Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you.

In some respects it is good that we do not have a comeback from any of you on that. Maybe it opens up other questions for the committee in the future. Thank you for that.

Nobody denies the ambitions that are in place in this project. As you have all identified, the ability to make things happen will probably come down to cost and financial constraints. Museums and galleries provide a huge opportunity for individuals to see, understand and gain knowledge from the past. You have also talked about how you manage for the future.

We have heard from the sector that timings and processes have to change in order for it to survive, and that you are finding it difficult to recruit the next generation of individuals for the sector. How realistic are you about achieving, in the short term, some of the goals and ambitions that you wish to try to achieve? No one is denying that the process is there but, at the same time, there are obstacles in front of you even today, as we go into a budget process that we know will be difficult. I cannot see the sector fulfilling its ambitions in the short term, because of the financial constraints that it will find itself in.

Lucy, you have told us in the past about the difficulties that the sector is facing and the complexities of attracting investment, financial support and even individuals, who perceive that, if they join you, it will be for a short-term job and not a career, because of the financial constraints. It would be good to tease out some of that, because, yes, you want to try to identify and progress things, but if you are not in a position to do so, I do not know how you will fulfil some of your ambitions.

It is also about understanding the community link. There is a vast opportunity here to see how you can marry your ambitions for that process and the work that you can do in a community. It has already been identified that some communities will be much more receptive than others, so it is about trying to get the message across to the harder-to-reach communities. That is what you need to try to identify. We know where we are with culture in some areas, but it is about trying to ensure that the culture element is broad enough to go into the areas where it is more difficult to get that communication and understanding.

As I have said, the respondents to the survey indicated that they felt that there was a pressure to interpret empire and colonialism in a negative way. Individuals have concerns about the whole process. How do you respond to that, when you are trying to strike this balance and get the lessons learned?

I have a quick supplementary question. You have talked about the lessons learned and the balance required, but there was a bit of negativity in the survey that you talk about in your submission. It said that

“a ... number of respondents expressed frustration with a perceived pressure on museums to interpret all links with empire and colonialism in a negative way”.

As that is part of the equation, how do you respond to it?

There is not a complete picture, as you identified. The issue has been addressed in the past, but it has not been resolved yet, so we still think that there is more room for improvement.

The annual report sets out information on complaints. Only 4 per cent of complaints that were closed last year went through the SPSO’s full investigation stage. That is much lower than we have seen previously, when we compare it with seven or eight years ago. Is the SPSO fulfilling its functions if only a small number of complaints make it through to the full investigation stage?

Peter and Paul, you have already made your views on some of this quite clear. I am not disagreeing—the compelling evidence that we have heard today very much backs up what was said earlier about how the whole process seems to be stacked against you, even if you are in the right process and moving forward. If you are not moving forward—if you are at the back of the queue and you are waiting, waiting and still waiting—there is a bigger problem to manage.

We have already touched on timescales and the length of the process. Adam Stachura talked about a timescale of four months and another of a year. In its submission, Age Scotland also commented on the length of time that the SPSO takes to consider a case, and on the backlog. We are aware of the backlog, which I am sure is getting bigger, depending on how many cases come through the system. That is frustrating for any individual. Their case will take a considerable length of time to progress and, even when it does progress, they do not necessarily get the result that they expect.

My question to all the witnesses is this: what impact does that have on the public trust in the whole complaints system? I can see that there is an impact, which may well be negative rather than positive. It would be good to get views on that. Perhaps Adam Stachura could start, given that Age Scotland put those comments in its submission.