To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it provided financial assistance to T in the Park 2015. (S4O-04653)
Official Report · Chamber
T in the Park 2015 (Financial Assistance)
Portfolio Question Time Culture, Europe and External Affairs
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- Fiona Hyslop SNP 5
- James Kelly Lab 2
- Liz Smith Con 1
- Gordon MacDonald SNP 1
- Liam McArthur LD 1
The record
10 contributionsT in the Park is one of the most popular and successful cultural events in Scotland’s annual events programme. It delivers significant economic impact, drives additional tourism and supports jobs. In 2014, the event generated £15.4 million for the Scottish economy.
The event faced unanticipated costs and reduced returns, and the funding was to support a successful transition to the Strathallan site and to support the format at that site in 2016 and 2017.
There is a clawback provision should the event not take place in Strathallan in 2016 and 2017. The detail and timeline of events that led to the one-off grant payment being made are contained within my answer to parliamentary question S4W-26910, dated 14 August 2015, and in my evidence to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday.
I think that after the cabinet secretary’s appearance at the committee yesterday, there are more questions than answers. Therefore, I ask the cabinet secretary whether she will agree to come before Parliament to provide a full statement and be open to questions before the full chamber.
I also ask her to confirm that T in the Park made a profit and, as such, to explain why £150,000 of taxpayers’ money was used to support a venture that was making a profit and a company that has made multimillions of pounds in profit.
The member may not be aware—clearly from his question, he is not—that I provided answers during an extensive session with the committee yesterday.
The member is correct in identifying that the overall company is a profitable one, but companies judge whether to hold events on a case-by-case basis. If they see that there are unanticipated extra costs that will lead to reduced revenues, they might want to change the set-up. That might have meant that Glasgow would benefit from more individual single-stage, single-day concerts run by that company, but I do not think that that would be the T in the Park that many, many people across Scotland have grown to love and that many, many people appreciate.
As I mentioned earlier, there was an economic impact of £15.4 million, which was not just on Scotland’s economy but on the local economy. We want to make sure that festivals are celebrated and enjoyed across Scotland, not just in our cities.
In relation to the timeline associated with the financial assistance, which the cabinet secretary provided to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday, can she confirm whether ministers or their officials had any meetings or were engaged in any communication with DF Concerts beyond the completion of the T in the Park festival on 12 July?
I would need to check and come back on that point. However, Liz Smith will be aware that some of the major issues, which I believe it was she who raised, were about transportation and exit at the event, so I would expect that, particularly in relation to transport, there would have been some communication and contact.
After the event, we expect to get the reports that we required as part of the grant conditions. They will come to ministers at the appropriate time.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that DF Concerts hosted a series of concerts in Glasgow this year—the Glasgow Summer Sessions. Is the cabinet secretary aware of any funding from the public sector for those concerts, and who provided it?
The Scottish Government did not provide DF Concerts with financial support for the Summer Sessions in Glasgow. However, we understand that Glasgow City Council provided £200,000 to provide delivery of the series. It was funded, through a commercial arrangement, in order to establish the Summer Sessions on a level commercial footing so that in future years it would generate money for the city.
link
Having reflected on the exchanges at yesterday’s meeting, can the cabinet secretary confirm whether she asked her officials to establish what, if any, additional contribution DF Concerts had requested from the lead sponsor, Tennent’s, to cover the additional transition costs?
There was extensive scrutiny from officials and the Scottish Government’s state aid unit, part of which involved looking at the revenue and projected budget of DF Concerts. People would like to see the content of that, but commercial confidentiality has restricted their ability to do so.
Motions, questions and votes
Linked from this item of the Official ReportIn this meeting
Everything on 30 Sep 2015 →- Infrastructure, Investment and Cities Questions · 1
- Road Network (Renfrewshire South) Questions · 6
- Rail Freight Transport Questions · 5
- Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route Questions · 14
- Elgin High School Questions · 8
- Public Transport Links (West Scotland) Questions · 6
- Infrastructure Investment Plan (Low-carbon Scotland) Questions · 4
- Alford Community Campus Questions · 4
- A9 Dualling (Disruption to Residents and Motorists) Questions · 4
- City of Edinburgh Council (Cultural Investment) Questions · 4
- Refugee Crisis Questions · 6
- Refugee Crisis Questions · 8
- Traditional Arts (Funding) Questions · 6
- Victoria and Albert Project Dundee (Audit) Questions · 8
- T in the Park 2015 (Financial Assistance) Questions · 10
- Employment Debate · 76
- Business Motions Business motions · 2
- Parliamentary Bureau Motions Business motions · 2
- Decision Time Decision time · 11
- Nuisance Calls and Texts Members’ business · 15
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.