerable focus of our activity as we go forward. We're also taking forward a range of activities to support EU citizens who currently live here or who want to make Scotland their home. We work with partners to develop a welcome to Scotland resource, and for the 235,000 EU citizens who reside in Scotland, we're making provision for an advice and support service through this uncertain time, and we'll consider how best to build on the success of the We Are Scotland social media campaign. So, hopefully, that gives you an overview of the portfolio priorities where we are in relation to the delivery of some of them during the financial year. Obviously, this is a new budget process, so I'll be interested to know what the priorities are interests of the committee as in exploring how the portfolio is performing to budget. Thank you very much Cabinet Secretary. If I could just focus for the moment on the cultural part of your portfolio, the committee has received a letter from Culture Counts acknowledging the warm welcome in the cultural sector last year when you were able to protect the budget for culture in the face of sharp declines in lottery funding, which you have alluded to. It's saying that because the situation with lottery funds and also the focus on the decline in spending in local authorities on culture, that budget will require to be protected again. Can I ask you to respond to those concerns and to ask if you have had discussions with local authorities about their cultural spending? Two things in there. From our perspective, we've made a commitment that the Creative Scotland budget line will be protected for the next three years to provide stability, but that, over that period, if there is a shortfall in relation to the national lottery, we can supplement that up to a level of £6.6 million. That's our side of things, but you're quite right to acknowledge that a large part of investment in culture comes from local authorities. In terms of our relationship with COSLA, we used to have a committee that met regularly every six months, which is my suggestion, and one of the conveners of local authorities responsible for culture. One of the positive outcomes of that was the national public library strategy. That was a very good collaborative piece of work. Obviously, the Scottish Library Information Service was very involved in that and in the development of that. That hasn't really met as much not from my desire, but obviously because I had elections, so therefore they had to point their new leads who were responsible for different portfolios. I've not met them, but that's not convened since the last local government election, but I'd be keen for that to happen, because it's a very good forum to have those exchanges collectively within local authorities. However, I keep a close eye on the spend by local authorities in relation to culture. In terms of the provisional out-term, I was quite interested to note that the reduction tends to be on events and tourism within what would be branded as the out-turns for local government. If you look at what I understand is the summary of the provisional out-term for 17-18 in relation to culture-related events, culture and heritage between 17-18 and 18-19 the out-turns is a 0 per cent change. Library services are also 1 per cent up, tourism 5 per cent down, and that's for budget estimates. Culture and heritage is a 0 per cent difference between year-on-year library services, 1 per cent up, tourism 5 per cent down, and recreation support 3 per cent down. In terms of what the committee is looking at, yes, you are correct in the year-on-year and in terms of what the budgets are in relation to the overall culture-related services, but you need to differentiate between them. The local authorities spend the large amount of spend by Glasgow in 2014, and perhaps we will be taking a retrospective look. That was a big spike for Glasgow. In fact, they will have that again because of the European Championships and their contribution to some of the cultural activity in the festival 2018. It's not—all those figures are more complex than they might look at on the surface. I know that there are pressures within local authorities in different areas, and I've said that over a number of occasions that there's quite a difference in variability between local authorities. For example, in my own local authority of West Lothian, you've seen a cultural reduction by 13 per cent. There's a considerable number of local authorities that have increased or largely increased their spend as well. As I said, it's horses for courses between the 32 local authorities. Quite understandably, there are local variations depending on the decisions that local authorities make at that particular time. Clearly, the new cultural strategy with its focus on wellbeing, the delivery of that strategy, will be down to a large extent to local authorities? The opportunities for the culture strategy to help to connect more widely with local authorities, but also with the health and justice system in terms of how we can collectively work together to make sure that the power that we all understand how culture has to help empower and transform lives, local authorities will be key within that. I'm very keen that we do understand within Scotland that place-based agenda that can make a difference in particular areas. I think that that's going to be quite a challenge for everybody, but I think that it's something that will help to support them. We know that Creative Scotland has a place-based initiative, a place-partnership initiative, where they've been trying to work probably on policy terms, certainly in terms of the figures that I was looking at. If you look at the South Asia one a few years ago, then they got a considerable amount, I think, of several hundred thousand pounds for that time. I just wonder whether we need to have some more sustained activity that partners between national and local in relation to the sustainable cultural offer as well. You're absolutely right in terms of the wellbeing, some of the differences that can make, particularly if you're looking at the early population and younger people as well. Culture can be such an important part of that provision for wellbeing and resilience in communities as well. Finally, the other pressure on your budget going forward is going to come as a result of Brexit. Do you know how many Scottish organisations in your portfolio receive EU funding? Have you had discussions with the UK Government and the EU Commission about what happens to those funding streams after the UK leaves the European Union? The answer to that is yes. We know that, from 2716, there's been at least £59 million supporting 650 projects in the culture and creative industries in relation to EU sources funding. I spoke most recently to a senior representative from the EU commission when we had the culture summit hosted here in the Scottish Parliament precisely about what could happen. There are different models of what could happen when the UK leaves. The creative Europe programme has been very successful for Scottish organisations. We've probably punched above our weight in terms of the amount that we can receive. We're also a partner of choice. People like to work with us because we've got a very vibrant and creative sector, and I think that people would still like to work with us, but it's far from clear as this committee of all committees will know what the UK Government plan is and what agreement it can secure in some of those funding streams. However, I've made it quite clear to the European Commission representative that we are very keen to continue to work if we can, so whatever opportunities there are to continue to work with creative Europe, similarly are the arguments that can be made for other portfolios for Horizon 2020, et cetera. I also spoke to the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture and Media and Sport when he was here at the culture summit and again on those issues. I think that he shares and understands the importance of international connections and collaborations as part of the culture sector, but again, he couldn't give me any answers, which is worrying for many, many people because we're coming very, very soon to what could be that cliff edge. We sincerely hope that it's not, but the ramifications are absolutely considerable. There are different aspects to my portfolio in tourism. It's very much about the population and about the workforce. We know that under current rules and what the UK Government has just said in relation to decisions about migration, we have 235,000 EU nationals here in terms of the tourism sector, 13 per cent of that sector, the workforce are EU nationals. If we were to carry across the rules on tier two in terms of the cap, the UK Government said nothing about whether it will set to not recommendations from the Migration Advisory Committee on the tier two cap. Currently, you need around £30,000. Although there are many people who can get a fantastic career in living out of tourism and hospitality and in excess of that, the vast majority don't. Unless we can get an immediate tackling of that, that's a real