At 540 pages long, with 124 recommendations, a poem, but no executive summary, the final report of Scotland's Cultural Commission has been described variously as 'inconsistent', 'impenetrable' and 'arts-dominated'.
James Boyle, the chairman of the Cultural Commission, has challenged the executive to respond to the report by St Andrew's Day, 30 November. Cynical observers have commented that it may take that long just to read it.
Perhaps the most radical of the report's recommendations is the proposed setting up of two limited companies with charitable status - Culture Scotland and the Culture Fund - which would oversee cultural policy and funding respectively.
Existing cultural bodies, including the Scottish Museums Council (SMC) and the National Museums of Scotland (NMS), would no longer be directly funded by the executive, and could lose autonomy over other functions.
Joanne Orr, the director of the SMC, said she was open to change, but was yet to be persuaded that the Culture Fund would channel money for museums more efficiently. 'Diverse funding streams can be good,' she said. 'Losing that could be detrimental.'
Gordon Rintoul, the director of NMS, went further. 'If implemented, one might imply more resources were going into bureaucracy than into the sharp end,' he said.
Less controversial was the report's recommendation that culture needed increased funding of £100m a year, but there was scepticism about what the executive's reaction might be.
Steve Callaghan, the Museums Association's councillor in Scotland, said: 'I hope it's not all been hot air, and whatever the structural changes there are lead to significant resources to underpin the sector.'
The sector was largely complimentary about the report's recommendations for a local cultural strategy, emphasising the role of local government in making culture central to community planning.
Mike Taylor, the director of the Perth Museum and Art Gallery, seemed to sum up the general feeling. 'Any development is better than none at all.'
Patrick Steel
James Boyle, the chairman of the Cultural Commission, has challenged the executive to respond to the report by St Andrew's Day, 30 November. Cynical observers have commented that it may take that long just to read it.
Perhaps the most radical of the report's recommendations is the proposed setting up of two limited companies with charitable status - Culture Scotland and the Culture Fund - which would oversee cultural policy and funding respectively.
Existing cultural bodies, including the Scottish Museums Council (SMC) and the National Museums of Scotland (NMS), would no longer be directly funded by the executive, and could lose autonomy over other functions.
Joanne Orr, the director of the SMC, said she was open to change, but was yet to be persuaded that the Culture Fund would channel money for museums more efficiently. 'Diverse funding streams can be good,' she said. 'Losing that could be detrimental.'
Gordon Rintoul, the director of NMS, went further. 'If implemented, one might imply more resources were going into bureaucracy than into the sharp end,' he said.
Less controversial was the report's recommendation that culture needed increased funding of £100m a year, but there was scepticism about what the executive's reaction might be.
Steve Callaghan, the Museums Association's councillor in Scotland, said: 'I hope it's not all been hot air, and whatever the structural changes there are lead to significant resources to underpin the sector.'
The sector was largely complimentary about the report's recommendations for a local cultural strategy, emphasising the role of local government in making culture central to community planning.
Mike Taylor, the director of the Perth Museum and Art Gallery, seemed to sum up the general feeling. 'Any development is better than none at all.'
Patrick Steel
