Meeting of the Parliament 25 October 2023
I am pleased that Scottish Labour has chosen the culture budget cuts as the topic of its Opposition debate. We need to clear up some of the confusion in the sector about the recent announcements. Some of it has been cleared up today, but not all of it.
As Alex Cole-Hamilton said, the culture sector has played a central role in Scotland’s public life and has created an international reputation of excellence. Indeed, the sector characterises the Scottish nation as a country that is passionate about its music, art and museums, and it accounts for 80,000 jobs and contributes a not insignificant £4.5 billion to the economy.
In February, the Scottish Government heralded its decision not to cut culture funding, but it has still indicated that there will be a 10 per cent cut to Creative Scotland’s budget. The Government has not provided certainty for the workforce, which has been through so much as a result of the pandemic. In fact, for many of us, when we were at home, worrying about our families and our jobs, the culture sector was the sector that we relied on most.
Over the past 10 years, the national performing arts companies have had a 20 per cent real-terms cut in funding. The level of insecurity for workers in the sector is high—higher than it is in most sectors—and the poor pay does not conform to fair work objectives. We are way behind where we ought to be. As Neil Bibby said, Creative Scotland has said that, of the 120 bodies that it regularly funds, up to one third are at risk of insolvency and half are financially weak. That is not a strong position for the sector to be in. Every key organisation has something striking to say. They talk about the hollowing out of services, the wilful demise of the sector and being at breaking point. The position could not be more bleak.
I want to spend some time discussing the confusion that still reigns in the arts sector following the recent announcement. Neil Bibby rightly welcomed the Government’s U-turn—let us begin with that recognition—but we require clarity on the £100 million. In its briefing, the Musicians Union set out pretty well the questions that the Government needs to answer. If the £100 million is meaningful and real, which budget lines have been included in the calculation to get to that £100 million? What does the doubling of the budget mean for the sector? What does it mean for the national performing arts, for example?
It is easy to make speeches at a party conference, but it is harder to provide funding and certainty to organisations. All they want to know is where the money is, when it will come, how the £100 million will be distributed, whether there is a timeline for the money, and when crucial decisions will be made. Can the cabinet secretary give us some indication of that? He is shaking his head, but he could clarify things. I do not think that it is unreasonable for the sector to say, “This is great, but we would like some certainty.” I would be delighted to take an intervention.