challenge. That's something that I've not only just shared with the UK Government, the previous tourism minister, but also collectively with the Welsh tourism minister as well, when we meet together as tourism ministers. Thank you very much, Claire Baker. Thank you, convener. Notwithstanding the cabinet secretary's comments about increases in budget and I do recognise areas where the budget has increased, we are seeing pressure on arts funding across Scotland. Over the summer, we had the dispute around the regular funding that comes from Great Scotland and the allocations that were given there. As you acknowledged, there is a restriction on a contraction of lottery funding. The figures for local government, although we accept that some local authorities will be putting more investment in them than others, there is an overall contraction of funding in that area. I have concerns when we look at where alternative sources might come from. If we were looking towards business and private interests, they would tend to go into more corporate type, I think, artistic activity, so they would interest in supporting big events. Within that, we have a real contraction on community arts provision. As the cabinet secretary has previously recognised, the household survey figures show that if you live in a deprived community or if you have a long-term health condition, you are less likely to participate in and engage in creative activity, whether that is attending or participating. The figures that we have for national show a high rate of participation, but when you dig into the figures, you can see that there are certain groups that are excluded from what Scotland has to offer in terms of its culture. I was interested in how the Scottish Government and the funding decisions that you are making are able to target activity in those areas and try to increase participation and how it is measured so that you know that it is effective. I appreciate that one of the problems will be that it goes through local authorities. Local authorities are really, in my view, the ones who are at the front line trying to deliver that kind of service. I am not asking you to direct what they do, but there is also an argument when we look at how local governments are funded. We have seen a reduction in local government funding over recent years, and the creative area is not a statutory provision. I know that you talked about a forum that you have with COSLA that you would like to reconvene. How does the Government try to prioritise funding to close what is a culture gap and ensure that more people can be engaged in what Scotland has to offer? There is a lot in that. I think that it is really important that we do not, however, make or just accept that culture funding is reducing, because the national culture budget has increased by 10 per cent in the budget that you are currently having your mid-year review. The figures that we had for Creative Scotland were decreasing. I did see that there was a note that explained that some of the funding, the reduction, because it goes down from 8 to 6.7 in 2012 to 67.2 in the most recent year. In relation to Creative Scotland and the spice briefing that you have, we will look at this combination. Obviously, they have got lottery funding and they have also got grant and aid. The provision that we are making as part of this year's budget provision will increase their budget by an additional £10 million for the screen activity but £6.6 million, so that will take it on your spice briefing that you will have on page 3 above the £50 million that you have at 14.15. That is a very healthy position in comparative terms. The issue around RFO is not a reduction in funding because there is not a reduction in funding that is provided for in this year's budget. We managed to maintain it. We cannot correlate the RFO issues with a reduction in national funding or lottery funding because they were both compensated for. Therefore, the budget for Creative Scotland is above what would have been in 14.15. Your point is about local authority. I absolutely agree that there are pressures. However, the debate that I suppose is in the finance committee, where our position is that if we look at the provisions that have been made by the Scottish Government and the capability that many local authorities have exercised to increase their council tax, they have more to spend. I am not sure that this is the committee to have that debate. It is an on-going debate. When I refer to it, it uses the evidence. I think that looking at the provisional outturn and the budget estimates for the recent years, you could probably get a truer picture of what is spent on culture. An absolute accurate point is in relation to the disparity between where that spend is and who reaches it and who benefits from it. That is where there has to be a partnership to identify. How do we make sure that there is more equity in the cultural system? How do we make sure that we have something that does, as the draft culture strategy looked at, that transforming and empowering agenda? It might not always be about the culture that is recognised and celebrated. In some areas, it has been transported and parachuted into local authorities, areas where people might not necessarily have experienced that type of culture before. It is actually celebrating the culture that people want to celebrate themselves. That can be quite different. That is why we have to recognise, as you said, what are the community arts that people really want to be involved in the creation of their own creative expression, not just watching or listening or seeing other performances? There is a genuine problem—again, there will be artistic—I mean, I am a politician—where we need to take the artistic advice and the committee well as well. Just as much as we are going to have the cultural experience fund coming forward, which will be about trying to make sure that the experiences that already exist can be accessed by children who cannot already exercise that. How else can we support that self-generated culture in communities to be given recognition, status and support? Bearing in mind, culture is not a statutory responsibility of local authorities, so when you get pressures—and it could be ageing population and more care required—the areas that are not statutory protected are more vulnerable. I recognise that there is a potential vulnerability to culture and libraries and other spend in local authorities, because it is not a statutory. The experience to date has not been what people might have thought. There might be individual examples that you have in your own local council, but if you look at the overall figures, that looks reasonable. Your point, though, about what people want to invest in and how you get that balance. The convener is hosting the Arts and Business Scotland event tonight, which I will also be at. One of the very good practices there is a very good example of what business want to partner. The Arts and Business Fund generates more income. How do we make sure that it is not all just public funding? Can we leverage in other sources, whether it is trusts or private investment? One of them is a very good programme that the Children's Theatre, the International Children's Theatre, is involved in and the National Theatre of Scotland in relation to trying to make sure that corporate partners have worked as businesses to help to co-invest with them to ensure that every school will see a theatre production. That is fantastic, but we also know that it is not just about seeing something that is excellent, it is actually about being involved yourself. I think that where local authorities have strength is the culture that is generated by communities, not just consumed by communities. Is reducing inequality and culture a priority of the Scottish Government? How do you measure that? The household survey still includes library visits as one of the measures. I am not in any way underestimating the value of visiting a library, but there are questions around whether that is a good measure of someone's cultural participation and engagement. How does the Government measure whether the fund is making a difference in those areas? That is where we have now got a new indicator in the national performance framework, which I think is something that many of the people who have spoken to you about including culture counts were keen to have. We now have that. Therefore, what we then need to do is what are the measures within that. The household survey gives us explanations. I think that you could have a debate whether reading is a hugely important part of our culture and I would not underestimate it in any shape or form. Is cinema an issue? The screen world is so much with us, whether it is on tablet, but it is also going to cinema in terms of activity. Sometimes, people might say distort figures, but that is also culture activity. We are in the process of making sure that we have the underlying indicators for that to make sure that we have a measure that can work. We are under quite clear focus from across Government that all portfolios will tackle inequality. What does that mean? I am saying that