Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 01 Mar 2000

Meeting date: Wednesday, March 1, 2000

Official Report 283KB pdf

---

BBC in Scotland

Good morning. I call the meeting to order. Mr Stone, will you stop playing to the camera?

Or playing with the camera.

I start by welcoming the witnesses from the BBC to this meeting of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee. I am sorry for the slight delay. We are now all assembled and would like to proceed.

On a point of order. Can we ensure that everyone who wanted to get in has managed to? There was some doubt about that; apparently this is a sell-out performance. I do not know whether that is because of the BBC or because of other guests, but some people were having difficulty obtaining tickets. Can we establish whether everyone is here or whether extra seats need to be put in?

We will do our best to ensure that everybody who wants to see the proceedings can do so.

Does that mean that we could bring more seats in?

There are regulations about how many people we can allow in, but we will do our best to permit as many people as possible to attend the proceedings. As you are aware, there are cameras here, so people will see what happens even if they are not present.

I want to say for the record that I used to work for the BBC and that my wife still does. She used to work for Scottish Television.

I declare my interest as registered in the "Register of Members' Interests".

I am an occasional broadcaster. That is registered in the "Register of Members' Interests".

I hope that Mr McCormick will not have to say at the end of the meeting that he, too, used to work for the BBC. [Laughter.]

That is very unsettling.

You are supposed to have total confidence in him.

Like Celtic football club.

Now, now. We write no statements of confidence.

I want to explain how we will proceed this morning. I will shortly hand over to Sir Robert Smith, but before I do so I remind members that for some time we have had an interest in the BBC's role in education, culture and sport, which are covered by the committee's remit. I am sure that other issues will be raised this morning, but I ask members to remain within our area of competence and to remember that, because broadcasting is a reserved matter, some issues can be dealt with more effectively at Westminster. I now ask Sir Robert Smith to introduce his team and say a few words.

My name is Robert Smith and I am the national governor of the BBC for Scotland and chairman of the Broadcasting Council for Scotland. Ann Caldwell is vice chair of the Broadcasting Council for Scotland. John McCormick is controller of BBC Scotland and Mark Leishman is secretary to the Broadcasting Council for Scotland.

I attended my first governor's meeting in October last year, but despite the fact that I have been in post for only a short time I can report that BBC Scotland is in good heart. By the end of the current financial year, we will have spent more than £100 million on programming in Scotland, which is a record—it is the first time that spending has exceeded £100 million. I am pleased to say that an increasing proportion of that money—roughly one third—is in network, by which I mean programmes that we are producing in Scotland and exporting to other parts of the United Kingdom.

We have had a strong programming year. Programmes that we have produced include "Chewin' the Fat", "Castaway 2000"—which we will no doubt hear about later—a number of drama programmes on Radio 4, "Feeling Good", which is a health and lifestyle programme for the Scots, and "Monarch of the Glen", which started on Sunday night. Throughout the year, we have been heavily involved in responding to devolution and in broadcasting the proceedings of this Parliament. Our response to devolution is also evident in our news and current affairs and Gaelic coverage.

We sent the committee a memorandum outlining what we do. We describe ourselves as

"the most diverse BBC production base outside London".

The BBC has 10 production bases around the UK. We are committed to putting more investment in creativity and learning into Scotland. With digital and BBC Online, we believe that the future is exciting.

Chris Smith, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, described the BBC as

"the UK's most important cultural institution"—[Official Report, House of Commons, 21 February 2000; Vol 344, c 1239.]

We believe that BBC Scotland has an important role to play in the culture of Scotland. That not only goes for covering proceedings of Parliament, news and current affairs, but includes the cultural contribution that we make to learning, education and so on.

I have been involved in financial services, which I thought was complex. However, this is a more complex business. The people whom I have come across have impressed me, but not everything is perfect. As chairman of the Broadcasting Council for Scotland, I must tell the committee that we are still not happy with some of our transmission problems. BBC2 transmission in south-west Scotland is still not good enough. I do not want to prejudice the report, which we have not yet properly discussed, but I can say that one of the comments that we will make is about how annoyed we are that we have not made sufficient progress on that.

