 Welcome. Welcome to the 13th meeting of committee in 2019. I would like to remind members and the public to turn off their mobile phones. Any members of the committee who are using electronic devices to access their committee papers should please ensure that they are switched to silent. We have received apologies today from Tavish Scott MSP. The first item of business on the agenda today is consideration of the Census Amendment Scotland Bill at stage 2, and I would like to welcome Cabinet Secretary Fiona Hyslop and her officials. First, we shall call amendment 1 in the name of the cabinet secretary, grouped with amendments 2, 3 and 4, and the cabinet secretary is to move amendment 1 and speak to all other amendments in the group. Thank you, convener. I'll speak to amendment 1 and the other amendments in this group. In my response to the committee's stage 1 report and during the stage 1 debate on the bill in Parliament on 28 February, I committed to bring forward these amendments to address the issue of the perceived conflation of sex and gender identity in the bill as introduced. The amendments that I've lodged are to deal with this issue, which the committee highlighted. The committee in its report supported a proposal by the equality network to amend the bill, and, as I previously confirmed, our thinking on this was not very different on that approach. I undertook to make sure that my officials engage with stakeholders in developing the amendments, and I can confirm to the committee that national records of Scotland worked with the equality network and others on the specific text of those amendments before they were lodged. National records of Scotland also wrote to other interested stakeholders, including the women's groups that responded to the committee's call for evidence at stage 1, to highlight the suggested amendments and to seek any views that they had on them. No issues were raised by any of those stakeholders' only support. As the committee will know, I lodged those amendments much earlier than is usual. In fact, before we used to recess, to give the committee and others as much notice of them as possible. The amendments presented to you would place transgender matters into schedule 1 of the 1920 act as an entry on its own alongside religion and sexual orientation, and would remove the provision in the bill, which would have added, including gender identity, to the paragraph in that schedule, which contains the word sex. The amendments would also continue to ensure that the census order will be able to make the question on transgender status and history voluntary, which is one of the key purposes of the bill. I am pleased that stakeholders, the committee and Parliament have supported the general principles of the census bill, and it is vital that nobody is or feels in any way compelled to answer the proposed questions on transgender status and history and on sexual orientation. It is right that those questions should be voluntary. It is also critical that all respondents clearly know that voluntary means that there will be no penalty by not answering those questions, and work is in hand by national records of Scotland to ensure that that is achieved. To conclude, the amendments being proposed deal with the issues raised by the committee on the perceived conflation of sex and gender identity and are supported by the stakeholders consulted, as I said earlier. Importantly, amendment 4 now puts transgender status and history explicitly in the long title of the bill. That is why I am pleased to have been able to bring forward those amendments, and I move amendment 1. Thank you very much. Would other members wish to comment? The amendments are very welcome. I think that they reflect the wider debate that was held by the committee, and they provide the necessary clarity to the short bill. We will support the amendments, and I am pleased to see them here this morning. Annabelle Ewing I echo what Claire Baker said. We called for the cabinet secretary to do the very thing that she has now come to the committee and explained that she has done. That is very welcome. As Claire said, it provides the clarity that the committee was seeking. If no other members wish to contribute, can I ask the cabinet secretary? Do you wish to wind up? Just to say that those amendments have approved will allow the focus of the bill to be achieved. There is currently limited evidence on the experiences of transgender people in Scotland and currently no fully tested question with which to collect the information. Whilst the bill does not determine the text of the questions to be asked, it is paving the way for them and allowing them to be voluntary. The census would be taking a leading role to gather the evidence needed to provide support and protection for Scotland's transgender population. The proposed voluntary question on sexual orientation would mirror that already asked in most other Scottish surveys. Can I ask you to formally move amendment 1, cabinet secretary? I did, but I will do that again. The question is that amendment 1 be agreed or we all agreed. I would like to now call amendment 2 in the name of the cabinet secretary, which has already been debated with amendment 1. The question is that amendment 2 be agreed or we all agreed. I now like to call amendment 3 in the name of the cabinet secretary, which has already been debated with amendment 1, cabinet secretary. The question is that amendment 3 be agreed to or we all agreed. However, can you move to amendment 5 on its own request? It's in a group on its own, so— Thank you. Amendment 5. Can I first of welcome the cabinet secretary's comments on the previous amendments? I think that they very much address many of the issues that the committee and many stakeholders raised with the Government, and I think that they are very welcome changes. However, they do, on a practical level, simply make wording changes in replacing gender identity with trans-gender status and history. The purpose of my amendments, when I spoke to the legislation team about it, were really two-fold to address two concerns. One was to make it explicit on the bill that the questions around what was then gender identity would absolutely be voluntary and there would be no conflation between the changes between which questions were statutory and which were voluntary, and I think that that makes that clear in 2BA. Secondly, to address the issue around guidance—we took a lot of evidence around perhaps some of the confusion over the previous census versus the new census—we don't know what the questions will be, we don't know what the wording of the questions will be, and that's yet to be discussed and tested, I think rightfully. Regardless of what the final outcome of that is, I felt it important that we ensure that there is explicit guidance given to completers of the census, that it is clear to them which particulars are required, and indeed it doesn't say specifically amendment, but I would hope that we would give guidance on how people should answer those questions. This arose from the previous debate that we had around conflation of sex and gender identity, but also to make it clear that neglecting to provide those particulars in the census would not make someone liable to a penalty. I'm hoping that it's not a contentious amendment, amendment 5, but what I seek to do is to ensure that guidance is clear given that there is a substantial change from how people to whom this change affects previously answered the census to how they may now answer it, and I hope that that guidance will be robust, and it's clear to them that if they choose not to answer that information that there's no penalty thereafter. Before I call the cabinet secretary, would any other members like to contribute? Sorry, Clare Baker. I was going to ask if Jamie Greene's had any discussions with the bill team. My understanding is that there is always guidance published. I suppose that we'll hear from the cabinet secretary whether it would include what he's proposing to include. It might just be that it's a double way of achieving what is already there. Also, a question that might not be able to answer the cabinet secretary might, as I understand it, be in previous censuses where the question was voluntary. It was stated within the document that you're completing that this question is voluntary. That would seem to be the clearest way to make it clear to people that the question is voluntary, rather than having to look up the guidance to find that information. If they could confirm that it will be stated as it was in 2011, it will also be stated next to the actual question, rather than maybe it notes at the beginning that it will be quite clear that that question is voluntary, which I think is what Jamie is trying to achieve to make it clear to people who are completing the form that it's voluntary. Jamie Greene. Yes, I think that the difference from the new census to the previous one is that I think people were answering the sex question in terms of their lived sex. I think that if you are asking additional questions, all I would like to see is to ensure that the guidance given makes it clear to people completing the new census in whichever wording it eventually ends, that they understand fully how they should answer that question if there is a change. Some of the feedback that I got from meeting stakeholders was that there may have been confusion, perhaps under the previous wording of sex and gender identity. I think that perhaps some of the earlier amendments may tidy that up and make it more obvious. There is guidance that comes with the census already, but I just want to make it clear that that guidance is robust and explicit in terms of how people should complete new additional questions, and that they don't feel pressured that they have to complete any additional questions that the Government has put on a new census. Any other members want to come in? Thank you, cabinet secretary. Thank you, convener, and thank you to Jamie Greene for highlighting this important issue. Indeed, it reflects the main policy driver for this bill, which is to make sensitive questions voluntary. No one should think that they are answering those questions under the threat of criminal penalty. We have made it very clear from the beginning that the purpose of the bill is to remove the criminal penalty from those questions and make them voluntary rather than compulsory. It is for this reason that I agree with the principles of the amendment. However, it is very important that we are explicitly clear to census respondents which questions are voluntary. I would also say that it will be clear before the actual census about which questions are voluntary. That will be set out in the census order in advance, and it will be made even clearer in the census regulations which questions are to be voluntary. However, I actually don't think that the amendment is necessary. Jamie Greene's amendment would place the information on whether or not a question is voluntary and instructions separate from the form. National Records of Scotland have been developing plans for some time to embed the words voluntary into the text of the new questions so that census respondents are not required to cross-refer to separate instructions to find this information out. This is what was done with the religion question in the 2011 census. There is also scope, and I think that that is the point that Clare Baker is making, for the addition of similar direct clear direction in the covering message from the Registered General, which will appear on the front page of the census questionnaire, including making it clear that there will be no liability for a penalty if voluntary questions are not completed. The information will also be covered within the supporting online guidance, which I think that Jamie Greene is referring to being developed for each question. It will be made clear in this guidance again that these questions are voluntary and therefore refusal or neglecting to state particulars does not make a person liable for a penalty under section 8. As you can see, there are already a number of ways in which National Records of Scotland plan to ensure that there is a clear message about the voluntary nature of these questions and that it is communicated to census respondents. On that basis, I do not consider the amendment lodged by Jamie Greene to be necessary, although I do support the principles of what he is trying to achieve. Therefore, I will request that the Registered General, Paul Loh, writes to Jamie Greene in the committee to provide the necessary reassurance on the approach that NRS will be taking to achieve that. I hope that I have provided Jamie Greene and the committee with enough information to provide reassurance that National Records of Scotland are alive to the issue, raised by his amendment, and indeed it is the driving purpose of this bill, and that National Records of Scotland's plans actually go further to communicate this message than the provisions that he is suggesting. On that basis, I would ask Jamie Greene not to press the amendment. Thank you. Jamie Greene, would you like to wind up? Just very briefly, I thank the current sector for its comments and reassurances. I think that naturally I wouldn't want my amendment to have any unintended consequences with respect to what is printed, either on the guidance or on the face of the census itself. I think that those reassurances are very welcome. I think that they address the issues that were the premise of the amendment, and therefore I would not move the amendment when it comes to it. Does any member object to Jamie Greene withdrawing his amendment? I now like to call amendment 6, also in the name of Jamie Greene, in a group on its own. Jamie Greene, would you like to move and speak to amendment 6? Thank you, convener. May I move amendment 6, my name? The general purpose of this really is, I think that the Soul Census Bill has opened up a very wide-ranging social discussion around gender identity issues in Scotland. Given that, at this stage, we don't know, as I said in the previous amendment, what the final look and feel of those questions will be, again, with the kind assistance of the legislation team who I thank, drafted this amendment that we review the potential outcomes of the next census. By that, I mean a number of things. One is that there is a duty to come back and take a