we could have good evidence and we have very good evidence from our national performance companies, from our international festivals, working with different communities. For example, the Edinburgh International Festival's partnership with Castlebray High School here in Edinburgh previously and now with Leith academy. That is far more outreach and community activity than most people realise, precisely to tackle those areas of inequality. We can capture the evidence of activity. What is more challenging is to identify outcomes from that. That is what the national performance framework allows us to do. The household survey can do that, but we need to do more than the household survey to make sure that we have that. It is not just people seeing things that we need to identify. It is also people participating, which is slightly different. Thank you very much. Can I respectfully ask if we can keep the answers a little bit shorter, because we have five members who are still hoping to ask questions? I will go to Jamie Greene next. Thank you, convener. Good morning, panel. Good morning, Cabinet Secretary. Just a few, probably quite different types of questions. The first one is really just an observation, and that is just to ask for your response to perhaps a perception rightfully or wrongfully that a lot of the cultural spend in Scotland is very centered around Scotland's cities and the central belt. How do we address concerns from communities in the Highlands or the south of Scotland or the west that they see lots of money being spent in their cities? It is great to see things like the V&A in Dundee, etc., and lots of activity in Glasgow and Edinburgh. However, there is a perception, perhaps in smaller towns and communities, that they really do not see those big tent type activities. How would you respond to that perception? Again, it is a challenging area. I think that it reflects a bit on what Claire was saying. If you look at the regular funding organisations for Creative Scotland, it is quite clear that not all local authorities have regular funded organisations within their area. There is a concentration in Glasgow and Edinburgh, but many of those organisations also then do work. They might be based or counted as in Glasgow, but they will work elsewhere. I am very conscious of the need for that spread of activity. Particularly, I think, the sense of Scotland. I have tried to make sure that there is activity there. Investment, as I have referred to yesterday in the Gatie Theatre, is £3 million over six years, looking at what is happening with Galashios. Culture as a transformation is not just the V&A in Dundee—how remarkable it is—but having the great tapestry of Scotland located in Galashios will also lead to some cultural regeneration activity in the centre of Galashios. If you look at Dumfries and Moatbury, which I was involved in right at the beginning, when we had a historic environment in Scotland stepped in very early doors to secure the roof to at least allow the project that is now being well developed to happen. Those are capital projects. Perhaps what I have managed to do on a national basis is to do more on the capital basis. I think that where you are probably getting to is what do we do on revenue to make sure the sustainability there. I am very conscious of that and that is why I hope that the direction that can come from the cultural strategy can be a clear message to everybody about what happens. I know the companies now. If you compare what the national companies are doing now, compared to what they used to do, there is far more reach in both in the north and in the south. Also with the national galleries, Cwcubri, the relationship with the national museums of Scotland, but also increasing within Vernest. That is still a city. We cannot nationally be responsible for what is happening in every town and village, but we can make sure that that is a priority in our letters of guidance to our grant and aid to different bodies. I am conscious of time as well. However, the Creative Places Award, the Creative Scotland setup, which was for smaller towns and, I suppose, villages, have been very successful in providing leverage and recognition of what is happening in small towns and funding to do things even further. Actually now, in several years' development, that has had quite a big impact as well for precisely the communities that you are talking about. Thank you for that response. I have further questions around the excellent affairs budget, but I thought that perhaps I might park those and let us continue the culture and tourism discussion. Maybe I could come back in later with that, just for the sake of ease. Stuart McMillan. Last night, news broke regarding the UK budgets being brought forward by three weeks. Does that have an effect on the Scottish Government and your particular budget area? Obviously, it is the 29th of October. The date has been set by the UK Government that will have consequences, because clearly we need to know what the position is for the Scottish Government. It really is a matter for Derek Mackay in terms of the finance secretary as to what that will mean. From everybody's point of view, bearing in mind that we have an April to April in terms of our budgeting, the sooner you have information the better. That must be the same for the committee. I know that committees have had concerns when budgets have been pushed back later on. It does mean that we will have a lot of work to do in a very short period of time, because we might have anticipated having longer. We are just about or in the process of looking at what might be our figures going forward. I cannot share them with you, because I have not even had a chance to go through them properly with my officials, but we need to move very quickly to make sure that we meet any deadline that is set by the finance secretary and, indeed, by the committee as to when you want evidence as well. Certainly, the fact that we are meeting today on World Tourism Day, which I think is quite fitting, and the budget that we will be talking about touches us up into 1920, which is the themed year for coasts and waters. In terms of any particular budget lines or any budget for that themed year, can you provide any information to the committee regarding how that will be affected? That is where I have guidance from the convener about the new process, because we are obviously meeting, after the programme for government, much of which will be for the 1920 budget year. I understand that this session is about the in-year budget scrutiny for the budgets that we are in, but you are right to identify that we have the year of coasts and waters in 2020. The idea is that we are now moving to every two years in terms of a cycle, so therefore 19 will be a preparation year, but it will still be spent, required, but maybe not as much as we will be in the 2020, which is in the delivery. I recently attended a very good meeting with the steering group for the year of coasts and waters that visit Scotland. We were hearing some of the fantastic ideas for different events, but they then have to open that up for a bidding process. I cannot give you that information just now, but I would be able to give you this sort of information with the next budget provision for 1920. This is a pre-budget scrutiny meeting, and we will be considering what we would like to see as a committee in the forthcoming budget. When the budget is published, we will be inviting you back, Cabinet Secretary, to talk to that budget, so I hope that that clarifies things. It is new for everybody in this process, so I understand that it has got to be a... I think that you have had a pitch there from which you were willing for a budget line. One final question is just regarding the major event that you touched upon this in your opening comments. Can you provide any further information regarding how you in the Scottish Government measured the value for money in terms of the funding that is committed to the major event that you touched upon in the European Championships as an example this year? There will be a valuation of that. We are not in the position to share that just now, but that is something that, when it is produced, we would be happy to share with the committee in terms of that information and impact. A lot of what we are trying to do, obviously, is in terms of helping that economic activity. We know that investment in major events has major spin-offs in terms of, you know, if you think about the numbers that are coming to stay in hotels and visits, not just from tourists or visitors coming to see the events, but the actual events themselves, the amount of athletes and the different federations and the different organisations. That is very important that we have the pipeline, so we have the Solheim Cup next year, and we have the UEFA 2020 after that. It is very difficult in terms of, it is not a static budget, so therefore that is quite a challenge to think about what funding you might have even beyond the next spending review as to what you can have within that. But even with the European Championships, a lot of the activity was making sure that it was cultural. The