 Y next item of business is consideration of business motion 6449 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting out changes to business and suspension of standing orders. I call on George Adam to move the motion. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and moved. Thank you, minister. The question is the motion 6449 be agreed, are we all agreed? Yes. The motion is therefore agreed. The next item of business is topical questions and at question number one I call Sarah Boyack. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to address the reported perfect storm that the arts and culture sector is facing in light of reports at organisations such as Falkirk Town Hall, the Filmhouse in Edinburgh, the Belmont in Aberdeen and the Edinburgh International Film Festival recently entered into administration and that modern art 2 gallery in Edinburgh was forced to close for winter. Can I briefly clarify, Presiding Officer, for the record that the words closure should be in advance of Falkirk Town Hall and not to go into administration? Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank Sarah Boyack for taking this issue to the chamber today. I understand that this is an incredibly difficult and worrying time for the sector, particularly for the staff of the venues that she has mentioned. We are engaging with Creative Scotland as well as the City Council, the councils involved, to provide support where possible for those organisations facing immediate challenges with regard to the centre for moving images, which includes Filmhouse, Belmont and EIF. It would not be appropriate for the Scottish Government to comment on on ongoing legal proceedings, but I can assure Sarah Boyack that both myself and the cabinet secretary have been engaged with key partners over the last few weeks. Creative Scotland is continuing to explore alternative options for cultural programming and I'll provide Sarah Boyack with an update as soon as I am able to. We're continuing to work with the culture sector to identify barriers to immediate and long-term recovery and we'll continue to do everything within our powers and resources to help those most effective by the current economic challenges. I thank the minister for that response, in particular in relation to the cinemas and the film festival. It's important not just in terms of our culture, but it's a huge part of our economy and identity, so I'd very much appreciate an update when there is news, hopefully good news to be shared with us. Minister, over recess I hosted a round table on the impact to the cost of living crisis on the arts and culture sector. Almost 30 organisations attended and they did all paint a very grim picture and their consensus was that they needed support because the rhetoric didn't match the support they need now. And as many cultural services are provided through local councils, don't you agree that the cut of local spending on museums and galleries by a fifth and the reduction of spending on culture-related services by 23 per cent is detrimental for our arts and culture organisations right across our communities as we speak? First of all I'd like to agree with Sarah Boyack on the point that she embraces around the cultural significance of the organisations that we're talking about, not just the culture and the wellbeing significance that they have, but also the significance that they hold within the local economies in which they sit. I absolutely agree with that. I commend Sarah Boyack for the work that she's done having round table sessions with stakeholders across the sector. It's something that we have been doing and are looking to continue to advance, obviously, with key stakeholders. I would also agree with her around the grim picture that she describes. It is a very challenging situation that our culture stakeholders are facing. It shows highlights the folly of withdrawing the Covid recovery funding, as the UK Government did before a meaningful recovery has taken place. I remark for the topicality of it that it was the then Chancellor, current Prime Minister, who took that decision. Many of those venues are facing pressures because of the energy cost crisis. It's not the only reason for some of them, but it's part of the reason. It just highlights the challenges that are being faced when decisions are being taken, some of them incredibly reckless that make the situation much worse, but also what happens when you don't get to grips with the cost of living and an energy cost crisis. Yes, there are huge challenges. That's really why I've asked this question today, because the message from the culture sector is that it needs that support now and that the costs of electricity and gas prices are rocketing, but its staff needs support as well. We know from evidence to the culture evidence that we've taken on the budget that staff have left the sector. We can't afford to keep that happening. What will the Scottish Government do now? Doesn't the minister agree that during winter that that is the critical time that we could make the best use of our cultural spaces, whether they're national organisations or local authority spaces, by utilising them to give multiple benefits for local communities? Edinburgh, for example, is looking at warm spaces with our libraries, so will the Scottish Government sit down with the sector, both through COSLA, but also look at the ideas that are being suggested by the sector, looking at the Birmingham anchor network, for example, to do small procurement hub, to actually make life easier for the sector by taking away some of the bureaucracy that makes it tough for them. Minister. I thank Sarah Boyack for the constructive way in which she's approached this matter and the constructive suggestions that she has followed up on. I've received correspondence from Adam McVeigh making similar suggestions for such around table and I'm looking to reply to him in positive terms around bringing together such around table to look at the challenges that are being faced. I'm sure that Sarah Boyack would agree with me that it isn't a sad indictment in energy rich Scotland as part of this UK, that we are in a situation where we're having to have public buildings used for warmth sharing during a winter period. It is a terrible situation that people are facing and a very terrible indictment on this Tory Government and its predecessors for the austerity, the lack of action, the recklessness that has wrecked the economy. Going back to our cultural venues, of course we're looking to do everything that we