stock check of the success or otherwise of the new additional voluntary questions around transgender status and sexual orientation. I think that the purpose of that is to look at a number of things. One is, were they the right questions, were they worded properly or adequately in a way that elicited the best response rates, did the addition of those questions alter the response rates of the census in any way? We spoke as a committee around a need that the primary core of the census is to ensure a maximum response and that no additional questions should affect that in any way. Also, generic feedback from users of the census to whom that section perhaps was relevant, as to whether they felt adequately reflected their needs. I appreciate that, between now and the next stage of proceedings, those questions and wording will go through a tremendous amount of testing and focus. I think that that is very welcome. I still think that it would be helpful if, after the next census takes place, we do some analysis as to whether the implications of the changes that we make affect the overall undertaking of the census and, indeed, make any recommendations for future changes to census, i.e., the addition of new questions, which could be changes to the questions that we are adding now, but, indeed, any other sections that we choose to add as society changes and we feel that it is important that the Government wants more and additional volunteer information from people in general. Again, the intention of it is not to be difficult in any way or to place a new post-legit scrutiny on the Government, but, given the, perhaps on occasions, controversy of the additional questions, it would be helpful to both users of the census and to Government to take a look back and decide if they feel comfortable that the questions that were added meet the needs of the data collection that public services require. Thank you. Before I move to the cabinet secretary, do any other members wish to contribute? Rose Greer. Thank you, convener. It's a question that I'd hoped Jamie Greene, the cabinet secretary, would be able to address. I don't think that any of us disagree with the need for a review after the next census, but my understanding of this amendment is that, and this may simply be a matter of scope in relation to the bill, it would only cover a review of the questions that are changed here, i.e. around sexual orientation and trans status in history. There may be further changes to the next census depending on what is in the census order. Would it not make more sense if any review of the next census were to cover any changes made within it and therefore go beyond the scope of what's in this amendment? Jamie Greene. Rose Greer raised a good point. I think that his suggestion would be helpful. As he rightly pointed out, the problem with section 2A of the amendment says that it must consider the implication of the changes of the census arising out of this act, which specifically relates to the changes that we are making in this act. My understanding was that, from my discussion with the legislation team, I could only do that. I think that widening it to future changes that may be made to the next census would indeed be helpful. I think that that's maybe a technical issue that we could address perhaps later on. If I could change and widen that section, I'd be very happy to. That may address the issues. I wouldn't want to limit it to just that, but it's a good starting point. If there was opportunity perhaps at the next stage of passing the legislation, then if there was a technical ability to widen it, I would be happy to do so. That's perhaps something that I might need to take guidance on. Annabelle Ewing. I appreciate what we're all trying to do to ensure that we're getting it right and that it's doing the job that it's supposed to do. In terms of official statistics, would it be for Scottish ministers to do that, or would it be for the register general to do that? I think that he does complete a report. In terms of the process, I'm not quite clear if this is the best route. I would have thought that it would be for the register general to widen the report as necessary. Jamie Greene. The Scottish ministers must prepare a report on matters that were mentioned and lay that report before the Scottish Parliament. Now, as ministers, I'm sure that with the wide range of assistance that they have from their respective directorates, they may choose to employ the assistance of the register general, but the duty is on the ministers rather than on the register general, and that's the advice that I took as the best way to ensure that Parliament receives that report. Clare Baker. Thank you. I do appreciate the amendment coming forward in what the intent behind the amendment is. However, we did have a wide range of discussion around the census amendment bill, but I'm not convinced that the two areas that you're focusing on, the voluntary questions, was really where the controversy or the debate lay within the committee. I do have some concern that, while you are limited by this bill to have to focus on those two, why there's a specific report attached to those two questions, whether there won't be reports unless it's overall report, there won't be anything specific attached to any other changes. I'm not convinced that I need to single out those two questions to be different from other ones. I don't think that this is where the issues that we discussed around the bill really lay. Jamie Greene, do you want to comment on that? I have just one, yes. I think that that's similar to Ross Greer's feedback. Again, I was offered the impression that I could only request a report to be laid in specific relation to the changes that this act makes as opposed to future acts, which are not yet laid before us, so I agree, actually. I think that it would be helpful to have a much wider review of the next census and report that back to Parliament, but in relation to the bill that we have in front of us, that's about as far as I could take it, so I'm sympathetic to the notion that we could request a wider review post the next census that gives feedback on any changes that is made to the census and the success or otherwise of those changes. Any other members wish to come in? Cabinet Secretary. Thank you, convener, and I understand the rationale behind this amendment and agree with the proposal that there should be evaluation on the important changes to the census arising out of this bill. I would like to highlight that section 4 of the Census Act 1920 already obliges the Registrar General to prepare reports on the census returns and lays these before Parliament. These reports provide information on the data gathered in the census, and in addition, national records of Scotland are already developing plans for an overall report on the census operation, as was the case following the 2011 census, covering a range of matters, including all the new questions. The implications arising from this bill would be part of that. Unfortunately, there are some important issues that mean that I can't support the amendment. The way the amendment is drafted places a one-off obligation on Scottish ministers to report on the implications of the changes to the census brought by this bill, and I'll come back to that later. First, I think that this amendment focuses on the new voluntary questions, sexual orientation and transgender status, and would not encompass other new questions, for example, such as the veterans questions and national records of Scotland applying to report on all the new questions in the 2021 census, not just the new questions made voluntary by this bill, and I think that that's a point made by Ross Greer and Claire Baker. To be fair to Jamie Greene, obviously you had to deal with what's in the scope of this bill, and the purpose of this bill is just about the voluntary questions, and just to make sure that there's no criminal penalty. Secondly, and importantly, Jamie Greene's amendment would place his obligation to report on the Scottish ministers rather than the register general. As I mentioned a moment ago, the obligation to report on census returns and lay these reports before the Scottish Parliament falls on the register general is set out in section 4.1 of the census at review. There are a number of reasons, and that's maybe where Annabel Ewingpite was referring to. There are a number of reasons while placing a new obligation on Scottish ministers to report on the implications of the changes to the census brought about by this bill would be inappropriate. The most significant of which is the involvement of ministers in relating to the production of statistical reports, which is something that must remain independent and is not something that I can support. I believe, and I think that Parliament would agree, that anything involved in the reporting, production and operation of the gathering of statistics should be independent of whoever the Government Minister is of the day. That doesn't stop ministers responding to the national records of Scotland's report. Of course, the committee can, I would expect, review the census and its operations. It's for those reasons that I don't support the amendment. I also consider the amendment to be unnecessary as the register general is already legally obliged to report on the census returns. Again, I will request that the register general, Paul Low, writes to Jamie Greene to provide the committee the necessary reassurance of the approach that national records will be taking to achieve the sensible principles of the amendment. As I said, the register general has a duty and must report to Parliament. I hope that I have again provided Jamie Greene and the committee with enough information to provide reassurance that national records of Scotland are alive to the issues raised by the amendment and that national records of Scotland plans for census 2021 analysis and consideration go further than the provisions that are being suggested in this amendment. I would ask Jamie Greene not to press the amendment. Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. Jamie Greene, would you like to wind up and indicate if you wish to press or withdraw your amendment? Thank you to other members for their comments and feedback. It's very welcome. Also for the cabinet secretary's kind comments on the premise of the amendment and the limited scope of the act. I gratefully received the confirmation that the register general's obligations already include that requirement to report back anyway. However, I guess if I could propose a theoretic scenario that if after the next census the feedback, the strong feedback is that the nature of the wording of the questions or the type of questions that are asked are not widely well received by those to whom those questions matter. What the Government's next steps would be in terms of changes to future census, what the process of that would be and would ministers have the ability to change those questions easily if we deemed that we didn't get it right this time and I think it's important that we do get it right. I think that we all agree that. Perhaps that's what sparked this amendment. I hope that the minister would reflect on that. However, on the information given today I'd be happy to withdraw the amendment. Drawing the amendment. Do any members object to a Jamie Greene withdrawing the amendment? The question is that sections 2 and 3 are agreed to. I now like to call amendment 4 in the name of the cabinet secretary which has already been debated with amendment 1. Cabinet secretary, can you move amendment 4 formally? Formally moved. The question is that amendment 4 be agreed to are we all agreed? The question is that the long title be agreed to are we all agreed? That ends stage 2 consideration of the bill. We shall take a short suspension. Thank you. The next item on the agenda today is an evidence session on Creative Scotland. This morning we are taking evidence on the acting chief executive of Creative Scotland and Isabel Davies, the executive director of Creative Scotland's screen unit. I would like to thank you both for coming this morning. Would you like to make any opening remarks? Thank you very much. I would like to move immediately to the Wavehill report which you commissioned in response to the issues that arose around the RFO process last year to evaluate that funding process. It is fair to say that many of the conclusions of the Wavehill report reflected on the committee's own examinations of the RFO process. What do you think that you have learned from the Wavehill report? Good morning everyone is good to see everybody again. We have digested a lot and I think that it was a very important piece of work when I was at the committee last I reported that we had extended the exploration of that piece of work and the issues in order to make sure that we got the full value from it to inform the funding review which I imagine we may come to later. So a lot of very helpful recommendations in that report. I suppose in my own mind I have been reflecting on it quite heavily and have costed it into three broad areas that will reflect on the full extent of the report and recommendations. The key things that were resonating from my point of view were around strategic considerations external and internal considerations and I will run through what I see as the headlines of that. On the strategic front there is a lot of reflection and useful commentary about the potential of the length of the funding period. A current regular funding is a three-year cycle and the planning horizons of cultural and creative organisations is such that they want to have long planning horizons so that a longer funding period is definitely something to be considered within the funding review. The one-size-fits-all approach we have such a variety of organisations that wish to apply for regular funding from Creative Scotland. Variety of scales, diversity of art forms and so on and so forth across the geography of Scotland that there is something about the one-size-fits-all model which is particularly challenging and ideas around segmenting the process in some way was something else that was very clear. That leads on to the kind of process being seen as too onerous for many organisations so we need to reflect on that as part of the work and there are ideas in here around a two-stage process for example which