Festival 2018, which again was very much appreciated by everybody involved, a lot of people came to observe it because they want to involve culture in sporting events in their country when they are providing it. In terms of health and wellbeing, there was a lot of focus on Glasgow Green on the act of Scotland, and that is part of trying to make sure that we are using things to have benefits that are in health and wellbeing. It is not necessarily encouraging people to take up sports, but in terms of any different activity, and that was the participation at Glasgow Green. Again, by community organisations, it is very strong and maybe reflecting on Jamie Greene's point. In terms of our respect for the Festival 2018, the community involvement and activity in art was as important as what was happening in George Square in terms of the wider performance. Good morning, cabinet secretary. Just returning to a discussion that we were having a wee bit earlier, you made the point, cabinet secretary, about culture being generated by communities themselves as being an important element of the position Scotland-wide. I am just thinking of my constituency. For example, you have street art projects in Cowdenbeath and Kelty Recife. The cabinet secretary referred to cinema as a cultural activity. In Kelty, you have a community cinema that has been set up in Bernarty. They are seeking to do that. Given that all this good activity is happening in my constituency and doubtless elsewhere, how can those initiatives be facilitated? My second question relates to a specific item that you have set forth in the programme for government about the launch of the cultural youth experience fund, where you intend to support pilots next year with a focus on areas of deprivation. Obviously, as the MSP for Cowdenbeath constituency, I would put in a plea for consideration to be given to activity in my constituency. I also think that it is crucially involving those young people who are currently at high school. I understand from previous discussions in the cultural committee that engaging primary school children is not such a challenge, but it is when young people get to high school that that becomes, for various reasons, a bit more challenging. I have taken board the points that were made by the committee previously—I think that Ross Greer made those points in particular. With your indulgence, that is one of the things that we might look at as how we might focus on early secondary rather than necessarily primary, because there is a lot of outreach work happening in that. In terms of creative Scotland funding, you will find open projects. Those organisations could apply for open project funding or other—not the regular funding, but the other activity might be more suitable for them. Again, they can take advice on taking that forward. The leverage point is very important in working with whether it is other arts, trusts and so on. I encourage the model that arts and business have been very effective in helping, even on very locally, the different matching activity. The point that was made about generating your own art is hugely important. We have to recognise that we as a country have a lot of self-generated activities—I know that in West Lothian—that are community activities to be recognised. When you were reflecting on your constituency, you have got Loch Galloway, I think, is that right? I had the pleasure of seeing Cora Bissett's show, which was about growing up in Fife and a fantastic show that was made in Scotland again supported by the Scottish Government. It was shown at the Traverse. She is quite keen if there is an opportunity to take that back, because she trained a Loch Galloway—she was involved in the North Galloway Youth Theatre. It is very important for people to see that it is the experience of telling the stories of people in their own communities and what has happened to the people who have become very successful in their own communities. She is a fantastic role model in lots of different ways. I cannot say to her that you must do that or to organisations that you must go there. That is a very good example of how you can try to connect people to place. Every community has success stories. I was talking to the provost of Angus just last night about Bond Scott and Kirri Muir. In the sense that if you look at every part of Scotland, you will have people who have been successful. How do you celebrate that and connect that and use that as an inspiration for young people? That is maybe a suggestion for you. Thank you for that, cabinet secretary. It is a very practical suggestion. I think that it is always important that, as we discuss perhaps more nationally focused bodies, we do not lose sight of the importance of place in terms of the arts and culture, because that is what is happening on the ground. That is very important to smaller communities. I just hope that, as we go forward with the new cultural strategy, that that will be very much a centrepiece as much as we look at the national picture, because it is equally important in my view. That is why I am pressed all the time in our national companies and collections. What are they doing, not just in Glasgow and Edinburgh? More people live between Glasgow and Edinburgh than in Glasgow and Edinburgh. As Jamie Greene pointed out, lots of other areas. One of the best things that I have seen involving and inspiring local communities to do things that they might not have had the experience of doing was Fever by Scottish Opera in Bones. The impact that had on that school and those individuals and the empowerment that it gave to the young people to perform is a performance that they are involved in. We have tremendous cultural educators in our national companies, and we just have to make sure that the reach and penetration is what is that. Maybe that is something that we can look at, is that reach and penetration, and I welcome the committee's views on that. Cabinet Secretary, I would like to turn to the screen sector for a moment. The committee has taken a keen interest in the sector, but we have found it somewhat challenging to effectively scrutinise the new screen unit within Creative Scotland. We were not promised, but it was strongly indicated to us that the memorandums of understanding between the public agencies involved would be ready in the spring for its then scheduled launch. When that did not happen, we were then promised by Creative Scotland that they would be published by the end of the summer, which they were not in Creative Scotland's letter to us at the start of this month. They committed to the publication of the MOUs by the end of this month. There is only one more working day this month, and we are aware of MOUs, or I am aware of, having checked this morning that they have not been published yet. I wonder if you would be able to give any update on that, and could you also ask if you are satisfied with the progress that has been made in this regard? They were signed yesterday, so I will encourage publication and, obviously, a copy sent to the committee. I think that that would be helpful. Your point about the screen unit was launched in August. We have now the new Executive Director in place. Obviously, in terms of the timing of that, the advice was to try and make sure that there was a big bang launch in August, particularly with the website and everything else. It was launched during the film and television festival, which would actually make sense in terms of the reach and penetration of the audience that we wanted to try and encourage the screen unit to work with, so that has happened. I hope that now is the Executive Director in place. We have got the screen unit launched. I know that the committee is seeking a debate, so we will obviously be able to talk through more of the progress, but in relation to the MOUs, as I said, that was yesterday. In that case, I mentioned the website. That was a key recommendation of the committees, and having looked at the new portal, I would certainly welcome it. It looks like essentially exactly what we had recommended on the basis of evidence from the sector. In that case, how will you be judging the success of the unit over the coming financial year? What will you be measuring to judge its success? Some of this is not necessarily going to be immediate, because a lot of investments will take some time to be realised in terms of securing the number of projects. However, I think that that is something about the sustainability of the sector, and it is about employability and to make sure that we are utilising the talents. We want to make sure that the different funds that are available—the production growth fund, the content fund, and the different elements—are projects in place that can utilise the resources that we have. However, in terms of the strength of the relationships, so it is not just going to be a number, I suppose, of quality of projects, it is also going to be in the strength and the diversity of the different relationships that are made. I am also very keen to see what can be done, particularly internationally, as part of co-production space, which I think that the committee has been