can and Sarah Boyack again references the particular pressures that there are on staff. We appreciate that. Currently there's negotiations ongoing in terms of pay deals and hopefully they can be resolved to ensure that we're properly rewarding and remunerating our hardworking staff within these organisations. But she will also appreciate that we operate within a fixed budget. We don't have the necessary borrowing powers to make a significant difference when such a difficult situation arises nor do we have the ability to vary tax rates in year. So our ability to respond to this is incredibly challenging, especially when we are without any grudge, without any grievance, are needing to resolve inflation higher than predicted public sector pay deals, which is putting £700 million additional on the Scottish Government's budget this year before they have all been realised. So we will continue to do all that we can within the resources and the powers that we have to respond to the situation as best as possible and I look forward to working with Sarah Boyack and others to ensure that we can do that in a meaningful way. So I have great concern that Scotland's highly regarded cultural venues are struggling to stay afloat during this Tory cost of living crisis, which is doing irreparable damage to both our economy and our reputation as a global centre for the arts. We have heard about the temporary closure of the modern two gallery, but it is also true that the wider gallery and museum sector is facing significant financial challenges. Can I ask the minister what action the Government has taken to respond to the immediate concerns of the museum and gallery sector? Minister. I thank Gordon MacDonald for that question. He is absolutely right. I remind the chamber again that it was the then chancellor, the now Prime Minister that took the decision to cut Covid recovery funding before a meaningful recovery was actually taking place. We are now seeing with the feedback that we are getting that it is not the full picture, but it is certainly part of it that energy costs and the lack of willingness of the UK Government to take meaningful action quickly enough is part of the reason we are facing the challenges that we are across the cultural sector here in Scotland. The Scottish Government, for its part, we are obviously in regular contact with museums and gallery Scotland and others across the sector to understand the challenges faced by them. We have agreed with Museums Gallery Scotland that it will be able to repurpose the grants that it receives from the Scottish Government into a new resilience fund in order to support museums to build their resilience through activity that will reduce costs, increase income and support communities. That new fund was announced on 12 October, and I hope that that can go some way to supporting the sector and the challenges that they face. Thank you, Presiding Officer. National Gallery Scotland has said that the crisis is bigger than the pandemic itself and the routes of this issue go much further back back as far as 2008. Budgets have been reduced and they have never fully recovered. Museum galleries in Scotland have done everything possible to address the current challenges. They have reduced their operating costs by 67 per cent while increasing activity to help to achieve net zero, but budgets continue to be shrinking. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to accelerate and support our culture sector's recovery and what additional financial resources is it considering after all that is critical to the city's economy and the country's reputation? I think that it was brave with all due respect to the member to be talking about recovery when I have just said on a number of occasions that this is partly down to the UK Government, of which she is presumably still a supporter, having cut back on Covid recovery funding before a meaningful recovery actually took place. Of course we are working with stakeholders across the sector to ensure that we are doing everything possible, both in terms of our support and in terms of the flexibility that we are able to offer our stakeholders, such as the repurposing of funding to create this new resilience fund, to ensure that we are doing everything that we can to respond as appropriate as possible, but Sue Webber and her colleagues need to take responsibility for the fact that we are facing a cost of living crisis, an energy cost crisis and diminishing budgets here in Scotland, and so I'll take no lessons from her or our colleagues on how to run the culture sector here in Scotland. I remind the Chamber I'm a practicing solicitor. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that, due to legal aid fees agreed in 1999, only increasing by 10%, there is a lack of legal provision across Scotland. I don't recognise the figures that the member has just used there, and I wrote to the Criminal Justice Committee in June 2022 setting out in detail the history of fee reforms since devolution. If the member hasn't had a chance to have a read of that letter, I would encourage him to do so. Since 2019, all legal aid fees have been increased by 13.6%, and we've offered to the profession a further enhanced package of reforms and increases worth £11 million a year, which has been accepted by the law society. I would hope to see a cessation of boycotting action as a result of this further funding. Officials engage closely with the Scottish Legal Aid Board to keep under review the availability of publicly funded legal services. Scottish Government also provides funding to law centres and localised advice providers. Legal services are also provided through the Civil Legal Assistance Office and the Public Defence Solicitor's Office, and all of those services can operate across a wide geographical area. Minister, for the answer, it's a completely tone deaf response that betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the profession. Many have warned for years that legal aid funding is at a level where new talent is reluctant to enter the discipline, partners retire, and solicitors suffer burnout and mental health challenges as they try to balance one of the most difficult disciplines with appalling compensation. Minister, this decline has been going on for years and nothing meaningful has been done by this Government to arrest it. Assuming the Minister is confirming that she's not going to increase legal aid to an appropriate level, what Minister is the Government actually doing now to increase the number of firms offering