might be a lighter touch initial part of the process and then those that are able to move forward within that process then invited to submit more detail. Finally on that strategic one there's a lot of debate around those organisations that are too important to fail i.e. what is a national cultural healthy national cultural infrastructure look like and how can we best support that through these kind of processes. On the external there's a lot there around transparency you know the process is perceived to be clear in certain regards and then opaque in other regards I think we've got to really address that one and make sure that the transparency and indeed the accountability of that process over its end-to-end is absolutely clear to people and that people are able to both inform that but also in terms of its design through the funding review but also able to see and understand how the decisions are taken and why we've taken them. There is something in here also from an external point of view about more open engagement during the process I mean I think we need to look at the length of timescales involved in it it was an extended process last time around in part because of budget setting timescales impacted but ultimately I think the design of the process should be as focused as possible in a way that enables us to explain as we go what is happening and people have the ability to interact with that and finally on the external there's a point about guidelines on acceptable contact and I've noted before that it was a bruising experience for everybody all round internal and external to the organisation and I think we operate as Creative Scotland with a very clear sense of professional conduct that we need to understand and expect that that is reciprocated when we have very challenging news to give on the internal final set of thoughts for me in terms of key learning points from the staff point of view there was a lot of training and support in place for them I think what is clear that we can and should do more to support staff and training around these processes they are big all organisational processes I think it's important that staff feel that something about better communications flow across the organisation so that people have a greater understanding of what's happening how and who's involved and also something very important which came through highlighted through the complaints on the process the last time about the quality assurance work so ensuring that the consistency and quality of the assessments is quality assured to stand up to the scrutiny ultimately when we communicate the decisions and the final one internally is about the dynamic between staff the executive of the organisation and the board to understand very clearly the roles there and who's doing what and how it's happening I think there was clear reflection in the report about the tensions at the very end part of the process which are captured in the report and I think we've got to be much clearer about how the end-to-end process works to make sure that that is clear and understood as we go through it and indeed to get to the right conclusion what's ultimately as important for me though is not the process itself there's something about pre-application the process itself but actually the post-application aftercare the post-decision aftercare is a very important consideration here in terms of us being able to sensitively engage with organisations who are disappointed in the outcome of their application I think we would anticipate that we're always going to be seeing attention between the available financial resources for these kinds of regular funding programmes and the quality and demand outstripping that so we're always going to have disappointment that we need to manage opening the organisation and the process up to help design that process so that people have confidence in it and then seeing and understanding how it operates as I say ultimately when we need to communicate decisions we'll have a greater understanding about why we've reached the decisions that we have thank you very much can I go back to the beginning when you talked about the need for long planning horizons and you suggested a two-stage process and we would now know that you're going to undertake further reviews and consultations which I think members will talk about later but given that you are going to put some sort of new process in place and that you have indicated that people need organisations need long planning horizons what will you do to ensure that given that process of change that they have time to prepare for any change? Yeah I think what's really important to recognise as change progresses and I'll be happy to speak more about that in more detail the fuller programme of change it takes time to get the depth of change for the longer term and what's really important is that we're doing that in the context of continuing to deliver the services and the business of Creative Scotland that people need within the sector and we can't disrupt that however imperfect people see the current models of operation there is a lot of good work that the organisation continues to do and of course we can get better so we've got to be able to as we go through the change process particularly on funding, communicate engage people around what that is, where we're at and how they can inform it but also then once we're clear through that set of conversations how we have identified the ultimate destination that we can work out a model of transition between the current model and the new model and do that appropriately in a way that continues to offer without disruption but creates a very clear route path to get there we don't know what that is yet but the conversations that we're about to embark on will help inform One of the big observations from the committee was that the introduction of the touring fund the last time was done without proper consultation so it was a change in the middle of the process that people weren't fully informed about and I take it that you know we will not have a repeat of that process No, as I said, the opening up is intended to do that but just on the touring fund I think it is a good example that first the initial handling could have been better undoubtedly the actual process that then ensued in terms of the development of the touring fund in conjunction very much with the sector to design it and then be part of the decision making continues and I think it's a good model in terms of how actually we would want to move forward in being able to involve people in the design of these processes Another recommendation of the Wave Hill report is around the support for key organisations that are deemed to be integral to the national cultural infrastructure and you'll be aware of the row that was very aware of the row around the Scottish Youth Theatre funding for example Are you in dialogue with the Scottish Government over that particular area of the creative sector that are considered to be very important to the national cultural infrastructure and how you can ensure that they are properly looked after under any future funding process I mean we're very keen and understand that people have got different views on what the national cultural infrastructure means I think for us it's important that we have the ability to engage with all of that I think the tensions are inevitably there about the limitations on our resources and understanding that we are and the demand against that and understanding that we are one part of an overall equation here in terms of being able to support the national infrastructure I mean we've had discussions with the Scottish Government about the Wave Hill report and its recommendations and those conversations will be continuing as we progress through the funding review but I think a lot of the emphasis here is on improving our processes I think another key part of the equation is the available resources within our direct budgets to be able to support the things that we would want to support and again we may come to that as part of the evidence session today Just quickly did your discussions with the Government include the Cabinet Secretary personally not for me directly in relation to this but we have regular contact with the senior officials in the sponsored department on an on-going basis my chair Robert Wilson does have regular meetings with the Cabinet Secretary and I do know that they have discussed it right when was the Wave Hill report published on Creative Scotland's website and because we were told last year that it would be provided to the committee but it wasn't provided to the committee I'm sorry for that it was a simple oversight it was published on our website last December so I'd written to the committee early December to give you an update and we were just about to publish it at that point it was an oversight that we didn't actually send you the copy of the report at that point so I do apologise for that we did it subsequently since last December and indeed we've just republished it as part of the supporting material to inform the conversations that we're about to have on funding review have you provided a full copy of the Wave Hill report to the individuals and organisations that it consulted and when was that done we to my knowledge haven't done that directly we have pointed people to it I believe that it's had traffic from the consultants direct themselves online but we didn't issue it as such to the consultees that was in the hands of the consultants but you commissioned it would you be issuing it to the consultees we promoted it more widely as I say it was published on the website last December and we've pointed people to it and certainly people have been engaging with it cos they've been talking with us about it but you don't have a plan to highlight it or send it out to those who were consulted as part of the process no not directly as I say that would normally be something handled by the consultants but we've certainly been very public about it in terms of its positioning on the website and its promotion as I say we've just done it again I've got a brief supplementary from Stuart McMillan on this topic Stuart McMillan the point regarding the national cultural infrastructure was touched upon and when we had the debate in the chamber in Tuesday regarding musical tuition Tavish Scott raised the point regarding how important the fiddle is to Shetland's traditions and also across Scotland the issue of the bikepipes is this an aspect that you feel that organisations and associations who actually help not so with these instance but other traditional instruments should be supported Absolutely and we do support many of those in relation to our work in Gaelic and Scots a whole range of organisations supported there within regular funding as an example but also so for example Faishan Agail Faish Roshan who are very much supporting this activity in communities right across Scotland and very much focused on young people too so yes, it's an important aspect of our work I think instrumental tuition is complementary to the work that we do on YMI for example which is a comprehensive programme right across 32 local authorities reaching the most recent figures where nearly a quarter of a million young people and that's broad music participation and music making and it's complementary to the instrumental music service within local authorities so there's a whole range of facets to this that we pursue Okay, thank you Thank you very much, Claire Baker Thank you, convener I wanted to pick up on some of the national cultural infrastructure issues in opening you described the current funding system of that you described the limitations of a one size fits all and understand that some of the feedback that has been around are there some organisations that are too important not to fund excluding the national performance companies would a change a model like that be possible within the financial resources that you distribute at the moment and if there was to be a move towards a kind of different types of funding of models would what factors would come into consideration how would you decide which companies were just too important to fail the convener mentioned the Scottish Youth Theatre it's maybe not that easy to identify what companies would come into that category I know it's early stages because understand this morning you've also announced you're doing regional consultations on funding models with with arts organisations and with the public so also the final point of this is what are the timescales attached is this an idea that's just been floated forward in that direction so I very much expect that this will be a key part of the conversations that we'll have with people you know I think it's a very very important point about what is a healthy infrastructure across the geography of Scotland as I said there are many different views and perspectives on what people would want to see or expect to be within that kind of infrastructure I think we need to recognise that regular funding is only one aspect of it as Creative Scotland there's only one aspect of the broader support network for artists and organisations across the country as I say I very much would see it coming into the conversations in order to debate that and get to a form of view on what that should look like but the start of your question is about resources and I've already mentioned that I think there are deep challenges there for us as an organisation our current income comprises two parts it's roughly £92 million a year two thirds of that is from Grant and Ed from the Scottish Government and one third from National Lottery of the two thirds from the Scottish Government roughly half of that is restricted funds for specific purposes for programmes that the Government wants us to run so the Youth Music Initiative Expo fund cashback for creativity for example the other half of the Grant and Ed the unrestricted fund is what we use to support other activity now what's important to understand is that we're in a situation currently where 86% of that unrestricted Grant and Ed from the Scottish Government grant is what's funding 121 regularly funded organisations currently it leaves very little room to manoeuvre in terms of the current Grant and Ed balance within that equation but it also throws more pressure on to the National Lottery fund and I feel very keenly