involved in as well. How would that then affect the decisions that you would make in regard to the various budget lines that feed into the work of the unit? Coming from different agencies, obviously, that was something that the committee took off time to look at, how those agencies relate to each other, and we will have a look at the MOUs when they are published. However, as the cabinet secretary, what will you be looking at in future years, when you are making a decision about the state of each of those individual budget lines, what goes up, what goes down, and what is adequate as it stands? My budget line will be to Creative Scotland, and we have made the commitment to—we have effectively doubled the spend that is there. Obviously, an element of that from Creative Scotland had been from Lottery, which potentially has restricted what it can use for. It would need to decide the balance of where it wants to put the Lottery spend at or once it has a wider portfolio. We want to make sure that they are making the best use of their activities. We are releasing funds when we have come to agreement as to what the content fund will do, for example, in different areas. I think that there is an issue in going forward, as we are identifying the contribution from everybody else. That is what we are alluding to. For example, the Scottish Funding Council skills development in Scotland, particularly in the creative skills set, and also in Scottish Enterprise. In terms of Scottish Enterprise, some of the recent, even the regional selective assistance, for example, I want to make sure that not just in screen action, creative industries more generally, that they are continuing to contribute. That is a key point for me. That is not just the case with the fact that we have got £10 million, so other agencies do not need to be contributing or investing. They do, and I think that that would be something that would be quite useful for the committee to keep a close eye on what I am sure that you will do. I am trying to remember the names of the two companies, Blaise and Griffin, and Axis. Axis has got a launch coming up in terms of some of the more developmental work in terms of virtual reality. A lot of our strengths in screen is in combination between virtual reality and gaming in different areas, and they are doing very well. They have been very good in astute investments in business development there, but it is not all about just what we give to Creative Scotland in terms of the impact for screen action in the other areas, so I will be keeping a close eye on that, as I am sure that the committee will be on that as well. The post of the Executive Director for the unit was something that the committee had considered. One of our concerns was that the job title in the end went beyond just screen. In your letter to the committee at the start of this month, you informed us that, for an initial period, the Executive Director would be focused solely on screen action. What is the understanding of how long that period will be? That really is an operational matter for Creative Scotland, but you will be aware that it is undergoing an organisational review as well, so that might come out of part of the feedback from that. I am sure that the views of the committee will be considered by the Creative Scotland board itself, but that is really an issue for the board. Our debate on the screen inquiry will be on 23 October. We have already touched on the cultural economy and the success that it has had, but the demands that are placed upon it and we have also seen the growth that has come through that sector. What are the biggest factors contributing to the growth of Scotland's cultural economy? There might be different ways of looking at it, depending on how you look at it. I think that the fact that we have a vibrant cultural sector itself is an absolutely essential prerequisite for what can then happen in terms of the creative industries more widely. It is recognised not just in Scotland but also in the rest of the UK as one of the fastest growing sectors. As the committee will be aware, there is a lot of micro and almost annual businesses. That is what is a challenge about how we support that. Together with Bob Lass and Jamie Hepburn, I co-chaired the Creative Industries Advisory Group, which I met just yesterday, and that was part of the issues that we were looking at. In terms of cultural economy, for us as a Government, what is important is that we have sustainable inclusive growth. That is our judgment, which also leads me on to a partner in the committee that we want to look at, which is some of the funding that helps the cultural economy that does not necessarily come directly from my funds. Part of what I want to try to do, and again to the cultural strategy, is to mainstream culture so that it is seen as whether it is health and wellbeing, as the convener mentioned, but also an economic activity. What I am very pleased to see is that, in a number of the city deals that have either been signed or, indeed, the Asia growth deal, which I refer to as helping in terms of the tourism side, the cultural heritage and tourism aspects to some of what would be more seen as, previously, infrastructure funds, the demand that is coming from local authorities, quite rightly, and I agree with them, is that cultural heritage and tourism can be quite transformational in their activity on a local basis. Sustainable inclusive growth also ties into Clare Baker's point about making sure that we are tackling all society, that we make sure that we are tackling inequalities as well. That is how I would define what is successful. Other measures and metrics, if you are using the UK-wide criteria, will talk about numbers employed and GVA contribution. However, if we are staying true to what our economic aim is, we need to think about it possibly from a different direction. The balance that we draw between growth and the high demand for funding has always been a difficult scenario to manage. Within the draft cultural strategy, it talks about actions that we are going to take to deal with skills development, with leadership innovation and also the digital aspects of things that are coming forward. What funding is the Scottish Government planning to commit to skills development to support the growth within the sector and to attract individuals within the arts and culture for the forthcoming budget? We would obviously need to work with skills development Scotland to identify the funding for the creative sector in particular, and I am happy to do that as part of the on-going dialogue with the committee. To give you a very practical example, one of the things that we also want to do is to make sure that we have modern apprenticeships that are fit for the creative sector. One of the things that we are looking at is to scale up the reach of what are called shared apprenticeships, because that can work very well. I visited the blue drill hall, if many of you have been there, it is a very good example of some of the activities that happen around creative industry space, and they have had a very good and practical shared apprenticeship, which allows people to go and sell and make connections and relationships to sell their product and have help in manufacturing when they cannot necessarily afford to employ somebody full-time all themselves, but a share of somebody allows them to do that as well. It is maybe not large in numbers, but in principle it is a practical thing that can help in the creative sector. Thank you very much. Before we move on to talk about external affairs, do any of the members have questions on culture or tourism? On the tourism front, we have had an evidence session last week. Two weeks ago, on the tourist levy, the tourist tax issue, we planned to have a further evidence session next week, I believe. It was just really to, given that you are here before us, cabinet secretary, I am sure that you have been listening to the various voices out there, not all of whom have the same approach at this stage to the issue. Is it interesting to hear some thoughts from yourself, cabinet secretary, at this stage? Obviously, it is early days. Well, our position is that we are not in favour of a tourism levy. We think that any progress in this area would need to be involved in the tourism industry right from the start. There are lots of positions, and we understand the sort of live discussions happening in Edinburgh. I met the leader of the Edinburgh council just last week, but we also have to remember that there are different perspectives. It is not as simple as people are seeing. I think that we have to look at our tourism industry. The figures are fantastic. They were doing very well indeed, but in terms of the turnover and the profit margins, because of other financial pressures, the tourism businesses themselves are not necessarily realising the same profit levels that they might expect from the increases in numbers of tourists themselves. We are also perceived as a very high cost place to visit for a number of different reasons. Of course, the issue of that at 20 per cent is quite different from other cities that people keep