Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you. I have seen a lot of this kind of development in my previous career and there is a risk that the process can become the absolute. In that respect, I was just a bit surprised to note that the review of bringing in propriety and ethics is the last step in the process, because the risk then is that the ethical approach is applied from a deontological rather than a consequentialist perspective. What is your thinking about that being the last step in the chain and therefore how you can look back at it from a consequentialist, ethical basis—in other words, on an outcome basis, because this is all about the outcome and not just about the process?

Phil, do you have anything to add in response to the original question?

I will move that on in my last question. With commercial properties, traditionally, somebody would have taken on the whole building, which would often be sublet for SMEs or microbusinesses. The model that you mention is similar, but for artisans. As you suggest, the return on investment is not as clear cut, which might rule out some of the bigger private guys.

Can we see something like that working to repurpose buildings? I appreciate that there is a lot of complexity around funding, if there is a public-private initiative, for example. Are there any final comments on that? Perhaps Anthea Coulter or Gemma Cruickshank would like to come in.

I do not know whether you all heard the earlier session, but I was exploring the multitude of ways in which culture, leisure activities and tourism can support the recovery of town centres. In particular, I am interested in the creative ways of doing that rather than the passive ways, which I described as putting a proposition in a box and into a former retail unit. That is still intrinsically passive, and I see the cultural element in particular as a main contributor to vibrancy.

I know that we have a lot to get through, but I would like to know whether there are any creative ideas that could translate into policy initiatives for the Government rather than for other agencies? I have to pick somebody to answer, so I will go with Danny.

I noticed in our documentation that you have consulted your members. Are you able to provide any insights off the back of that that would help to answer my question?

I will direct my question to Phil Prentice and Jennifer Hunter. We understand and have had a variety of evidence on the ways in which culture, leisure and tourism can support the restoration of town centres. I am interested in a word that was used by Scotland’s Towns Partnership in its submission, which talked about encouraging “vibrancy” and the use of culture in that regard. In my view, we are trying to get away from a kind of proposition in a box, because culture lives and breathes—it is creative and dynamic, and so on.

I would like to hear your insights into that. I am not in any way suggesting that that is easy, and I ask that you highlight some of the complexity that comes with that. Perhaps Jennifer would like to go first.

Beyond the framework that has already been set out and a welcoming open-mindedness to the vibrancy that you described, are there specific policy initiatives that the Scottish Government could adopt that would be valuable, beyond what Jennifer Hunter has already mentioned?

Good morning, Professor Sparks, and thank you for your contributions so far. It has been a very interesting session.

You said earlier that international comparisons are useful. First, I would like to get some more thoughts from you on what parallels you see elsewhere with what the Scottish Government is able to do, given that there are limitations here on the availability of fiscal levers.

Secondly, what differences do you see in how change is undertaken? You have touched on some of the challenges that we have here, such as local engagement and so on, but I am interested in your knowledge of what has happened elsewhere in those two key areas.

All the way through this session, you have highlighted the complexity of the situation and, in your opening remarks, you said that we have spent 50 years getting into this position.

The challenge for all committees is to make a difference. I accept that it will take time to make a difference, given the lack of engagement and experience that you highlight, but how long will it take us to do something fairly radical? What expectations should we be setting?

In terms of policy change or devising new policies, as you set out, what underpinning further detail do you have? Have you gone as far as developing policies to support people?