that the National Lottery has at its heart public benefit and also the principle of additionality which is there to protect the fact that it should not be substituting for Government or other funds so I think we've got something in the equation here which is to be looked at in terms of how we can deploy our overall resources we would always want to advocate very clearly for enhanced resources that are directly at the disposal of both Creative Scotland and other partners in the overall equation but at the moment it feels very very challenged our Grant and Ed budget is just short of 0.2% of the overall Scottish Government budget now if you set that in the context of the broader creative industries as a whole which include the art forms and arts and culture more broadly the creative industries in Scotland are one of the key growth sectors within the economic strategy for Scotland currently 15,500 creative businesses within Scotland employing 77,000 people and contributing 4.4 billion GVA to the economy now we're delivering that as part of an overall equation with direct resources of 63 ish million from the Scottish Government overall now we've got a very supportive Scottish Government and Cabinet Secretary and we're very grateful for all that they continue to do to recognise culture and creativity and the resources that are there but it's very clear to us that given the demand that we see coming through the organisation every day and the limitations on our resources and indeed the frustrations that we have about a desire to fund even more enhanced resources would definitely enable a transformational effect within what culture and creativity means to the country and I speak about that beyond culture itself I think that's about cultural value yes but it's also about social value and economic value so I think that there are deep challenges there in terms of the available resource versus the very clear demand and I think that we're at quite a sensitive tipping point because of the contraction of other resources that are available within the equation local authorities in particular where we're seeing contraction of their resources and they are a very key partner for us in being able to support the most vibrant cultural life across the country Thank you Obviously the committee will be looking more in-depth at some of those issues as we flush launch an inquiry into Arts Fund Can I maybe just stay on infrastructure and ask if there's an update on the Port of Leith studio developments is there any further information you can give us in terms of the tendering process or timescales or any update It might be for Isabel Davidson Thank you very much Where we are at now you'll be aware that we launched the tender process in November We were keen by the end of April to be able to announce an operator We're not quite in that position yet it would be wonderful to tell you today who the operator is but we are in very advanced negotiations It's a complex process and we will come back to you as soon as we can on that It's a project that makes advances every day We're feeling very confident about it but we're not quite there yet so that's good to hear You're hopeful that maybe by the summer we would possibly have a clear picture of developments Yes, certainly We've said as well that we're very hopeful that it can still be operational by the end of this year so certainly we will come back to you as soon as we can We haven't set a date for that but certainly by summer we'll be in a position to come back with more news on that I'd like to say as well that this is in the context of a huge uplift in the number of inquiries that are coming to Scotland wanting to use that facility when it's available We're feeling very keenly the heated market for studio space across the world so it will be very exciting for Scotland to be able to take its place in that global picture That's very welcome and while the largest studio infrastructure is something that the committee has been calling for for a while and we had the inquiry last year Is there other work being done to try and develop other capacity throughout Scotland whether that's a different scale than what we're hoping for in the port of Leith but what other projects are under way? Yes, absolutely We'd hate to acknowledge the need for a variety of space not only for those large scale productions that may land in Bath Road but for TV production of high-end TV scale but also for local domestic returnable shows as well We are working with our screen commission in the sector visiting every site that is put in front of us We know that there are a number of people including Stuart who have highlighted space across Scotland and we'll look at every opportunity to find space I think that the model of conversions is a really good one if we can make that work It has to be said that there are a number of factors around what a client is looking for be that a local TV show or something that's coming in from the other end country, for example, or from the US So there's a technical spec and there's a need for space to be in a particular area to have the right connectivity with regard to proximity of crew rail lines and airports So we are looking at a number of factors that will determine whether or not studios can work You'll be aware of some of the privately led projects that are out there So Salters Gate is the latest one that we're very hopeful we're working with along with a number of other inquiries that we get on a regular basis So in addition to promoting existing space across Scotland that can be converted at short notice that's something that's an ongoing piece of work by a screen commission Of course that's in tandem with the range of support at Screen Scotland be that financial incentive such as a production growth fund such as the RECI fund that is another service offered by the screen commission that makes Scotland a very attractive place so that offer and its totality is what we're able to offer to companies looking to set up new space and indeed to clients looking at the range of facilities that they might use either temporarily or on a more long term basis The final point I suppose is that of course given the strictures on public funding the amount of it and also the restrictions around state aid we do need to see bids come forward that are driven by the private sector the only way that these things are going to work so bringing the best industry intelligence to that piece is something that we're very committed to doing Thank you very much, Ross Greer Thank you, convener Just to start off with wondering if you could give us a quick update on the recruitment process for the permanent chief executive post So it's really a question for the board but of course I'm pleased that the board have fully mandated me to drive forward the change programme and that has the support of the Scottish Government My understanding is that there will be an open process for the permanent chief executive recruitment and that would be taking place at some point in the near future but in the meantime I'm very firmly in the seat making sure that we can drive forward the change confidently with the board Thank you To move back to issues around screen and specifically the leaf development Isabel, in an exchange of letters on you'd mentioned to myself that there was going to be a meeting with the Association of Film and TV producers in Scotland in April regarding issues that they raised about the development I wonder if you could give us an update on how that meeting went I haven't been present at a meeting we've reached out a number of times to AFTPS unfortunately they haven't come to the table yet but we'd really like to meet them The issue of industry consultation was just having a look through the business plan this morning I was wondering if you could take us through what industry consultation there was in the development of the overall plan Thank you The first thing I'd like to say is that our business plan has come directly out of the work that was done by industry in the lead up to this so this is very much, if you like, the son or the daughter of the collaborative proposal that was put together by industry and government and we're very grateful for that blueprint set out very, very clearly industry need and a number of recommendations so the business plan is the expression if you will of the next stage of that which is our ability to implement those ideas and overlay them with the developing landscape as it comes forward and looking at how we are able to take forward in a practical way all of those ideas have come forward so industry has been involved the whole way throughout I started at the beginning of September and I have been talking very constantly with industry who have been, I have to say, very, very supportive they have indicated by and large extremely happy with the direction of travel the other interventions that we have are that since the birth of Screen Scotland we have three board members at Creative Scotland who have very long and illustrious careers in TV who have been extremely dynamic presence for us as we've developed the business plan they're present at the screen committee and they've been on the phone and really I have a hotline to all of them if I need it as does my team to make sure that we are checking in always with industry best practice beyond that you'll notice that there are eight areas of delivery within the plan each of these has been taken forward by groupings of Screen Scotland staff so that may well be within the Creative Scotland sort of lead partnership but very often in partnership with the other members of Screen Scotland so for example the skills strategy will be working very closely with Scottish Funding Council, Skills Development Scotland and of course with that we have industry around the table and we also have the sector around the table so for example the creative media network which is now the one stop shop for all of the higher and further education colleges delivering film and TV skills in Scotland which is much around that table so I would say we're pretty porous in the way that industry is able to communicate with us final point is my email address and phone number on our website so I'm getting very used to being approached which is extremely welcome and people are finding hopefully that's a nice open process if I can't answer the question myself then we have a number of specialists within the team now who are able to help Grant, the plan mentions the intention to be standing with channel 4 I imagine similar to the model with the BBC could you give us an update on progress towards that and if there's a date it's expected to be signed by I don't think we've landed on a date but the conversations are very much on going we're very very happy to have the BBC MOU out there into the world and that's been well received I think it provides a model in the sense that it's held up a very ambitious but very achievable target we believe for the number of Scottish originated programmes to achieve a network release across the UK but it also lays out steps as to how we get there talent progression is a really important part of how we will achieve that together with the BBC and with industry so in that regard it's a template but we're also very keen that it's not a cookie cutting exercise and that's something that we need to work with with channel 4 which has other specialisms that may or may not reflect where we go with the BBC actually channel 4 and BBC have been very collegiate about where there is common ground as well so there may well end up being areas in which we all work together beyond channel 4 there are a number of other partners in the mix who may well want some form of strategic relationship some are telling us they don't want an MOU it doesn't really work for them to have some piece of paper that they'd much rather work in a more dynamic way and that's fine too but there are a number of conversations on going on TV and other of the platforms that have failed there's a helpful section in here around business support and there's some quite ambitious targets not just on this plan but in Screen Scotland's overall output you've stated some quite ambitious targets around attracting international productions in particular I was wondering what consideration you've given towards ensuring that business support given to international productions has a long-term positive impact on the domestic industry here in Scotland and in person's elsewhere of the requirement to receive financial support is dependent on an obligation to take on a number of apprentices during the production etc have there been considerations of any measures such as that? Yes absolutely I think for international production the financial support is mostly predicated on the production growth fund and absolutely that is a selective fund it is based in part on spend so we set very aggressive targets very ambitious targets for a spend ratio for productions coming into Scotland but not only that any production that is in receipt of that money only gets it after a very robust conversation with the team around what it's going to deliver in terms of benefits to the local industry so that might well be crew it might be bringing on new apprentices as you say it might be giving opportunities for progression for crew from Scotland so it's we like the design of it being in part very clearly about elevating the amount of spend that Scotland will receive but not solely being based upon that in order that we can work with the grain of every production that comes to us and negotiate a really good deal for Scotland so that's a key way in which we will ensure that the local industry benefits from the incoming production it's a real challenge it's something that the UK is facing overall I've seen this from previous work that I've done before coming up to Scotland that the runaway train that is international production and the very very overheated market and the huge numbers of spend that come in can be a challenge when you're looking at capacity issues where in the end even in a country with as advanced an industry as the UK where we have an exceptionally deep crew base you still end up with a competition for crew and that's something that we're very very alive to as we develop all of the initiatives around growth in tandem so you've mentioned business development supports and that's absolutely