³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

I know, it is.

Some of that work will be on-going, but there is a commitment in the bill to just under £700,000. There is a recognition that there will be some new costs in terms of pivoting work away. I do not know whether anybody else wants to say anything about the process of coming to the financial memorandum.

I will make a couple of points on that. First, if there is a legal duty on a body to produce a Gaelic language plan, that will need to be considered. Clearly, that will be considered as part of budgeting processes.

Secondly, I am a lot more interested in what those public bodies are actively doing rather than them just producing plans for the sake of producing plans. The scrutiny is on what those public bodies are doing already.

My last point is that the real focus is on the areas of linguistic significance. Bòrd na Gàidhlig will also have provisions when it comes to its role in supporting public bodies in terms of providing advice, assistance and so on.

There are three quick answers on that.

For the first time.

I have been there on a visit. I am not hugely across all the details of how it operates, but I have been in post for two weeks—I think it might have been a week and a half—

It is important to try to find a way of co-ordinating all the organisations and bodies that currently exist and ensuring that there is a formalised structure of sorts to underpin all the work, but it is also important just to let them get on with doing the good work that they already do.

This is not an excuse, but I am only 10 days in this job, as I think that I have established, and I am still considering all the evidence that I have taken. I have made a commitment to Willie Rennie to engage with some of those who have given evidence, and I am very much in listening mode.

I appreciate that that is unfair to the committee, as it has been taking evidence for quite a while. However, being new in post, I want to familiarise myself with the issue. If there are opportunities to improve the bill and expand it in line with its objectives, I very much want to be constructive and respond well to any amendments that you might want to lodge.

On Gaelic, it is important, but it is not the full story. I was speaking to officials who have counted that, across the different Gaelic organisations, there are about 50 community workers with a mission of Gaelic revitalisation and support. I confess to being quite surprised by that number. My question was whether there is any form of unity and consistency in approach and objectives. That work strikes me as being important when it comes to the community. It does not need legal backing, because it is already happening. It is being done well, and it is happening on a very devolved basis in different organisations.

I do not think that legal routes are the primary or only route to revitalisation. The bill is critical because, if there are no legal rights or legal backing, it is a lot more difficult to get, for example, public bodies to do the things that we want them to do. I do not think that we can ignore that. However, I will maybe come back to the committee at some point, if you are still interested, and talk about what is happening more generally on housing, social interventions and work opportunities, because that is where the real excitement and potential exist.

The bill cannot be dismissed. It has to be part of the picture, and I think that, if you speak to those who are heavily invested in the bill, they will say that having the legal backing matters. When people engage with a public body and they want to be able to access a service in Gaelic, they either have the right to do that or they do not, and they want the right to do it. We cannot dismiss the legal underpinning of that work.

I still have to respond formally to the piece of work that was done by the short-life working group on economic and social opportunities for Gaelic, which is a mouthful. It contains some brilliant recommendations, as you will know if you have seen it—I am sure that you have. I intend to respond formally to that, and I think that that response will capture a lot of the stuff that you are interested in.

I would not dismiss anybody’s comments and I will not dismiss the committee’s report either. I will read it with interest. I will review all the comments that have been made by those who have given evidence, and I intend to meet them personally to discuss the matter, including Professor Ó Giollagáin.

We have that already. If that information is not being provided to the committee, we can see what more we can provide.

In terms of the overall spend on Gaelic, funding goes to the Bòrd na Gàidhlig, and funding is given to MG Alba, which I have talked about already. There is also funding for Sabhal Mòr Ostaig and Stòrlann Nàiseanta na Gàidhlig, and there is other Gaelic development work. Indirect capital also goes to Gaelic. There is funding for Gaelic schools, and there are specific grants that go through local authorities for Gaelic schools.

There is not only one line of funding for Gaelic to allow us to see the full funding package—although that can be drawn out. There is also all the funding that is distributed through schools and so on, and I hasten to add, through broadcasting. The Media Bill, which is progressing through the Houses of Parliament in Westminster, is key. Welsh language television and broadcasting get their financial support from the United Kingdom Government, because broadcasting is reserved, and equity with Welsh is being sought.