Meeting of the Parliament 16 November 2023
The debate has been wide ranging and helpful. I add my thanks to the committee’s clerks for all their work on its inquiry into culture in the communities and to all those who gave evidence. I thank, too, all the organisations that hosted visits from the committee, including the excellent ones that some members took part in to the Stove Network and Lift D&G in Dumfries, to the various venues here in Edinburgh and to Orkney.
Before I respond to members’ contributions I will expand on some other important aspects of our report, further to those raised by the committee’s convener in her opening speech.
Throughout our inquiry we sought to better understand the factors that either support or impede the development and growth of cultural activity in communities in Scotland. One view that we heard consistently was that there must be physical spaces in which cultural activities can take place. Those can include traditional venues such as theatres and cinemas, but also community assets such as village halls, community centres, schools, libraries and church buildings, which are equally important to our cultural ecology.
On our visit to Dumfries, we saw the vital role of the Stove Network building, which provides a cultural venue and meeting place on the high street and is somewhere to bring the community together to participate in culture. In Lochside, we visited the Lift D&G project space, which now operates as a community hub, having successfully moved into community ownership.
However, we have also been concerned to hear of a growing trend of cultural and community assets becoming less available, less affordable and at greater risk of closure. That will no doubt negatively impact on access to culture for the affected communities. Volunteer Scotland lamented the lack of affordable and accessible community venues. Fèisean nan Gàidheal said that unaffordable rental levels for community spaces such as school buildings present a very real threat to community cultural activities. Making Music said that the rationalisation of the church estate was proving a significant challenge for its members. Creative Lives expressed concerns about the longer-term viability of venues run by local councils or arm’s-length cultural trusts, which might be subject to closure as they face financial pressure.
Professor David Stevenson said that anguish was expressed over the closure of the Filmhouse but that the closure of community halls, which are the cornerstone of community culture, was being ignored. He told us that the impact of community spaces closing was even
“more significant in rural areas and smaller places, in terms of the effect of one space—one community hall—that had supported a multitude of cultural activities closing down.”—[Official Report, Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, 27 April 2023; c 13.]
We heard that there was a need to improve the mapping of assets at a local level to support better use of those assets, to improve understanding of the impact that individual site closures could have in the wider local context and to inform planning decisions. We heard that the Scottish Government should understand better which communities across Scotland have limited access to spaces for culture.
We considered community ownership as one possible route to keeping spaces open for use by the community. In her opening speech, the convener touched on the vital role of volunteers in sustaining community culture and the burden that that can place on individuals. We heard about similar challenges in relation to the community ownership of assets. That requires expertise, as well as volunteers’ time and resources, and high costs are often associated with managing and maintaining such spaces.
It was clear to us that community ownership cannot always be the answer to protecting cultural assets that are subject to closure. However, when it is a viable option, communities need to be provided with on-going support and advice.