A Scottish government minister has formally defended the government Techscaler programme, calling allegations made against the initiative’s foreign trips in The Sunday Post “unsubstantiated.”

Techscaler is the Scottish government’s startup support network scheme, which provides support, networking opportunities, and funding to Scotland’s startups and scaleup founders, delivered by CodeBase.

One of Techscaler’s key initiatives is its international trips to major tech hubs, like Silicon Valley, Singapore, and Japan, offered to startup founders to open them up to business deals and funding opportunities with key foreign investors and markets. These trips are tax-payer funded and include airfare and hotel expenses for participants.

While the trips have often received stellar reviews – according to testimonials on the Techscaler website – The Sunday Post reported on information it acquired from Techscaler participants, investigations, and FOI requests. The Techscaler participants that spoke to the The Sunday Post, many of which were anonymous, relayed their dismay at some of the participants’ behaviour and the unstructured way the trips were run.

The Sunday Post’s report indicated that Techscaler did not have a formal or transparent process for how trip participants were selected -thought CodeBase has since described the selection process as rigorous” –  and that the trips lacked structure as far as connecting participants with investors, and with little mandatory networking events.

More salacious allegations included that there was late night partying and drinking, with some saying that certain participants treated the tax-funded business trip as a “free-holiday”.

Recommended reading

• CodeBase Defends Techscaler Trips After Critical Report
• Deputy First Minister Delves into Techscaler Two Years On
• Techscaler One Year In: Hit or Miss?
• Swinney Pledges Support for Deep Tech, Goes All in On Techscaler

Since then, The Sunday Post piece has received significant pushback, even from the one named person who gave their own account of the trip. Daniel Grant, who provided his name in The Sunday Post article and attended a Techscaler trip to Silicon Valley, clarified some of his comments on LinkedIn, even saying he thought the original idea for the trips was “ingenious”.

DIGIT had previously addressed the piece with CodeBase CEO Stephen Coleman, who said that the article “wholly misrepresented” the Techscaler trips. A CodeBase spokesperson also defended the selection process, describing it as “rigorous,” and said that partners of participants had to pay their own way and did not participate in any Techscaler activities on the trip.

Still, the article did catch traction, with Scottish Conservative MP Murdo Fraser calling for a “urgent enquiries” into the Techscaler trips.

Further, an FOI request issued by The Sunday Post sought feedback forms from the trip, but the Scottish Government only submitted redacted copies which only showed positive feedback from participants. The Sunday Post had, however, already received unredacted feedback forms from an unknown source that did show concerns from participants.

Now, Deputy Minister Kate Forbes, who had helped to launch Techscaler, continues the defence of the programme.

“The unfortunate reality is that we are not here to discuss the rationale for Techscaler or its performance, or to debate how the programme could be optimised,” she said, addressing the Scottish Parliament. “Instead, we are here because some see political capital in a series of unattributed, unsubstantiated claims that have been made in the press.”

She defended the trips’ organisation, saying they were meant to present Scottish startup founders with the ability to experience life and work in the “world’s best ecosystems” for startups and tech.

She also told the parliament that expense spending only absorbed around 2% of the initiative’s total budget, and that participants cannot claim for additional travel or costs on the trip.

Still, Fraser challenged Forbes on the FOI’s redacted negative reviews, questioning if the Scottish government did not have to “give a balanced view on the value of those trips,” he said.

Forbes shot back, saying that some redactions had to do with some elements being “commercially sensitive.” But she also said that “the information was provided on the express basis of anonymity. If the same people who are so keen on reducing or removing that anonymity cannot even get anybody to go on the record in the press without their names being removed, that says it all.”

This rhetoric is a bit harmful to her point, however. If all feedback was given anonymously, then surely, positive feedback should have also been redacted on that front. As well, anonymity is protected in the media and press for a reason, and it should not negate or dismiss verified testimony.

An earlier version of this article misstated aspects of The Sunday Post’s reporting. The investigation was based on multiple sources and documents, not a single participant, and the lack of a formal selection process was reported as fact. The article has been updated to reflect this.