Chamber and committees

In that case, I will ask Dr Garner exactly the same question. You have said that you do not see this as being unprecedented in terms of the devolved settlement, but the evidence that we have received and our Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee have raised concerns about people knowing what they are voting for and the lack of scrutiny both at UK and Scottish Parliament levels. Is that something that we should explore and be concerned about?

As a result of having read the paperwork in advance of the meeting and listening to the questions and answers, my question has changed slightly. It is partly triggered by the deputy convener talking about the need for pragmatism. My concern is about accountability through the legislation in respect of knowing what we are voting for, given the huge powers that it will give to Government at both the UK and Scottish levels, and the difficulty for us in working out what they might be and testing that. My initial question was going to be about the uncertainty and the damage to relations with the EU. However, the fact that things have changed since the bill was introduced makes things even harder, because the uncertainty is greater. It seems to me that we do not know what we are voting for.

In respect of parliamentary precedent, given the huge scope of the bill, should we as parliamentarians support it? We are being asked to vote for something before we know about the negotiations. We do not know the context of what will be in the negotiations, and we are, in effect, being asked to support a bill that could be anything without being able to scrutinise it. I would be interested in feedback from the panel on the precedent for that at the UK and Scottish levels. Would Jonathan Jones like to come in on that precedent and uncertainty issue? Is the bill bad in terms of accountability?

I will ask Dr Fox the same question. Should we have concerns about certainty and the lack of accountability?

That was helpful. The concern about what “conduct” and the making of “any provision” might mean and our capacity to interrogate that has come across very clearly, and I thank the witnesses for their answers to my questions.

We have had some very concerning evidence from witnesses this morning about the way in which the bill undermines parliamentary accountability, leading to the instability and uncertainty that you referred to in your opening comments. Can you say a bit more about the discussions that you have had with other devolved nations about pushing back on this legislation? You have highlighted the challenge in Northern Ireland, but what about the Welsh Government? Can you say a bit in principle about the use of secondary legislation rather than primary legislation, using the Henry VIII powers, which makes it impossible for us to conduct scrutiny on what you may be doing as a Government, given the concerns that our own devolved regulatory committee highlighted, as we have seen at the UK level, both in the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

Okay; thank you. I want to put that same issue to Sir John Leighton and Lucy Casot. In your written submissions, you both talk about short-termism. I think that the word “projectism” was used—that is, one-off annual spending.

One of the things that we have been taking evidence on is the contribution of culture to health and wellbeing. Both your submissions make quite powerful points in that regard. Will you say a bit more about that? Sir John, your organisation’s submission mentions the need for

“determined leadership from the Scottish Government.”

We have asked cabinet secretaries about that and their response has been to say, “It is coming at some point”. What leadership and investment would be needed to transform what you could deliver?

It was good to read the report. I have a couple of questions about how you effectively market the BBC to people in Scotland. The “Ofcom Annual Report on the BBC 2020-2021” highlighted that

“some audience groups have lower satisfaction with the BBC, such as disabled audiences, those in Scotland and those from less-well-off backgrounds.”

To what extent are you reaching out to those audiences? We have talked a little about different ways to access TV. I am interested in future viewers, and younger people in particular. What is your strategy to address those issues in a Scottish context and the diversity issue in audience ratings?

The other side of that is career opportunities for young people. You have talked a bit about production in Scotland. Can you give me a sense of production across Scotland? Obviously, a lot of the production is in Glasgow, but what about the rest of the country?

I want to pick up the particular issue of BBC News. To what extent is that focused across the country or mainly on Glasgow? What are the opportunities for young people to get into the sector—into journalism or behind the camera?

It would be good to get that feedback to compare with the stats that your team gave me earlier. Thank you.

Thanks. That is really clear. Given the comments that Jenni Minto made about the situation being “sobering”, your answer reinforces the need for money now and clarity going forward.

Lucy Casot, it was striking that you referenced 440 museums in Scotland and those organisations’ capacity to cope with the cost of living crisis and keep the doors open. Do you want to say a bit about multiyear funding and the need for more funding generally to get through this?