right but it's very very ally to a skills strategy which in turn is ally to an infrastructure strategy that says that you can't think that we'll build and they will come we have to build the base around that in order that we can support the work with local indigenous high-end skills at the same time Thanks and just one final question for this time Just very briefly, I think it's quite clear from the plan the role that a number of other agencies are playing in this I was wondering if you could detail a little bit more the role of SDI and what discussions you've had with them so far about the role they'll play SDI have been extremely helpful and supportive we have worked with them with Scottish Enterprise about the role that they can play in international promotion of Scotland it's something that I think we'll see more of as we develop an international strategy which is at the moment focused very much on bringing in those international productions of Scotland but I think that there's more that can be done to promote Scotland on the international stage not least as a very strong European partner in practical terms around production in terms of exporting our content and our talents I see a role in the future for SDI and that's something we'll take up with them in the future Thank you You've talked about the need to identify in creative Scotland that we have the sustained support and the empowering communities and that's been talked about how you manage that and that's also been the need to ensure that you're not too reliant on volunteers and you've identified that yourself but when you look at the skills development and the strategy that you're putting forward how can you ensure that that does happen and that you do have that creative business environment and you're supporting the creative business and you're getting the creative business people actively involved so my first question would be how are you achieving some of these challenges of making sure that that does take place The work that we're doing in the broader creative industries not just screen is very much about how to grow sustainable businesses and what we're actively involved in is looking at how we can provide the right forms of support that creative businesses need that's a conversation with Scottish Enterprise, Business Gateway HIE and so on because I think at the moment there's a feeling that there's a complexity of the offer there that people don't really understand or can navigate very easily and achieve access to the kind of business development support that they require so very much is part of the overall strategy for us in terms of creative industries to work with partners to get in place a more effective business development support network more broadly it's a work in progress I think there's been a number of collective conversations with partners about the current forms of support but what's very interesting at this point in time is that Scottish Enterprise itself who's a key partner here is going through a strategic refresh and the services that it's going to be offering and that's a very positive direction of travel from our point of view and I've had a recent very positive conversation with the chief executive of Scottish Enterprise recently including in this regard and what we're agreed on is that we need to get around the table again to look at this in more detail with the relevant people in order to work out how we can get a plan in place to strengthen what is already there and improve that offer You've got a good template already what you've achieved in the past but can I ask about how you're prioritising the resources that you have to ensure that that skill base and that development is now taking place because as you go forward and you've identified any opportunities you have but you've also identified the challenges that are placed upon you and budgetary challenges are one of the biggest to ensure that you can have that broad cape ability of ensuring that you do bring in the skills and you do bring in that development in that process so how are you going to prioritise the resources in ensuring that that does take place It's an undoubted challenge I come back to the point that I made earlier about general resources that are directly at the disposal of creative Scotland and I've already shared that in our grant in aid part of the equation 86 per cent of that is invested in 121 organisations and we would and could do a lot more with more investment so there's a combination of things here I think we would always want to advocate for more direct resources in the hands of creative Scotland but part of our approach is also to understand that the work that we do is very much a partnership approach taking those conversations forward in a way that unlocks the opportunities and potential resources in other partner organisations that play into the equation overall and that's certainly the approach currently in the arrangements with Scottish Enterprise in terms of that direction of travel and it's all about managing how you review and how you monitor that progress and to see what is actually being achieved because there's a big gambit for you to take on board but at the same time you need to prioritise and you need to be quite focused as to what you can achieve and to ensure that you do get that success or the easy win or the gain initially that then builds on that that gives you the confidence and gives others the confidence in you managing to progress that so how what plan of action is there to ensure that that monitoring that progress does take place and it's absolutely clear about what it is that we're keen to progress then we can understand the best mechanisms to monitor progress and delivery and so on so I think it's one step at a time at the moment I think we've very firmly got our sights set on this as a priority but I think going back to the broader point about creative industries I think it's worth the committee knowing that we hold this brief in relation to the creative industries and I've set out earlier 15,500 businesses 77,000 employees and GVA 4.4 billion to the economy there are no direct resources in Creative Scotland from Scottish Government in relation to that work we do it from within existing resources at the moment we've got a team of seven on that agenda directly with a discrete budget of half a million pounds from national lottery funding so there's a something within our overall conversations here which are partly about strategic focus and I agree with you about priorities being much clearer about who and what we're here for and what our priorities are and the available resources to enable us to move forward confidently in a way that's directly in the hands of Creative Scotland to deliver against the brief that we've got and not always so relying on partnership working which is time intensive and unlocking the other resources available in other agencies and public bodies important though that remains too the new entrance into the industry is vitally important too and the support mechanisms that you can give them to ensure that they have the idea or the potential but they need that support and without that support they cannot achieve their goals so you have to try and bridge that gap and support them through that because you want the industry to continue to cultivate and expand and regenerate itself but that is a very difficult thing to do if you do not have all the pieces together to make it the jigsaw fit and ensure that you can provide them with what is required for them to expand and unlock their potential and an important point here is that we've our director of creative industries is actually a partnership role between ourselves and Scottish Funding Council deliberately in that regard to be able to bridge create bridges as it were in terms of the skills development pipeline and that's been going very well for both organisations and very much hope that that would continue as part of this overall equation Thank you Thank you very much, Keith Gibson Thank you very much, convener Miss Monroe and David Goodmorning Miss Monroe, you said that Creative Scotland has 63 million pounds from the Scottish Government and you said that this was frustrating and obviously having these limitations and resources what do you believe the optimum funding level should be for Creative Scotland and what would that deliver? You talked about the £4.4 billion What kind of gearing effect do you think there would be if there was additional funding for Creative Scotland in terms of additional employment on GVA? We're reflecting on this at the moment in terms of the funding review just looking back at our own funding equation understanding its impacts and outcomes and so on I think we absolutely recognise the pressures right across the public sector and beyond in terms of private sector and so on but what we know and understand for example is that our investment through the regular funding organisations represents about a quarter of the overall turnover so there's a gearing effect there in terms of direct leverage on investment for those individual organisations and of course there's what they are able to then go on themselves in terms of cultural, social and economic value to the country the figures around Edinburgh festivals in particular are well known in terms of hundreds of millions in that regard What's the optimal good question in terms of international comparators I think we're broadly the same give or take in relation to spend per head of population across the UK slightly lower in some regards but when you look at international comparators it becomes quite stark Ireland, Norway, Sweden spend per head of population in terms of culture and creativity is markedly higher by some degree I think we're realistic we've got a very supportive Scottish Government and Cabinet Secretary and we realise the pressures on these other areas of public budgets but less than 0.2% of the overall Scottish Government budget feels that it's not in tune with the actual potential here in terms of creative industries as a whole being a growth sector for Scotland as a whole so realistically to get it even up to 0.5% would be transformational enough in itself it would take us up to 160 or so million in 0.5% of the budget overall which in real terms is a lot of money but in terms of a £34.5 billion Scottish Government budget to deliver the breadth of what creative Scotland is expected to do it's certainly taken us in the right direction it's always easy to call for another 100 million but it's more difficult to say where in the Scottish budget that should obviously come from when I was convener friend as we always said to people if you're looking for additional money you have to tell us where you think it should come from in the Scottish budget I'm not going to ask you to do that specifically nor am I going to talk about the per capita spend across Scotland because as we discussed before there's huge disparities within the country but your evidence I think is an interesting the open project funding there were 154 million pounds in terms of bids 2 million was awarded and of 1177 applications only 493 were awarded so clearly more people are looking for funding so in that regard EU funding for projects apparently has been a minimum of £23 million of EU funding in the last decade and that obviously is likely to disappear now there's a proposed UK shared prosperity fund being at least considered allegedly by the UK Government it was supposed to be a consultation before Christmas it didn't actually happen we don't know where we are on that have you had any indication of whether that will come through and if not how that gap will be plugged will you be looking for additional funding from the Scottish Government because what you've basically said is that this is needed to support development of creative sectors of significant investment is not to be lost and the Scottish Government funding has been critical I think there have been consulting on the shared prosperity fund and we've certainly been the team in creative Scotland have been engaging in that regard what we're advocating for because it's not clear is hasn't taken place there have been conversations about it that we've been taking part and what we're not clear about is whether it will be UK wide and whether it's participating very strongly in those conversations that it needs to be UK wide and we'll continue to do that I think it is important to recognise the value of what comes through in terms of European funding because that 23 million that you refer to that's come into the sector two thirds of that is actually from non-cultural budgets so it is an important overall component part of the equation here I'll be concerned about it I was looking at the business plan that we got this morning and I've been listening to your comments about the need and it's emphasising the business plan to do more to create apprentices, nurture Scottish talent, give experience to Scottish crews etc but when I was looking through it I looked at page 13 and again at page 21 and I noticed on page 13 funding has been provided for a film Scottish based director and freedom fields on page 21 indicated by it was about Libya, I'm not sure if it was made in Libya but it was again a Scottish based producer how does spending money overseas effectively help to deliver more optimise the spend in terms of Scottish screen development because to me it seems odd that if you're trying to attract investment here and develop films and talent here that money is being awarded so that people can make films somewhere else It's an ecosystem there's a very well-worn network matrix of international funding that works together this is bound together by a number of international co-production treaties which are signed by countries in order to allow our skills and talent to exchange and to grow and I think that the net benefit to Scotland is absolutely in favour of working in that way of course our talent and our skills travel in Cuba so the producer, the director, the writer were Scottish, they work with some of their Scottish crew and some of that work comes back to Scotland it's not a zero sum game so the reciprocity of that of course is that Scotland then receives incoming production so we had a Polish crew land called Mr Jones so that was the luminary at Newscar Holland coming into Scotland Scotland needs to be playing