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?

Obviously, the new process applies to former ministers, so what consideration have you given to how iterations of the process will be communicated to them and over what timescale, both in relation to former ministers and in relation to ministers who are currently in post—five years down the line, how will they be communicated with? I am not talking about the detail of the process, but they need to understand that they have a responsibility to be across the process at a given point in time and as it evolves. Where is your thinking on that?

I agree completely but, with regard to Lesley Fraser’s comments, if this is done under a UK civil service remit and approach, how will the different and more nuanced approach that we are taking here be reflected?

I also want to hear a bit more about the extent to which the data that is published will be quantitative or qualitative. After all, the biggest change in all of this will be to culture and behaviour, which are always the hardest things to change. In that respect, it is the qualitative insights that give that flavour. How will success be measured or reflected in the next version of the people survey? Are you planning to include additional Scottish Parliament elements to get a sense of that?

Good morning, Deputy First Minister. It took me quite a long time to get into Edinburgh today, too, so I have every sympathy with you.

I want to ask about three broad areas. First, you have indicated that you are developing measures of success for the programme, but I want to get a little more flavour of how those measures will feed into later iterations of the people survey. Indeed, on the back of that, can you tell us what will be put in the public domain? In other words, my question is not how you but how we will test the measures of success, given our responsibility for scrutinising public administration issues.

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?

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 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 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.