criminal and civil legal aid? Will she provide us with the research that suggests that it's going to work? I think that the issues that the member raises are important. I am sympathetic to some of the issues that the member has raised, but I think that we need to engage in this debate in a way that takes account of evidence and engages with the detail and with the data. With that being said, Scotland is one of the leading jurisdictions in Europe on legal aid in terms of scope. The Scottish National Party Government has invested in legal aid and in Scotland, and more than 70 per cent of citizens are eligible for some form of legal aid. Of course, I will remind the chamber that that is not the case in England under the Conservatives, where the scope has been drastically cut. I agree with the member that access to justice is a fundamental issue, and that is why the Government has listened to the profession. I engage with representatives of the profession on a regular basis. I have brought forward the latest package of fee reforms, which, as I laid out in my earlier answer, is worth £11 million. It is a credible and substantial offer that has been accepted by the Law Society of Scotland. That was, of course, in addition to the 13.6 per cent uplift that is already in place. I do not think that it is accurate to characterise the fact that this Government is not listening and that it is not responding to the concerns of the legal profession. I think that the Government is clearly not responding, but I was interested to hear that the Minister is only sympathetic to some of the issues, not clearly all of them, but the impact falls on victims of crime 2, as they are involved in crimes that are already being delayed by huge court backlogs. That combined with the fact that 40,000 of the poorest people in Aberdeen do not have direct access to a single legal aid firm should cause this Government to hang its head in shame at what is happening in some of the most vulnerable areas in our justice system in places like Scotland's Silver City. Yesterday, the SCTS responded to the proposed justice budget freeze by suggesting that the current backlog will actually be growing by 2025, with a suggestion that summary cases might particularly suffer. Does the Minister recognise those appalling consequences of our Government's actions and what is she doing? We did not hear an answer to my first question. What is she doing right now to ensure adequate access to legal aid firms in Aberdeen in particular? I am always working on actions to improve the situation in terms of legal aid provision, but I just want to be clear with the Chamber that the Scottish Government cannot compel private firms or solicitors to provide legally-aided services. We also provide civil solicitors through the CLAO, and they have always covered a wide geographical area to go to the member's point about geography earlier. They have always largely been based in city centres near to the courts. We are currently in a very challenging public finances environment, and that is not least due to the choices that have been made by the UK Government, which, as we know, is resulting in a reduced budget in Scotland. Access to justice is imperative—I have laid that out already, and I have made a commitment to that. It is very important, and that is why this Government has made the recent offer of £11 million, which is a substantial offer of funding in the current context that we find ourselves in. We also fund law centres, we also fund PDSO and the Civil Legal Assistance Office, as I mentioned earlier. It may be the case that the current model that we have at the moment is not going to be sustainable in the long term. That is why we are looking at substantively reimagining legal aid, and work is on going on at the moment. I hope that the member will support that work as it progresses. Legal aid budgets were cut by almost £500 million between 2007 and 2019. Spice now estimates that the framework from the Scottish Government will mean that, over the next four years, there will be a further £12 million real terms cut to legal aid budgets. The law society says that the sector is already in crisis. What analysis has the Scottish Government carried out on the impact of cuts in civil legal aid budgets to the most deprived communities in Scotland? Does she accept that, increasingly, access to justice is only available for the rich? No, I do not accept that at all. I have set out some of the action that this Government has taken, which was the 2019 3 per cent overall rise in fees, followed by the 2021 overall rise of 5 per cent in fees, and 2022 another overall rise in fees. This year, as I have just set out in my previous answer, an additional investment that has already been put forward, an investment of another £11 million fee package. I think that this demonstrates that the Government is listening, and that it is investing money into legal aid, whether that be civil or whether that be criminal. I am always looking at what more I can do. I will give the Chamber some examples of some of the things that have been done recently. That was the £9 million Covid resilience funding, £1 million into trade and e-ship funding, which was something that the profession raised with me, new payments for holiday courts and increased payments for appropriate early resolution. I am constantly working to see what more I can do. In reference to the member's question about how we go forward, we have the payments review panel. If we can get to a position where everyone is working together to provide an evidence base, because that is something that the member mentioned there in terms of analysis, we need that to be evidence base, that is how we will endeavour to set increases over the future term. The minister must be concerned about the impact of the qualities in the profession of her Government's shocking funding. Can the minister tell me what the percentage split was in the profession between male and female practitioners, generally and then specifically for legal aid criminal work, to highlight the specific difference to this chamber and then set out in detail what steps her Government is taking to address it right now? I do not have that data in front of me at the moment, but I would be happy to follow up to the member in writing afterwards. The member may be aware that I have undertaken a programme of work in the Equalities area in order to encourage more diversity in the profession, and I would be happy to follow up with the member on the work that I am doing on that.