Chamber and committees

I am sorry not to be able to join you, although I am speaking from a very snowy Highlands.

I have three questions, if that is okay. I have a tendency to lump my questions all together, but on this occasion I will separate them and keep them short.

To pick up on the deputy convener’s questions on MG Alba, I wanted to talk a bit more about BBC Alba. It is worth putting in context that, according to your figures, BBC Alba reaches around 50 per cent of the total Gaelic-speaking population, in contrast with BBC Scotland reaching 13 per cent of the total population. Considering the size of its target group, I would suggest that it is quite successful.

Mr Carson talked about the fact that the BBC joins with the committee in concentrating on the public service that BBC Scotland offers; that is particularly noticeable when it comes to Gaelic output. I want to put on record the sincere thanks of Gaelic communities for the work that you do. That said, it is clear that there is a question about equity if we look at language programming across the UK. I am led to believe that BBC Alba sometimes gets bigger audiences than S4C, despite there obviously being more Welsh speakers, and despite the budget for Welsh language programming making BBC Alba’s budget look tiny in comparison. Is there a question of equity there?

Some of those who gave evidence previously commented that they were enormously relieved by the budget this year. One comment was about the tension between ensuring that there is resilience and sustainability within the sector and being able to grow and develop and do new and fancy things. How do you approach the question of ensuring that Creative Scotland, for example, can continue to sustain the same organisations—the regularly funded organisations—on an on-going basis, which has been delivered this year, thanks to the budget position, versus taking a risk or a punt on something new?

Thank you.

Thank you. I imagine that the committee will continue to focus on that area, not least for as long as there are Highlands and Islands MSPs on the committee.

I have a final question. I note that your report contains something about the importance of the presence of the BBC across the UK. Homing in on Scotland, I have a bucket list of BBC studios to be interviewed in. I am doing pretty well across the Highlands, having been interviewed in Portree, Lerwick, Inverness and so on. Are you committed to retaining those physical presences in the more rural areas?

Thank you for that. I suppose that there may be a balance when it comes to the number of repeats on TV. Could you come back to me with information on whether you are noticing the proportion of repeats on TV, rather than on iPlayer, increase or decrease?

One other question that is indirectly linked concerns the economic powerhouse of culture. We all know that Scotland faces challenging economic circumstances, and we are looking for anything that gives us a competitive edge. Scotland’s culture does that in international branding, by drawing tourists here and through the role that it can play in some of the hardest-to-reach or more remote areas, such as through the role that MG Alba plays in the Western Isles. Is the increase in funding this year a recognition by the Government of how critical our culture sector is to Scotland’s economic performance?

That would be great. Thank you very much.

I have one other point. That is obviously £15 million out of the reported £61 million, if I am right in my understanding. Is there any understanding from the Government as to when the remainder might be returned, or is that subject to future budgets?

Thank you.

On a more general point, are you content that we are on track to meet our planting targets? I am conscious that, at the end of the day, the debate about the budget is about whether we can achieve our aims and ambitions. The Government has very ambitious planting targets that we are required to meet.

To go back to a point that the cabinet secretary has already made on the £15 million that has been returned, it is encouraging to hear that that is now capital. To clarify, I am assuming that the way in which that is already split in the budget will remain. You talked about unfunded priorities in terms of agri-transformation, crofting grants and so on. Beyond its being changed to capital, will there be any other changes to the split in the budget?