referring to all the time, who may only have an 8 per cent vat on hospitality of tourism, and it is much less. However, we also understand the pressures that certain places have in terms of making sure that they have a city, particularly a city, but some in rural areas fit for purpose to meet demands. That is one of the reasons that we have the rural infrastructure fund, and I am about to announce shortly the beneficiaries of that to help pressured areas in particular. I will not say the vast majority, but the vast majority, but a significant amount of investment in the provisions for culture and tourism in the city comes from the Scottish Government. The investment that we have had in our Edinburgh Castle, National Galleries, the National Museums, the Portrait Gallery, all those major developments, even when the roof on the Queen's Hall has come from funding from the Scottish Government, or indeed our agencies or NDPBs. If you also look at the Expo fund, again, I meant to help us to stimulate that. That is £2 million a year over the last period. That is a vast deal in terms of investment in the festivals. On top of that, we have had the place investment, which is now part of the Edinburgh city deal of the contribution from ourselves. There is a huge amount of investment that is coming from the central government in those areas. If you look at V&A and Dundee, if you look at what we are done with the cities in particular, I understand the debates that are happening, but I just want the debate to be an informed debate. That is probably the territory that we are in. Obviously, the work of the committee is helpful in that. I think that getting all the different perspectives out there is helpful. Obviously, we will be able to probe some of those issues in more detail with our evidence session. The evidence session is soon with the hospitality industry. That would be helpful to face that. I have a couple more culture and tourism questions from Claire Baker and then Ross Creer. In the budget discussions that are upcoming, the culture budget by itself has a tiny percentage of the Scottish Government's budget. I do appreciate the pressures that are on all areas of the budget, but it is such a small amount of money. We have discussed this morning what big benefits can come from it. I accept that it would be challenging for the cabinet secretary to convince others to increase the percentage of funding that goes to culture by a small 0.5 per cent, which makes a huge difference to what it can provide. Are there discussions on going with other cabinet colleagues about what contribution their budgets could make to culture? There is increasingly a discussion around how culture can improve educational attainment, increase health benefits and work across other policy areas. There is not a lot of discussion about other policy areas contributing to the culture budget to make those things happen. Are you finding that you are able to have discussions with colleagues to advance that agenda? The answer is yes. I suppose that it is how you look at it. I have managed over the period that I have been imposed to try and leverage in contributions to culture from other portfolios for different reasons. We have just talked about the city deal, for example. That is one example. I think that you are more talking in revenue terms. Wherever I have managed to do that, previously there would probably have been more on the capital side of things. What has happened in terms of the discussion around the draft culture strategy is an intensive amount of work across Government, which is probably not the most obvious part of the consultations. That has been the contribution of whether it is environmental, health and different areas. You are right that culture can make such a difference. One of the most obvious areas that was shown at the culture summit that I hosted here is the contribution of dance with people with Parkinson's. It is a very good example. Scottish Bally is working, for example, in areas where it can help movement, where people have difficulty in controlling their movements on a regular basis, but in terms of music and dance, whatever the cognitive neurological aspects are, it can make a difference in the can-moving. That was quite astounding to watch some of the videos in activity. That is about other areas consuming culture for their own purposes, as opposed to contributing. We have not quite got to the contributing part of it. We have got the fun things themselves. For example, I understand that the drama is called Bally's Song, and it has been performed in a number of schools, high schools. I think that it is over 100 now. For the next period, it has already, over the last few years, been performed. The Justice Department is funding that through the police budget somewhere, and that is tackling knife crime. They have realised that drama can have more of an impact in terms of the messaging than necessarily other aspects in relation to the messaging of police going into schools on their own, etc. That is funding culture, but it is not obvious in my budget line. Just as we want to make sure that we evidence what our national performing companies and collections are doing in different communities in terms of their activity, we need to see what the spend is. However, we do not want to turn that into a bureaucratic exercise that is for the sake of it. We actually just want to get that spirit of, well, no, we need to see how we can use that more embedded as a mainstream part of what they are doing, as opposed to nice to do if they have extra budget. I think that that is the change that I am hoping can come from the culture strategy in terms of that area. I know that that is not a specific detailed answer that you would want, but that is the direction of travel that we are trying to get to. Just to briefly drill down slightly further on the question that Annabelle Ewing asked about a tourist tax, it feels that we are often conflating two separate, obviously related debates. Should local government have that power, should that be something that is at their disposal? Is it a choice that those local elected bodies should be able to make and should a tourist tax be introduced? For all I might take a different view, I could understand if the Scottish Government's position was that a tourist tax should not be introduced, but is it the Scottish Government's view that that should not be an option available to local government, which is, after all, an elected body just like this one? I think that you are braming it and understanding the different tensions here, because we clearly recognise that there is a discussion to take place with local government about what taxation powers they should or should not have in principle or in operation. Therefore, the request from COSLA on this issue is in relation to that context, and that is why there is an issue in relation to the local government's review, which Aileen Campbell is leading. There is also an impact on taxation more generally, which is an issue for the finance secretary. For me, it is about how we have a sustainable tourism industry, not just for today or tomorrow, but going forward. We are benefiting from the devaluation of the pound, which means that we are cheaper to come to, but we have something like 60 per cent of our visitors are from the European Union. There is one wanting to come, and I think that we are seeing that people still recognise Scotland as a welcoming place and want to come and visit. However, if we are in a situation that we have any risk whatsoever to airlines, and we know that airlines are making decisions 18 months out in terms of their provision, we do not think that just because we have strong figures now, that will necessarily continue. We want them to continue, we want to be upbeat about it, but we have to watch about timing and flexibility of what we can do, what is within our power and what is not within our power. I think that you are right to identify that my interests are in relation to the national tourism sector. It is one of our key seven economic sectors, and I have interests in there and the implications that it would have, and therefore they are not as straightforward. However, what we are going to try to do as a Government is to make sure that between us, Derek Mackay and Eileen McCamillan, we are to try to understand how we can make sure that this is informed as well as possible, so that we are not necessarily having debates that are operating in parallel but that are connected. I think that it is right if we can have a very good and rational and objective look at the pros and cons of all those issues and make sure that the local government's review is not necessarily just in isolation from the other debates that are happening very locally but also nationally as well. Before we move on, I would like to go back to the cultural strategy. In the draft culture strategy, it suggests that a new cultural leadership post will be established—a culture czar, I am sure that it will be called—in due course. We will also talk about how we are going to measure impact by establishing the Measuring Change Group, which you have already referred