at the international table in order to grow that base and the production spend in that regard, in that particular model of co-production also extends into the export value of those films as well so in co-production treaties or in co-production more generally what you see is a mix of production crew and talent coming together also the distribution side as well so as you'll know a film industry can't survive in isolation the audiences aren't large enough in Scotland or indeed in the UK for a film industry to be sustainable without looking for international audiences as well so for Scotland to be making films that have an international appeal that attract international distribution is how finance flows into the business and how indeed finance flows into Scotland on Scottish soil as well so the jobs and the growth in any case regardless of where that activity is taking place still return benefits to Scotland but there is a bigger ecosystem there which allows Scotland to play in that international arena and to attract international finance who will consist of its films That's great, well thanks very much for that I think that's really interesting I'd like to have seen more of that in the business plan just to explain that because I think it's quite important for people looking at a two dimensional way I don't think you really see that I noticed that you have a range of screen funds available, nine different funds from broadcast content fund right down to professional development fund it seems to me nine funds rather than the budget you have seems quite a lot of funds and are these in silos or is there more flexibility because if I was deciding to produce something here I'm looking because there's nine different funds they apply to that one, they apply to that one would it not be better to have one general fund in which you could apply I mean under a different criteria I'm obviously open you'll have given me a good explanation here but it just seems quite on the surface again quite restrictive to have nine separate funds for the fairly limited resources you have but I thought it'd just been one fund you could apply to for whatever it is you require funding for I suppose I'll come back to the fact that this plan has been built on a blueprint that was put together by industry and that there is a range of need it's quite a complex business I think that film and TV share a number of commonalities but they also have points of divergence and in order to respond with a really clear set of priorities that someone can apply to and know why they haven't received the money and that they can make their case I think that's actually rather important if anything I think my take is that we move more towards specialism that means specialist staff that are really across the particularities of the distribution picture audience picture those are specialists in production and skills those are specialists in talent development that for me is the way in which you build a successful model that makes us more than the sum of our parts makes us more than just a bunch of people who write cheques that we have more value to add by being very very clear and targeted about what it is that Scotland needs how then we best support it to come forward our guidelines are always a work in process if people are confused about what it is that we're asking for through these various funds then that's something that my team is really ready and spends a lot of time interpreting and helping to support the industry to understand but I think it serves the industry best to be really clear about what our priorities are and then to put resource behind it where necessary and canatic no, quite, absolutely thank you very much just briefly in terms of all the funds that you've listed is there a document that says the amount of money that's attached to each of these funds well yes we've put numbers against each of those figures in the plan before you and of course with regard to the production funds that figure's very publicly available so that the film development and production fund is £10 million a year broadcast content fund is £3 million a year production growth fund is £2 million a year we do have some flexibility to move lots of funding across years, productions are very lumpy business as they say so productions don't fall neatly into 4.0 million pounds per year so that's where you might see in some of those numbers a little bit of movement and I think that's a good thing that works with the grain of industry practice too overall we've worked to cost each area of the plan of course we're subject to final budget approval as any public body is at this particular point but we have a costed plan against each of these items sorry can I just add that that will be published ultimately once we get formal confirmation of our budget from the Scottish Government okay and for every single one I mean I know some of them we already know that every single one will have a budget beside it okay thank you Annabelle Ewing thank you convener good morning and thank you very much for coming in this morning I'm just going to ask Mr Monroe a procedural question we noted the article in the Herald this morning announcing the reporting on the announcement of your intention to proceed with consultation on the funding going forward and that there are to be consultation workshop meetings in various locations obviously in the article it just gave a flavour of some of the destinations can I clarify whether Creative Scotland will be holding one of these meetings in Fife I believe so I will just double check the okay well you can it's important because it's important to cover as much of Scotland as you possibly can and Fife obviously is a very important part I think Claire would agree with that what I will do is double check that but what I would say is that this is one set of conversations well indeed but presumably if Fife was not on the list at the moment you would want to now add it I would have thought probably further to this question but moving on to a broader issue although retaining some of the principle underlying my previous question in your approach recognise the importance of closer collaboration as between national and local bodies and that would be essential to deliver on your objectives and so I just wonder if you could give a flavour of what you foresee in that regard how do you plan to ensure this closer collaboration as between the national and the local absolutely would reinforce the point about the importance of local government within the overall support infrastructure for healthy cultural offer across Scotland we in many regards have engagement with local government in different forms regularly I think what we recognise though is that as things are shifting in terms of public finance in particular and I mentioned earlier that there are key pressures now that are demonstrating that it feels like there's a bit of a tipping point in relation to cultural support we need to look at a more strategic approach to understand what those issues are with local government directly and have conversations with them about what the solutions around that might be so we're doing two things as part of that programme of work this year whilst we continue to do all the other things that we do anyway one is a very specific piece of work to research with local authorities and other partners and stakeholders what the challenges actually are to understand those issues and once we've done that to gather everybody around them to have a discussion about how we can move to more effective collaboration in a changing world and ensure that we have got the most effective relationships there so that piece of work is about to be commissioned next week it will report in the autumn and we will be publishing it in due course and we fully anticipate that we host an event for discussion around that very specific piece of work in due course the other thing that we're doing is prompted by a very immediate piece of work that we've been part of around the cultural cities inquiry and Dame Shona Reid from Scotland was part of the overall steering group for that tomorrow in path we are convening Scotland's cities as local government and Shona Reid will be there too as part of the conversations to understand that report and the principles within it and the ideas within it in terms of new and different ways of thinking about how culture can be supported to best effect in this changing environment that we're going through so there will be a lot of good value coming out of that the one thing that I would say around that though is that although it's focused on cities because the nature of the cultural cities inquiry, the principles within it can equally be deployed across the geography of Scotland in terms of the ideas and thinking within it be that in terms of regions or indeed individual local authorities themselves so I think that will be part of the conversation that we have tomorrow and we'll see where that goes in terms of next steps okay thank you for that a couple of follow up points questions so the first piece of work that you referred to looking at the position vis-a-vis local authorities in general, what is the timing for that when do you expect to we're issuing the commission next week and it will take place in terms of its research and consultation over the course of the summer with a view to concluding in the autumn so by the end of this year we will have a report and as I said we will be publishing that report and subsequent to its conclusions and recommendations we'll then understand next steps by way of how we take it forward thereafter and the cities, the cultural cities work is that on a more accelerated basis tomorrow the actual meeting itself again dependent on where that goes we'll understand what the next steps on that may be okay and tomorrow will just be cities reps attending I get that it's important that culture is available all over Scotland including of course in our cities but I just wonder when you said that you would anticipate that the work in the cultural cities inquiry could extend across Scotland, other urban areas rural, remote but I suppose there would be an element of caution with that because by the very nature of other areas which are not cities there are other issues prevalent and I would hope that that would not be lost in that discussion because that then would defeat your recognition of the need for closer collaboration between national and local if one just sort of sought to apply wholesale the outcome of your cities work to the rest of Scotland that may not actually suit the rest of Scotland so hopefully that's very much at the forefront of your endeavours with regard to cities cultural work Yes, I mean what I'm suggesting is that there are interesting ideas and principles there that could be of value in other parts of Scotland not just cities but that's absolutely, tomorrow is a starting point in terms of the conversations and I'm sure this will come up but we will thereafter see and understand what we may want to do next by way of taking anything within the conversations from tomorrow forward in due course and then I've got a question if I may for Isabel Davis but to Mr Brno the work then the first piece of work that you mentioned as regards local authorities in general would that involve all local authorities? You plan to work with all, okay? Absolutely, and indeed we may also look at reference points beyond Scotland in terms of anything that's relevant Thank you. Isabel Davis, so in terms of one of the strands of work of Screen Scotland so the film festivals fund and I'm very pleased indeed to see that in my constituency of Coutinbyth Kelty will be launching their inaugural film festival on the 24th of May just a wee blurb for them it will last Friday's Ashley Sunday it looks like an excellent programme and I know that they receive funding from the challenge fund I understand there's a further round of this fund upcoming and how do you ensure that people are aware of that because obviously the point would be to involve as many local communities be it my constituency or anybody else's constituency so that they were aware of that and they could take a view whether that's something that they could get involved in We have a very lively comms team and they have been expanded as a result of Screen Scotland so we rely quite a lot on the official media and the connections that we have and the mailing lists that we have throughout Scotland so that's really our plan if you have other suggestions we'd be more than happy to hear from you on that as you say the intention of that fund is very much about getting film into the parts of Scotland that wouldn't otherwise get to see that range diversity and breadth of excellence in filmmaking across the world so we are very very happy to do whatever we can to get the word out further and ensure that other parts of my constituency see the great example that Kelty is setting if they might wish to pursue such an initiative but just a final question what is the overall size of that fund? Can I perhaps come back to you? Thank you very much Just for clarification the review that you're doing with local authorities and allios can you share the results of that with the committee when it's completed? Yes absolutely and as I said it will be published online as well I will make sure that we do that next time If you could delete it this time and send it to us that would be fabulous Stuart McMillan Thank you First of all I just want to thank Creative Scotland and Isabel Davies in particular for coming to the event of Hosted in Greenock a few weeks ago Certainly in terms of questions regarding a film studio because it's something that we've touched upon and we've had those discussions before but some aspects regarding the Scottish Enterprise has been touched upon regarding the business development Clearly there was a bit of an issue in the past with the confusion regarding Scottish Enterprise's role So I'd be grateful just to get an understanding as to how things are operating now not solely also with SC and SDI but also with SE because just to make sure that there is a clear direction going forward Thank you SC are partners in Screen Scotland that are knitted into the fabric of what we do through being around the table through contributing to the business plan they are present and very active at the delivery level through