The status of Creative Scotland and the failure of the Minister for Europe,
External Affairs
& Culture to answer questions about it were topics raised at First Minister's
questions on
January 22nd. We reproduce the full text of these questions and Alex Salmond's
answers,
taken from the official report of parliamentary business available online via
the link at the
foot of this page. Please read the text carefully as we have four points we
wish to
highlight.
------------
PAULINE McNEILL (Glasgow Kelvin, Lab.): To ask the First Minister when the
Scottish
Government will finalise the transition costs of establishing Creative Scotland.
(S3F-1385)

THE FIRST MINISTER (Alex Salmond): The costs of establishing Creative Scotland
will be
set out in the financial memorandum, which will be presented to Parliament
alongside the
public services reform bill. We will make an announcement to Parliament
regarding the
costs shortly.

PAULINE MCNEILL: How will the First Minister restore confidence among the arts
community in relation to the formation of creative Scotland? How will he
resolve the
allegations that have been made by 400-odd artists that there has been a lack of
clarity
and transparency in the process? Until 11.26 this morning, no meeting had been
arranged
with the Scottish Artists Union, and two weeks ago the minister in charge could
not say
which body will distribute funds to the arts in Scotland. Is it not time for the
First Minister
to get a grip of the bill? I ask him, in doing so, not to reduce the issue to a
merger in the
public services reform bill but to introduce a standalone bill as soon as
possible so that
the Parliament can focus on how to make the change a success.

FIRST MINISTER: Putting the bills together is the quickest way to deal with the
matter. As
I understand the position, there is general support across the Parliament for
the principle
of the merger. The issue under discussion is how any transition costs might
affect pledges
to artists. I take it from the formulation of Pauline McNeill's question that a
meeting is
arranged. I think that she should just accept that a meeting has been arranged
and
welcome that. The other thing that she should welcome is the guarantee that the
Government has given that no money that has been budgeted to provide grants to
artists
will be used for transition costs. I would have thought that that would
reassure people
throughout the artistic community. If I was one of those nasty, politicking
folks, which I
am trying so hard not to be, I might contrast our position with that described
in a written
answer from Pauline McNeill's colleague, the then minister Patricia Ferguson,
who said:
"I do not anticipate any costs involved in the establishment of Creative
Scotland that will
require specific funding in addition to the general administrative costs of the
Scottish Arts
Council and Scottish Screen".—[Official Report, Written Answers, 14 November
2006;
S2W-29736.]
It is fantastic that the previous Administration did not think that there would
be any costs
at all. I contrast that with the reassurance that the current Administration
has already
given that no grants to artists will be cut as a result of the inevitable
transition costs.

TED BROCKLEBANK (Mid Scotland & Fife, Con.): Can the First Minister confirm
that, under
current plans, Creative Scotland will not be the lead body in disbursing future
arts funding
but that Scottish Enterprise will have that responsibility? Would it not have
saved valuable
time and scarce funding, and prevented a total collapse of morale in Scotland's
creative
community, if that decision, no matter how controversial it is, had been made
during the
passage of the original bill?

FIRST MINISTER: The bill and its provisions will be brought forward, but I have
to say that,
in a year that has seen the flourishing of the arts across Scotland, with
magnificent new
events being planned the length and breadth of the country, and at a time when
our
national galleries and great national collections are looking forward to a
renewed and
revitalised future with record levels of investment, it is extraordinary that
Ted
Brocklebank, with his enormous knowledge of these matters, should talk about
demoralisation. We are seeing a renaissance, and he should recognise that.
------------

The SAU has four responses to these statements:
1) We find the lack of acknowledgement of the four month delay to the Public
Services
Reform Bill, revealed on the same day as these questions were taken,
extraordinary. How
can the First Minister claim that inclusion in the Public Services Reform Bill
is the "quickest
way" to Creative Scotland's take-over when that bill has been delayed, according
to his
government, by additional instructions unrelated to Creative Scotland? And the
matter
"under discussion" is not merely transition costs. The parliament have never
voted on the
merger, merely on the first of three stages that would have made the Creative
Scotland Bill
law.
2) Pauline McNeill and Ted Brocklebank parsed their questions with care. Would
that the
First Minister answered with equal precision, especially considering recent
headlines.
When on the afternoon of the 22nd he said "I think that she should just accept
that a
meeting has been arranged and welcome that.", no such meeting between the
Scottish
Artists Union's management and the Minister for Europe, External Affairs and
Culture had
been scheduled. A formal invitation was received late that evening. At the
time of writing
final arrangements have not been agreed.
3) Note that while the First Minister said that the still undisclosed transition
costs would
not be deducted from grants to artists he did not refute cuts of any other
description.
Indeed how the arts will funded by Creative Scotland, and at what level, remains
unknown.
4) We welcome the opinions of our members and indeed all Scottish artists with
regard to
the First Minister's contention that they are living in the midst of a
"renaissance".

Quotes taken from official report from the Scottish Parliament, 22/01/09:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or\
-
09/sor0122-02.htm#Col14307