to. Can I ask you when the new cultures are will be appointed and also when you will establish the Measuring Change Group and how you will recruit to that group? As you might appreciate, I think that the idea of a culture czar is not something that I have recognition of in terms of how it has been reported. However, going back to Clare Baker's point, the point about how you make sure that across different governmental areas, particularly in health and justice environment, you are making sure that the importance of culture is read across across all areas of government, we do need to make sure that we have and we think that having somebody in post that could help drive that would be very important indeed. Nobody thinks twice that you have a chief scientific advisor to the Government or that you have advisors in lots of different other areas. Why would you not have one for culture? It does not mean that you are telling people what they want to consume or see or anything like that. It is about how you make sure that the power of culture is reaching right across different areas. The strategy is not complete yet. We have just closed on the consultation. I will be interested to hear what people's views are on that particular proposal. I am not making a decision until I have seen the feedback from the consultation itself. The measuring change comes back to making sure that we can have, particularly across governmental bodies and also our agencies, a capability to understand the power and influence. Not all of it is monetary, but it is also about impact. I think that that is the challenging bit. I am not saying that it is easy, but unless we try to measure how we are making sure that the cultural activity of our organisations and across Government and not even just the cultural department and other areas are making a difference, we want to work across Government in recruiting to that. However, there is a point about how to make sure that we have particularly external, whether it is community or specialist advisors from the wider cultural sector. That is not definitive yet, because the culture strategy has not been published yet. In fact, we have not even assessed the consultation responses. The consultation just closed on 19 September, so I want to look at that first before I take steps on that. Is the proposal to make the measuring change group part of Government, or is it going to be completely independent of Government? To be fair, it is too early to say how the actual form and structure of it. Thanks very much. Jamie Greene Thank you, convener. Before I move on to external affairs, I just wanted to pick up two points on culture and tourism, which I think are relevant to pre-budget scrutiny. The cabinet secretary will probably be aware that Norwegian airlines are pulling their US to Scotland routes, which I suspect may have a detrimental effect to inward tourism from the US in terms of direct connectivity. One of the reasons they cited was the failure to see any reductions in APD. I just wondered if the cabinet secretary has had any discussions with her finance secretary colleagues on the matter and when we might see some progress on it. Obviously, from a tourism point of view, reducing APD is something that will make us more competitive. Going back to some of the questions about the tourist tax issue, one of the reasons that we are and are perceived to be at an expensive location compared to other countries is because of the APD issue. That is one of the reasons why, from a tourist perspective, it absolutely makes sense to have that reduction. There are understandable reasons why that has not happened to date, but, in terms of going forward, that is an area in which, in terms of the tourist interest, we want to see that progress. That is an issue that is cross-government. It affects transport and, indeed, the taxation discussions that we are having. I cannot give you any clear indication as to what, when and how, but I am very conscious of it because inward investment and inward connectivity and direct connectivity makes a great difference. Interestingly, we have the Beijing flights as well, so, on a tourism point of view, it would be interesting to see the impact of the Chinese tourism bring in mind. We now have the direct flight from Beijing. That is very welcome. I think that the difference largely being that the Norwegian model is very much a low-cost model and that the percentage of the ticket cost is much relatively higher than, for example, China routes. The second point was around, and again, I am not suggesting that this is a policy suggestion by any means, but in other committees I have been in. We have had some frank conversations around RET and the fact that that has on island communities and people within Scotland, their ability to commute on ferries, for example. Do you think that tourists overseas visitors should continue to benefit from RET? Again, I am not suggesting that they should, but they shouldn't, but I just wondered if it is something that you had given any consideration to. I think that our islands benefit from international and domestic tourists. The point is about what benefits the islands in terms of what they want to see in terms of their economic development, sustainable tourism and, indeed, lengthening the length of the year. You have already seen that. It is earlier and later and later. It used to be post-easter, whereas now you are getting more activity in March and further into October and November. I think that that is really important. I took part in a tourism summit on Islay last Easter. One of the issues there was for the sustainability of the island. It wants to make sure that it has young families that can move there, but it needs all-year-round employment, which also means that it needs to make sure that it can try and, particularly in the tourism industry, be all-year-round. I suppose that it is the balance that has to be had there. I know that there are some issues, and I know that Alistair Allen has been very effective in raising issues about some of the pressures on domestic, as well as island travellers and the essential activity that they have. I know that that is an active discussion in terms of what happens with RIT and the impact of it. It is something that the islands minister that Paul Wheelhouse has been involved in very recently in terms of what the demands are. There is no easy answer to that, because I know that there are pressures on ferries. Obviously, we want to make sure that the ferry connectivity is strong, but I think that we should look at it from the perspective of do tourists benefit the islands, and I think that the answer from that is yes. It is just how do we manage the transportation effectively. I appreciate that response. I have no further culture or tourist-length questions. Please move on. I would like to move on to, and I am sure that other members will want to check in the short time that we have around the external affairs and international affairs budgets. My understanding is that the budget at the moment is around £18 million per year, of which £10 million is international development, and the rest is spent on external relations and etc. It is very unclear from the spouse briefing that we have, but does that include funding for the Scottish Development and International Offices? Is that from another budget, or is your budget just for the international hubs? Again, there are perhaps some confusions to the difference between the two. The Scottish Development and International Offices, of which there are over 30, are funded through the Scottish Development and International and Economy budget line, where we have, and I might ask Karen to correct me if I have this completely wrong, but we have in terms of the hub, the whole point about the innovation investment hub, is to allow us to be able to combine the activities of both governmental activity, diplomatic activity, along with investment and economic activity, as well as cultural and indeed other relationships. What we are now seeing in our new innovation investment hubs is a co-location. For example, in Dublin we have support from SDI in location there, and also in Berlin, and that is also the plan in Paris, which is due to open as well. Again, we are just trying to be very practical and efficient in terms of public purse to how we align the budgets, because I think that is what you would expect us to do. Some of those budgets, as I mentioned, are funded through the economy line through SDI, and some of them will be through our line. We are working closely with the new Trade Minister, Ivan McKee, and also Derek Mackay on that. We will try to make it clear, particularly going forward, if this is pre-budget, as to what we are funding and what they are funding, but it is trying to be joined up. I think that that is what you would expect, joined up collective use of our funds. That would be very helpful. Again, in the spice briefing, which I believe that you have sight of on page 20, it says that the Scottish Government does not currently appear to have any set out any specific indicators or outcomes against which the spend in areas such as the international