our project groups and our working groups and of course they're represented on the screen committee and have both visibility oversights and commitments that they are making to screen through the formal mechanism of Screen Scotland We have found them to be extremely helpful on the level of studio provision they've been giving advice throughout that whole process but I think as you say the area of business development is one where we're really bearing down and we're bearing down on that area with the services of a consultant to look at again the scope of what industry wants so very recently in fact last week we had a meeting of that particular project team within Screen Scotland with all the partners around the table to look at what actually is the need and some very interesting findings have come out of that of course that's industry feeding in as you will know sometimes with frustration over the years and I think sometimes with general positive collaborative spirits that the gaps that we've identified are around company support and also that companies are varying scales not simply the ones that will make it to that 10 million pound turnover that we've talked a lot about but that we are supporting companies with a range of skills across the portfolio of companies from really those start-ups through to the much larger beasts how we service that need then is something that will be the subject of the scoping study with industry consultation happening in early June before we come up with the final model we make sure that the money that we're deploying and the people that we're deploying and the roles that we create in order to further cement business development as part of Scotland's growth picture will come out of that piece of work but in the interim we have a very close relationship with SC colleagues we're in dialogue with them very very frequently so I think things are moving there I think it would be very useful for the committee to have an understanding post when that is produced and that piece of work is done if you can send information to the committee I think it would be very useful in terms of the... you mentioned the roles and expertise to what additional skills and expertise are you bringing in to deal with the improved business development and support well in a sense that remains to be seen it's very clear that there's a need for signposting I think that's an idea that came through recommendations from both the committee and the collaborative proposal that the industry needs to know where it goes so there's a sort of triage function which may be a combination of human beings and technology but I think it's also really clear that the industry needs very high end best in class industry advice and that's something that I'd be surprised to find all those skills in one person from absolutely honest so I think the model of what that person looks like or what that support team looks like will be not to entirely jump the gun on where this piece of work is going but that triage service is one thing but having the resource to give the Scottish industry access to the kind of expertise it needs in a very bespoke way I think is the name of the game what we have right now is a project called Focus which you may have heard about which is co-funded by Crater Scotland and Scottish Enterprise with companies themselves and it's putting 20 companies from across the film and TV spectrum through a process of growth bringing in in each case a bespoke suite of experts across international sales, company growth, finance talent development if that's what's required helping them individually fill in their gaps in order that they can come out of the other end of that 18 month process with a stronger set of skills and resilience to grow Scottish companies and the work that that outfit is doing with those 20 companies is also expanded to a wider cohort of around 40 to 50 companies that are benefiting from workshops, events and talks from industry experts across the areas that we know are where the gaps are for Scottish companies so we have something of a model there that will be reviewed after that programme finishes at the end of this calendar year but it does provide a very useful working model of how practical supports can be drawn together and done so on a bespoke basis so that our companies are able to avail of working practitioner knowledge as opposed to another talking head in a public body and the other recommendations in the report was to follow a Danish style model so would that actually be comparable and certainly very much work with what you're actually trying to do with this focus project well I think in certain regards my understanding of the proposal with regard to Denmark was that their commissioners said the decision makers on the funds that go out the door to production that those commissioners are drawn from industry on fixed term contracts and some sort of employment issues that we'd have with any fixed term contract but I think the principle of bringing in industry experts both into Screen Scotland and to finding other ways in which the industry and frankly Screen Scotland can avail of current best practice expertise from the sector is a point very well made in something that we're embracing it's already happening within the make up of the team itself within Creative Scotland and within Screen Scotland we're a local member of the team through an intensive induction in terms of TV having the sector come to us and talking to us about the realities of working TV what that market looks like and how we ensure that the funds are fit for purpose but it's also I think as you say exactly within business developments that we would look to avail of best practice look to scan the country for the best people who are prepared to mentor, advise on whatever basis the best available support and finally has Screen Scotland secured any major productions from any of the fine companies well we are an active conversation with a number of companies I wouldn't single out the streaming platforms of course anything that we any conversations that we have unfortunately remain completely confidential it's a confidential service that we provide for good reason of course but what I will say is to slightly repeat an earlier point that we have never had the volume of enquiries that we're having from across the spectrum of companies be that, film companies streaming platforms, cable companies companies from the south who are feeling the weight of comm regulation about out of London so my screen commission colleagues are busier than they've ever been and thank goodness we've been able to increase the resource within the screen commission with the additional resources from the Scottish Government that's something very useful and certainly going back to one of your earlier comments regarding crew proximity, airports and transport and the space to be easily converted to short notice I've got a perfect location for you can't wait to come and see it thank you very much Jamie Greene, did you have other questions that you wanted to come in with Jamie Greene good morning to you both I think I'll do it in reverse order I'll carry on the line of conversation that Stuart McMillan was talking about I've read through your business plan it's a welcome document however I do have one concern on it and I wonder if you could comment on it and that's we've got 57 pages business plan admittedly half those are photographs and pictures but the one that jumps out at me the most is a very very small section page 37 that says crew facilities and it says we will help production companies find the specialist crew and facilities services needed to make productions in Scotland in paraphrasing and that's it other than the discussion around studio space which I might come on to next that strikes me as a glaringly short and vague statement to make surely if we really want Scotland to be a one stop shop for production your business plan would have had far more robust plans we're not just a location service we're not just providing good high quality crew but it really truly is a one stop shop where you have adequate studio space adequate editing facilities adequate support for distribution for example and all the other elements of creating production it strikes me that the focus is very much on location and I hope that we might have decent studio space in the next couple of years is that enough I think you're referring to one of the paragraphs within the second page of Filming in Scotland which is section 4.7 of the overall plan so I think if that were representative of our entire ambition for Screen Scotland then I would entirely agree with you that it wouldn't be nearly enough as it is it represents a fraction of the work that is done by the Screen Commission which is a team within Creative Scotland who absolutely see that overall picture that the overall aim is to increase the number of productions and the quality productions that are making Scotland their home so it's true that the work of the Screen Commission includes helping points international production in the direction of existing locations crew and not only pointing them in the direction of that but they are supporting budgets to be undertaken they're making the right connections with line producers in order that any production that is thinking of basing in Scotland can come armed with the right facts and information to make an educated choice about coming to Scotland so the service is quite strategic in and of itself we absolutely understand the interplay between having greater depth and diversity of infrastructure it's a challenge, it doesn't happen overnight Bath Road is not the be all and end all we're very be all and end of but it's where a lot of focus is right now but as I say the work of the Screen Commission in parallel to that is to continue to promote a huge range of space that can be converted at short notice by productions that are prepared to come in and that's a working model as well so our ambition for Scotland certainly goes beyond that and as you also say and rightly say I totally agree that there is a need also to look at how do we best support the post-production sector of which editing is a part editing actually is a particular challenge especially if we're looking to production outside of Scotland to grow that mix because it's always that last piece where the director would like to go home they're a bit tired of doing their location shoot or their studio shoot that's a bit that's quite a challenge but a range of excellent post-production facilities, visual effects companies in Scotland that are growing need to be really well served and really well promoted around the UK and around the world so I absolutely hear you on that we are somewhat challenged by the ability as a public body to be writing checks to make new facilities happen and that's just a very complex picture it's something that in the end we have limited resource but in promoting these things and by incentivising the use of them in the correct way or the most effectively calibrated way that's a key part of the strategy I welcome those comments and your sentiments there are you aware of any major production business that you think Scotland PLC is lost out on because we don't have those facilities we don't have that broad range of post-production facilities that people need any evidence of it going to other sectors and how do you think we could turn that around I think we in common with many many industries are facing a capacity challenge so it's up to us to rise up to that challenge and to increase skills that will make post-production a more lively sector I think there are some challenges as we familiarise people working in Scotland there's always a bit of a perceptional barrier to cross when people haven't worked here before it only takes one to go do you know what had an absolute knockout time my post-production was done in Scotland and it was excellent that's a referral business it's something that can snowball I think that's really really important have we lost out I think that you can't win business that you can't service there's no doubt that the large-scale studio business has shown very clearly that the appetite is there to come and work in Scotland if we can step up to the plate on the studio just to clarify on the following page the KPI for studio in your plan is a new studio facility refurbished and opened by April 2020 but on the next page it states our aim is to identify a studio operator in April 2020 is less than a year away so do you think it will be up and running by next year or is that just when you want to have somebody in place who will be doing the refurb and looking to open it at some time in the future when do you think it will be ready for business we are certainly intending that it will be operational by the end of this year so that is ambitious but that's we know what a priority it is we're working extremely hard as is the preferred bidder and their very talented team around them to make that happen so does that there's a need to identify the operator and then clarify it Mr Monroe at the beginning of the session you were talking about your finances your £92 million revenue can you explain how much of that is available thereafter for funding projects after excluding operating costs etc I'm just keen to get my head around the numbers our overhead is approximately 10% fluctuates according to income per se so there's about £83 million available for frontline grants delivery and do you have a worry that there's so much reliance that a third of your revenue comes from lottery funding I know that's decreased in recent years there's only two thirds remaining Government funding that you get half of that is an effectively ring fenced and you're told how to spend it it doesn't really create a huge pot to support all the great work that you do and so many of the local projects and one of the things that this committee has discussed a lot is this perception that the focus is often on the centre belt or cities and not enough in our regions in rural parts of Scotland or in small towns and do you think that that remainder pot that you have to spend on those smaller projects is overstretched Yes is the short answer we know that the evidence is there by way of demand statistics and one of the other things to mention that we've just opened up even more information through a data