³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I am happy to allow the discussion to move on.

I have a lot of questions about how to sustain what has been created and how to develop the partnerships that have been established by the various projects and make them sustainable for the long term. It seems as though the Culture Collective has seeded all that work in the communities, but how do you then build the network for the long term and get partners in that network to feed into it, recognise its long-term value and move beyond that period of great creativity and innovation that has lasted for the six months or two years? Ultimately, the need is there, the benefit is there and the commitment to communities is there, and expectations will have also been raised. Where do you go next?

Thanks very much for those introductions and, indeed, stories. You are all good storytellers, and you have given us some great examples.

I want to drill down a bit and look at what actually works with regard to funding, partnerships and so on. It sounds as if a diversity of connections is being made between your organisations and, say, statutory agencies, councils and other organisations in your area. Can you drill down into that and be quite succinct about what actually works? In previous evidence sessions, the committee has heard, for example, about the NHS in England employing people to go round and find social prescribing opportunities, and we have also heard about some of the partnerships that have emerged from community planning partnerships.

I am interested, though, in hearing your perspectives on the essence of this. How do you develop the funding partnerships that allow you to undertake more longer-term work in your projects? That question is open to whoever wants to come in.

Coming back to the point that you have made several times about the inherent risk of greyhounds racing at speed around an oval track, I am interested in whether it is possible to reform that. Last week, I put it to GBGB that it could consider racing greyhounds on a straight track. Is that something that the industry has meaningfully considered? Is there a way of removing that inherent risk in greyhound racing, or is there something about the nature of the sport—how it is televised, how it has grown up or how tracks are constructed—that makes that difficult? I am just trying to understand, because it seems to me that, if you remove that inherent risk, you perhaps remove a central part of the objection to greyhound racing.

Does Sam Gaines want to come in on that?

GBGB also said last week that a phase out of or a stark ban on greyhound racing would just drive it underground. Is it possible to drive greyhound racing underground? I am trying to imagine how that would work. Maybe it is—I do not know. Maybe there are examples of that happening elsewhere.

Related to that, I will ask about trends in availability of physical assets, whether that be the Filmhouse, a village hall, a playing field or an open space for an expansive art exhibition. What is the level of availability of such resources? Is there a tangible decline? Are particular resources in more decline than others? Are opportunities opening up for communities to get access to new forms of resources?

I was particularly struck by the work that all the national companies are doing with schools around Scotland. I talked to a teacher who was involved in a Scottish Opera production with her school about how transformative that was for the entire school. That was a big undertaking, and it developed the self-esteem of the young people. I want to ask you about the resource implications of doing that, particularly on the school side, because it is quite a big commitment for a school.

We have also seen changes in the way that music tuition is provided for across councils. Is there resource available for schools to interact with in order to make your work in schools effective? What are your reflections, from the council resource side of things, on the music resources and general resources that are needed in schools to make your work effective?

Would you make a distinction between a democratisation of culture and a cultural democracy? Does what you describe—the work that you have done with the Culture Collective and the studies that you have done in Culter—really focus more on what a cultural democracy looks like locally rather than just on widening participation and access more generally?

Those were interesting points about how the world might be changing a little after Covid. Are there trends in terms of availability of time; is time becoming harder or easier to find? There is growing interest in the concept of a four-day week, which is being implemented in a minority of situations. What are your thoughts on that? In particular, how does that play out in relation to time not just to participate, but to organise the voluntary effort that is needed to, for example, run a third-sector group? How does that vary in communities that might be time rich or time poor? Reflections on that would be useful.