offices or hubs can be measured. In addition, no business plans appear to have been published setting out the individual work of each international hub or office. As you said, there are 30-odd SDI offices in far-flung places such as Ghana, Acra and Berne and so on. You are also setting out these consolidated hubs. Could you enlighten us what actually happens in those offices? How do you, as a Government, monitor their operational efficacy and how do you monitor outcomes, be it financial or otherwise? The only one that we could find, for example, was a metric on Scotland's reputation out of five key performance indicators around external affairs. Even then, that graph showed that, according to the information that I have, Scotland's reputation had dropped to 10 per cent between 2012 and 2016, but that seems to be the only outcome metric in the spice briefing that we have, which, as a stand-alone figure, does not really make sense. As a Government, how are you monitoring what the purpose of these offices are and if you are getting good value for money? A couple of things. I refer you back to the national performance framework, which we are working to. Again, the revised international perspective is about our connectedness and openness in terms of our position there. The NPF is about how we are going to judge that. The NPF is that we are open, connected and make a positive contribution internationally. IDF is probably easier, but that is a separate budget line that you have identified. In terms of the other areas, we will be looking at a positive experience for people coming to Scotland, Scotland's reputation. I am not sure that I recognise those figures, but I am happy to look at them again. However, the Arnold brand is fairly constant in terms of our position, and we have used that as an index previously. Scotland's population, our trust in public organisations, international relationships and the contribution of development support to other countries. The international relationships is a challenge, because a lot of that is about how we build good partnerships. What the hubs enable us to do is to make sure that we have more sustainable and longer-term relationships. The Dublin hub is the oldest, which has been going for about 18 months—two years now. It was the first one, and it has built up its staff, so we have now got the SDI in that. I will ask Karen to come in shortly in terms of operational level, the business effectiveness and the business plans that have been developed, and how we have oversight of that together with our economy, our colleagues, and our international boards. There are almost two levels. There is the national performance framework and the indicators there. You are quite right. How do we measure what they are meant to be doing? My main interest is in the hubs themselves. Berlin was only opened in April, and we are due to have Paris come on stream shortly. London has been extremely effective, and we know from different metrics whether it is activity, whether it is a membership situation, and whether it is being used not just by Government but by all our partners in trying to make sure that we have a platform to get new lines of business and opportunities. Some of it will be Government to Government, so how do you measure that? How does MD measure that in terms of activity? It opens up doors that allow us to take up other activity. Berlin is a very good example where, again, on the back of the European Championships, when we opened the hub, we had Glasgow Chamber of Commerce and Berlin Chamber of Commerce signing agreements there. I know from my experience from meeting with the Berlin elected members, but also with its business organisations that I have met, or indeed cultural organisations, having a hub there will enable far more activity to continue. However, we are going to make sure that we do that in an operational way in terms of the business plans that we develop. As I said, most of them are just in process of being set up. We don't have that. That is not something that we have published to date, but maybe Karen can give us an operational insight into how the business plans themselves are big and remodeled. Each of the Government hubs does three things. They do Government to Government work, so they are looking at understanding policies, priorities, positions and promoting joint work in areas of mutual interest. The second thing that they do is building cultural relations and exchange, so building international connections and mutual understanding. The third thing is longer-term economic diplomacy. How do we set the conditions for the kind of trade and investment activity that Scottish Development International, for example, and other actors such as our chambers of commerce entertain? The budget largely pays for people, and in some of our offices there are possibly three or four people in one location. London is our exception where we have a much bigger blend of different agencies and public bodies and Government footprint. All of our offices plan every year. They have different levels of maturity, so what we have been doing this year is working out how we get to a position where we are moving from inputs and measuring inputs, for example, how many ministerial visits have been conducted, which is a good proxy sometimes for the sort of activity that goes on, into working out how we really crystallise the outcomes and how we measure them effectively. A lot of work this year to do that on a consistent basis for, as the cabinet secretary said, a different level of maturity across the network. We are aiming to explore ways to make this more public from 1920 onwards. That is very welcome. I said that the current excellent affairs directorate section of the Scottish Government website is very light on information on that, so I think that the more transparency around the work that they do, and good work perhaps, as well. I have been to the Dublin hub earlier this year and met some of the staff there. I believe that it is co-located in the British embassies, is that correct? I wonder if how much joined up approach, given that these offices have no formal diplomatic or consular roles, how you best piggyback off of the diplomatic presence of the British embassies in these locations. Again, I have equally visited STI offices that are co-located in the UK embassies as well. I did often wonder what the separation is between the role of a diplomatic role of an embassy versus the culture or trade role of an development office, and I wondered how they worked together. Relationships are really important. Every time I visit any of the hubs I will meet with the UK ambassador whenever I am in any country. A lot of that is making sure that, in terms of their contribution to our agenda and our understanding of theirs, there is complementarity that you will wear to all possible. Particularly in relation to the trade side—again, it is not my lead at other ministers—there can sometimes be more specialism from Scotland in relation to our particular interests, whether it is in renewables, whether it is on food and drink. When I was in Japan—that was my third visit—in terms of the feedback that we had from the ambassadors, I think that we are very effective in making sure that the STI team—it is not a Scottish Government team, it is an STI team—reaches and their impact is very strong, and they can complement some of the areas that UKTI and the UK embassy are doing. We are very conscious that we are facing the world and that, although we will have differences domestically, it is very important that our responsibility is to secure investment and reputation in the positive relations with Scotland. We do that in a diplomatic way, as we think we can. Thank you very much. We will need to wind up soon. Before we do, I asked earlier, Cabinet Secretary, about the EU funding streams and the overall figure. Is it possible for you to send the committee a list of the areas in your portfolio that depend on EU funding and on the requisite amounts that they depend on? We could. It is not necessarily my portfolio as in Government. It will be more the organisations that we work with, but we have managed to pull that together. We have a regular group that is on the creative cultural side advising us for some time. We have asked them about different issues, so sometimes it can be about import-export issues or potential. We do not know, because we do not know the deal. We have collected, as far as I am aware, the funding streams that agencies within the wider cultural sector benefit from. However, it is less direct to our Government, so most of it would be to my Government budget. It tends to be to the organisations, but we will supply that. Some of that will, I think, have come to you previously in relation to your Brexit inquiry that I am aware of, but I will check and make sure that whatever is up-to-date information that we have, we can… I would like to thank the Cabinet Secretary and her officials for coming to give evidence today. As I said earlier, you will be back in front of us once the budget is published to give evidence and we look forward to that. I now move into private session.