dashboard on the website around the spend on open project funding for example and the application demand is all now there beyond just a simple grants listing in order to help people understand the equation here but absolutely we all feel a frustration internally and externally that we know the quality of applications that we receive against the available budget is at the heart of some of the issues and challenges that we've got but what I would say is that we work very hard to make sure and yes there's much more to be done on how the impact of that support has felt right across the geography of Scotland for all the people of Scotland we know what the local government landscape looks like and also what the breakdown of our support looks like against that in terms of direct spend but we should also recognise that many of the things that we do support in certain geographic locations goes on to tour or be distributed right across the other parts of Scotland so it's only one lens to look at individual local authority spend in local authorities per se but for example the regular funded organisations, the predominance of the base locations of those organisations is Edinburgh Glasgow but we've got 21 local authorities represented there but we know that 75% or so of the work of all of those 121 organisations is actually across the geography of Scotland so I think it's important that we keep working hard at that but there's no doubt that there is an absolute tension there in terms of available resource against the ability to respond but we work very hard with the resource that we've got to make sure that there is distribution there I thank you and commend you for that good work and my final point really is around the Wavehill report which was given in the summary it says that the evaluation team highlighted several differences of opinion between the leadership team and the board within your organisation it says that it points to deterioration in the relationship between the two bodies it then later talks about ambiguity in a lack of transparency at the heart of the criticism directed towards your organisation how will you as an organisation respond to those criticisms by new people, the chair and as chief executive may alter and affect the direction of travel but clear this isn't one-off this is a systemic problem that's been identified in terms of the relationship between your board and the day-to-day management of your organisation what are you doing to fix that? So I think it's fair to say that things have moved on already I think we're in a different environment with different leadership including myself of course and the new chair and increasing change within the board over time too I think it was taking place in a very particularly hot environment and I think that added to some of those tensions that were in play I think everybody was doing their absolute best to navigate that and find ways of ways through but undoubtedly there were clear tensions there and one of the learning points earlier on is about making sure that in all of this in the organisation going forward that there's a clear understanding about the relative roles and responsibilities who's doing what, how and when in any process that we run or any key policy or strategy decisions that we make so I feel we're already in a much better place other people tell me that too and you can get a sense of that from others but we'll continue to work at that I think that it's fundamentally important that the governance of the organisation works effectively and that we support the organisation at board and non-exec sorry, at the exact level to be able to ensure that these issues are understood and never repeated Thank you Ross Greer, did you have a quick supplement? Yes, thank you, it's two questions so I'll ask them together and I'll try to be brief going back to the studio and build space section of the business plan the only target in KPI in there are for the Leith Dock development but I know that your ambition is for more than just that the first question is why is that the only target in KPI in the business plan when Screen Scotland has greater ambition to expand infrastructure and the second question related to that is we've seen press reports about the significant Lord of the Rings production that would potentially come to Leith Dock if it is operational by this autumn if it is not operational by the autumn is there a risk that that production goes elsewhere? I can't comment on I'm afraid on any given production before it's something that we can talk about in public so I can't comment on any individual production as I say we're very very acutely aware of a number of productions that would love to use a facility so getting it open as soon as possible as soon as feasible is an absolute priority I think the reason why you see this is the key performance indicator in the studio build space is because it's a key performance indicator and this is a two-year plan that ends at the end of the financial year 2020 so we have a range of other performance indicators beneath that but that we'll be measuring but this is the very top line that we're setting here in the short period of time that this plan lasts for so I think you'll see more of that and in fact I suppose it's that also the range of build space that's ongoing work in order to promote the other work and our ability to stimulate directly come on board and stimulate proactive new space is sequential in a way we can support other projects that are in the private domain as I've outlined but I think it's really worth getting this one open and seeing where that takes us in addition to the work that we do to support the build space around the Scotland The expanding studio capacity was a major priority of the committee in our reports I imagine we'll write to ourselves to ask for the further detail on the indicators that you've said are sitting beneath that and could I just if I may I know that we're slightly over time but I've just got another couple of quick questions from myself as we wind up you talked earlier both to Jamie Greene and to Kenneth Gibson about incentives for filmmakers to come here and to place work here I just wanted to maybe drill down on that the carrot and the stick approach you talked about the carrot approach when we speak to producers in the screen sector who work in Canada or France they are under because they're getting money from Canada in France they are under quite very strict conditions as to employing Canadian and French talent and I think of one that spent a lot of time in the Euro tunnel because post production had to be done in France in another case where a Canadian writer had to be used have you got any plans to review the way that you provide incentives to ensure that we take in terms of the stick approach that people have to have to use Scottish talent in order to get the funds that are available yes I think Canada and France are both very strong co-producing nations and I think that the restrictions that you refer to will be to do with the spend requirements within co-production treaties and Scotland is part of that same network of co-production treaties so Scotland's crew will benefit from those same rules where there is a need for Scotland's filmmaking contribution to be at a particular percentage in line with its financial contribution so that tends to be how things work if France is putting in 60% of the budgets 60% of the budgets will need to be represented by people goods and services from France and that's also true for Scotland and that's part of that framework we do I think across all of our production funds require the use of Scottish personnel so whether that is through the film and development production fund which is absolutely anchored around production companies that are resident in Scotland the priority going to Scottish filmmakers who will of course want to work with local crew as well and there's a very strong spend requirement around that fund too likewise with the broadcast content fund that's very much predicated upon the use of Scottish companies who are using local personnel as well we have another mechanism there on the TV side of course with the off-com regulations so I think there is a balance to be struck between a you know hard and fast approach that doesn't allow companies the flexibility and the creativity to use non-Scottish personnel where it suits the creative needs of the production that is something that is being made very clear to me by not only Scottish companies but companies that want to come and work in Scotland where there are either existing relationships or their projects have been gestating for a long time in development where it wouldn't be in Scotland's interests to be overly dogmatic about kicking off a particular variety you know Oman and obviously there's obviously got to be that flexibility but are you saying that you know like that we are as tough as Canada and France whenever I speak to people in the industry they tell me that Canada and France are extremely tough when it comes to ensuring that their talents employed and money is spent in their country I would say that we are I think that France and Canada in my experience are both economies that rely very heavily on co-production and actually enforce their co-production rules very very strongly I think Canada comes at the whole growth piece from a very industrial perspective that's you know there are pluses and minuses to that system I would say France is very much predicated around language as well so there are other you know they've made their industries in their own image I think and I think what we need to do in Scotland is to make sure that we yes we're tough we're asking all the right questions I think the fact that we other than the UK tax credit have there's a human dimension to all of the selection processes the production growth fund which is a key intervention for incoming production we are scrutinising very very carefully all of the applications and happily given the booming market we're in a position to be very very strong about those requirements to make sure that Scottish sorry to interrupt you've already said that your requirements are tough but in terms of the enforcement you mentioned in terms of the London with off-com we've had conversations about off-com about this and obviously doing their own work on that would you be reviewing how you monitor these things because I think it's fair to say that the committee in its scrutiny of off-com wasn't absolutely convinced that the sufficient monitoring was in place to absolutely make sure that the requirements were being met by companies that were supposed to be doing more work in Scotland I'm not sure when off-com last gave evidence but my sense from the last couple of months is that we're moving in that space towards much stronger monitoring and enforcement in the TV space and what about in terms of your direct grants and incentives are you going to improve monitoring there well we you know through setting these KPIs it's something that absolutely we're measuring and through the enhanced resource that we have at Screen Scotland on the research and monitoring side then yes it's absolutely something that we're looking at we'll be doing it anyway as part of the spend measurements and the work in that field but yes absolutely we are we are we look not only at the point of application and awarding of the money but through production as to how that's how our money has benefitted the Scottish industry at the other end of the price thank you very much and one just last question to you in Monroe again going back I think it was two year exchange earlier with them you were talking about the creative industries and you were being very polite but you talked about how the creative industries was your remit but I felt that reading between the lines you did feel that you didn't have the budget that went with that remit and that's something that's come up time and time again in this committee scrutiny of the creative industries and in previous committees scrutiny of the creative industries and you talked about the partnership with SE and putting quite a lot of time and effort into that partnership would you prefer to see some of that budget being blunt about it should some of the creative industries budget come from SE and be transferred into your budget so that you can get up to the 0.5 per cent that you said was desirable so I mean we are absolutely ambitious for the creative industries I do recognise that we are inhibited in terms of the resources as you've said I'm not going to make a play because I wouldn't like it done against my organisation for any other organisations resources directly in this kind of forum what I would say is that we feel inhibited in being able to deliver against that creative industries brief to the full extent that we would want to and that I think is expected of us when it's so reliant on partnership working as opposed to directly within a kind of empowered position within Creative Scotland per se so whether it's one organisation or multiple organisations in order to generate the actual source of the investment if it's directly placed within Creative Scotland that's a very much more empowered position to enable us to deliver on the brief as I say that's expected of us we mentioned SE's strategic review we know are you pressing as part of that strategic review for more of the budget allocation to be coming over to you so there are very positive conversations with Steve Dunlop at Scottish Enterprise about the principle of if we can identify a mutual set of priorities then there is the opportunity and actually in theory it's both ways to identify human and financial resource that should be attached to that that's in our mutual endeavour to make it happen what I'm saying is that we would always want to be continuing that to endeavour with any partner anyway in terms of unlocking opportunities and resources but it's secondary to what is more ideal which is direct investment through Creative Scotland in a more empowered position that means that the energy and focus is spent on making things happen as opposed to in part unlocking the potential of that partnership which can be often protracted discussions to achieve I think we will be returning to that subject thank you very much to both of you for coming to give evidence today and we shall now move into private session