Chamber and committees

For absolute clarity—again, I know that the minister fully understands some of the apprehension—what I am hearing from the minister is that there would be an obligation to consult, because there would be a parliamentary procedure. It would not be a case of ministers just making a decision in a dark room without engaging with stakeholders. That is the key in offering assurance.

Not moved.

Does the member accept that, as we have seen over the summer, the most destructive thing for peatland is wildfires that are out of control and that, where muirburn can be restricted and managed, it often ensures that peatland is saved on a much broader basis than if fires were to get out of control because of increased fuel load?

We would be right.

I take in very good faith what the minister says. So, if he can assure me that there will be an amendment of some kind at stage 3 that gives effect to my amendments 88 and 89, I will not move them.

That is heartening, because it means that there is the potential for change, so your participation really matters. I do not know whether anyone else wants to respond and say whether they have equal levels of optimism and hope that their participation might result in change.

This may be a bit of a political question. SAFE has identified a number of areas where it would like progress, such as programmes to join or new provisions and regulations to make. There has been more success in some cases—such as the horizon programme—than in others, where there are outstanding programmes that you want participation in. Where movement has occurred, has that been because of effective consultation with civic society, or has that been pure politics?

Good morning. A number of Scottish Government staff have been before the committee, and we have discussed some of the distinct advantages of promoting Scotland with regard to the Scottish brand, produce and talent. That work started under Governments that were in office prior to the SNP and has continued under the SNP. What do you see as being the advantage to the Scottish economy of having a specifically Scottish mission that is ever so slightly distinct from, although such missions are often housed in, UK embassies?

We have talked about the value to the economy in trade terms. However, Scotland faces challenging demographic forecasts and it is somewhat frustrating that we do not control visa arrangements. Nevertheless, we have been promoting Scotland as much as possible and inviting people to come to live and work here.

In your work, did you consider what it takes to help people to make that decision—to move from seeing Scotland in a positive way reputationally to seeing Scotland as somewhere that they might want to put down roots?

I recognise your points about S4C, but the question of equity still stands. The spend as a percentage of the total local spend is around 8 per cent, which is not to be dismissed by any stretch of the imagination. Considering the content on BBC Alba, do you know whether the proportion of overall programming that is dedicated to repeat programming is increasing or decreasing? Is it funded sufficiently to be able to ensure that there is fresh content?