Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes, I will be having those discussions with the Deputy First Minister. You are right that the £15 million is part of the £61 million deferred funding that has been returned to the portfolio and that we have had the agreement to switch to capital funding. That remains and means that we have £46 million outstanding. The Deputy First Minister has confirmed that that will be returned to the portfolio, but the sequencing of that and how the money can be utilised is subject to further discussion. I am happy to keep the committee updated on that.

The £46 million is still to be returned, so that would be in future years’ budgets.

If you have particular concerns that are being raised with you, I am more than happy to look into that. It is not a concern that I have had raised directly with me. You will be aware that the Minister for Energy and the Environment has responsibility for crofting, and I do not know whether that issue has been raised with her.

With some of the crofting schemes, we look to make improvements where we can. If you look to the croft house grant as an example of that, we have increased the grant rate for that and we have also looked at introducing measures for energy efficiency that did not exist previously. If there are adjustments that we can make within that or if that is something that we need to look at, I am more than happy to follow that up with the Minister for Energy and the Environment and consider it further.

Again, Dave Signorini will have more detail on that. It is fair to say that there has been a fair amount of transformation in the marine directorate, with a focus on reducing costs where possible.

I will need to follow up on that directly and look into the circumstances. I am not able to say right now whether there has been communication on that or what involvement there has been. Perhaps Dave Signorini has more information on that.

I am happy to do so. I understand that the committee will be disappointed that it looks like a cut on the previous year’s funding; of course, the funding is lower. As I said the last time that I appeared at the committee, when you look at the capital spending review and the overall allocations, you will see that nothing had been spent against the islands programme. That is why I am delighted that we can, in spite of the very difficult financial circumstances that we are in, particularly with our capital budget, continue with the islands programme for the coming year, including providing vital funding for the carbon-neutral islands project.

On overall funding for the islands, £1.5 million in the islands programme has been allocated for resource funding and £3 million has been allocated for capital funding, and for the carbon-neutral islands project we have allocated £0.9 million resource funding and £1.3 million of capital funding. Taking those two programmes as a whole, there is an overall funding envelope of £6.7 million for the coming financial year.

I would like to think that we are. I think that I have said to the committee previously that our having an islands team that works extensively across and with other portfolios in the Government has been critical in helping to develop and further that understanding. It is built into decisions that are taken within various portfolios and there is engagement right from the outset. I do not know whether Erica Clarkson wants to add to that.

The funding that it has provided is the same level as last year’s.

For clarification, I know that that was an ask of the committee, but, at the time when we were considering the policy, there was not a £5 million allocation in the budget for that year to develop the policy, because we were undertaking the initial work and engagement on the islands bond.

Initially, there was a £300,000 budget allocation for the islands bond policy. From the extensive engagement that we undertook, we heard loud and clear that it was not something on which island communities wanted to move forward. We utilised the funding that was available at that point to deliver the practical policy test, which I think I have talked about previously in the committee. The decision was based on the outcome of engagement that took place on the islands and on ideas that people thought would help to tackle issues such as depopulation.

Within that, we had about 11 different projects under way. I discussed previously in committee a piece of work that had been undertaken. The biggest portion of the funding—I think that it was about £250,000—was for work on a skills and population pilot that was undertaken with Skills Development Scotland, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and various local authorities.

I am sure that Erica Clarkson can come in with more information. Evaluation of that work is still to take place and will soon be under way. That work was done in three local authority areas and looked at bespoke solutions that could be created around skills. Erica Clarkson might have more information about those projects.

The £5 million was an overall figure that would have been used for islands bonds had they progressed. In developing the policy, we had to go through the engagement exercises.

As I was saying just now and as we have talked about previously, we are looking at these decisions in an annual budget cycle. If we had decided to pursue that policy and had proceeded with it, the budget as you see it today and the priorities within it would probably have been different. However, it was decided that we would not move forward with that policy. That is why we undertook the work on the different tests, which are helping to inform the interventions that will best address depopulation.

We are still waiting on the publication of the addressing depopulation action plan, which is being led by the social justice portfolio. I am responsible for the rural and islands element of that plan, and we hope that we will be in a position to publish it shortly.

It has been important for us to listen to that engagement and then to undertake this work, which will help to inform our actions as part of that plan so that we know that the interventions that we make to address depopulation will be meaningful and have the impact that we all want.