Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have a fair idea of the answer that I am going to get but I will ask the question anyway. What should be the make-up of the board of qualifications Scotland?

In evidence last week and earlier today, the committee has heard that there is a broad landscape with many players. I do not doubt for a minute that teachers are an extremely important part of that, but there are many other stakeholders and people involved. There will always be someone who is saying, “We should have representation on said board because of X, Y and Z”, so how do you see the plan for this? Laurence Findlay, you have gone down this route because you mentioned the local authority point of view—and I understand that perspective, because I used to be a councillor. We will not keep everybody happy all the time, but how do you create a board that people feel is representative of all those who are involved in education in Scotland?

Would they normally be used in the high-profile cases that we are probably all aware of, where everyone has understood what has been going on because the situation has become newsworthy?

We do not often hear John Mason admit that he is in a minority’s minority. That is just a wee bit of light banter before I start.

On the more serious issue of the bill, we have heard much about the relationship between the SQA and the profession. There is a lack of trust between them, although Laurence Findlay has stated that things are getting better. I am forever the optimist and forever hopeful that we can make things better. What do we need to do to make changes? How can trust be regained with the new qualifications body?

I read that in your framework.

Finally, on the positive side—I asked a question about this and, unfairly, the previous panel of witnesses did not mention it—I know that you can be a conduit between what is happening at local government level and what is happening at national level, and that you can ensure that various different streams of funding are available. For a bit of balance in our discussion, in the current budget landscape, how do you see that work continuing in the future? I know that you have regional reps in various areas who are working with local authorities to try to make things happen.

There is also a practical thing that arises from my Sandy Stoddart example. The reality is that when you pay for a Sandy Stoddart installation, you know that it is going to take years, it is going to be massive and it is going to employ quite a lot of people. It is also going to train quite a lot of people, which brings us back to what Lyndsey Jackson was saying about the fringe. There is that tangible thing there, too.

I also wanted to ask about where the connectivity is. How do you get that story to Government, apart from in this kind of forum, so that civil servants and politicians know that that is the way forward? How does Creative Scotland, which must obviously get its budget from the Government as well, ensure that it is making that pitch for various things?

As a sidebar to that—this will be my last question—when we are talking about the disconnect between local authority funding and national funding, is it not Creative Scotland that is meant to be in that middle space? I am aware of some local projects in relation to which someone, locally, has managed to help local authorities and national Government get together and navigate through that issue. Is that not Creative Scotland’s role, too?

It is more or less about the tangibles. How do we get that story through to Government and how do we connect it up with all the other stakeholders involved?

I get that, and I understand the history of Creative Scotland, but in the here and now, not one of the organisations that have given evidence to the committee—we heard earlier from representatives of the Musicians Union, Dundee Rep and Scottish Dance Theatre, the Edinburgh Festival Fringe Society and Culture Counts—sees you as being part of the solution with regard to what they are trying to do. They mentioned the challenges and the difficulties that they have. You are an advocate for the arts, but they did not say that you were part of the solution, which concerns me.

I am already sold on it. I am buying in.

Good morning. I have been interested in everything that you have been saying, so the issue is where to start at this stage. I will try not to go down a rabbit hole and instead stick to the basic ideas. This is similar to what Keith Brown said, but, having been in Government myself, I can assure you that, every Tuesday morning, there is discussion of the cross-portfolio work and the benefit of some of the stuff that you guys give to Government. However, things become quite difficult during challenging times.

I am reminded of a conversation that I had a few years ago with Sandy Stoddart, the Paisley sculptor. He told me that, during a challenging budget time, he had met a local councillor who had said to him, “Why would I buy one of your installations when we can spend public money on a kidney dialysis machine?” Sandy’s answer was very Sandy. He just went, “What is the point of living?”

I get that argument about the thought of life without colour, without music and without the thrill of the lights going down and the curtain coming up in the theatre. Yes, that is part of the argument, but, the reality is that the Government also has to deal with the challenges. We have heard a lot about the fact the Government should do more cross-portfolio working, but, as organisations, how do you feed in and tell Government about the benefit of what you do? Lyndsey Jackson spoke about this earlier. It is easy to talk about the Edinburgh festival fringe—I get it. In August, people come here from all over the world and the festival generates millions of pounds, but how do we make sure that Government is aware of that and your impact on the economy and everything else? Sometimes, I think that that gets lost in translation. We talk about it, but we need to get that across to people in Cabinet meetings or a local authority meetings.

For example, in a debate this week, I spoke about the Gaelic language and I said that the effect of the Royal National Mòd, which was held in Paisley last year, will potentially be to increase footfall and that it had brought in millions of pounds of new revenue. That was tangible—I can actually say that that money was there. What is the mechanism for getting that information into Government, and where does Creative Scotland come into that, as a conduit for that information between you and the Government?