The same applies to Gaelic broadcasting. We feel that we need to extend the network there, so that we can say that we are providing a really national service. We want greater network output, but to do that we must produce quality. We are not looking for a quota; programming must be good quality. We outperform in terms of network output in the UK, especially in children's television, where we take a much greater proportion than members might expect.

We are hoping to improve on that. I see network output as export earnings, which go back into the cultural community and allow us to be involved in Scotland in building the craft skills such as writing, producing, directing and even performing arts—the more money that goes into that area, including in the independent sector, the more we can generate creativity in Scotland.

We also want to improve what we do in local radio and television. We must look at the implementation of a response to devolution. In May, we will produce our findings on what we have done over the past year in response to devolution and how we will take that forward.

We have just had the licence fee settlement. We are working our way through how that will affect BBC Scotland and the BBC in general. Members may have heard that we have a new director general. He has his way of doing things, so I think that one can expect some radical change. He is committed to programmes. He is excited about what he has seen in Scotland and, this week, is about to make a second trip here, which is interesting in itself. He will propose changes to the way in which the BBC is run, which, with the licence fee settlement, means that there are uncertainties at the moment. However, matters should become clear shortly.

I echo what has been said—BBC Scotland's accountability is officially to Westminster. We have already appeared before a select committee there this year.

We have been in informal contact with a number of members of this committee; we are now appearing before the committee formally and look forward—in a way—to the questions that the committee is about to ask us. We are happy to be here and will be happy to continue the contact in the months and years ahead.

Thank you for that comprehensive statement. I remind members to keep their questions succinct as we have only until 10.30 am on this matter.

As Sir Robert Smith said, the settlement for the licence fee is very recent, so he will probably not have had a chance to adjust fully to it. One concern of the viewers is what is happening to digital services. It is probably too early to say how those services will be affected, but what is happening in relation to BBC Choice and what plans do you have for the future?

I shall pass that question over to John McCormick, although he will also say that he cannot give you a detailed answer. The additional licence fee that we received is not ring-fenced for digital television and includes additional money. We have also been asked to provide additional revenue savings, which can be done in several different ways. We are looking to save an additional £490 million over the next six years. We are juggling with additional cash and money that must be saved. John will say more specifically on BBC Choice and digital television.

We play a full part in the BBC's UK digital proposition. Our three special services—BBC News 24, BBC Knowledge and BBC Parliament—as well as BBC Choice fulfil the Reith dictum of "inform, educate and entertain". We are playing a key part in the provision of all those services. It is important to stress that, from the existing services, we will produce educational programmes in Scotland for BBC Knowledge—we are already planning them. We make a major contribution to BBC News 24; the work of this Parliament makes a major contribution to BBC Parliament, as do some of our existing programmes.

BBC Choice is a developing entertainment channel. As members will know, we provide 10 hours of new programming every week for that channel and are playing a part in the assessment that it is currently undergoing. We can decide whether to change the emphasis of BBC Scotland and whether to look for a different market. We have been particularly successful in the context of new digital channels, as we have focused on a younger audience. From 10.00 to 12.00 every night, we focus on attracting an audience that is perhaps under-served by BBC1 and BBC2. That has been successful and we would like to build on that success.

Another key area in which we are working with our colleagues in London is in developing plans for a BBC children's channel. As Sir Robert said, within analogue we are the second provider of children's programmes within the BBC. We fully expect to make a major contribution to the children's channel through programmes that are made here in Scotland.

The broader concern is how long that will take. Many people do not receive the digital service. What sort of long-term commitment is there to it? At the moment, the audience is quite small. Over what period would you expect to build that audience up? How are we all to benefit from digital services?

It is important to stress that a large part of the increase in the licence fee will go to strengthen the analogue services. The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport talked about enhancing BBC1 particularly, and we have plans to help the controller of BBC1 to strengthen his channel with programmes that are made here in Scotland. The licence fee enhancement will benefit not only those who have access to digital television. One of our plans is to strengthen our presence on BBC1 and BBC2, then to migrate that to the digital audience.

One of the great challenges of this period is to pioneer new technology and to invest money from the public licence fee in a service that is available only to a minority while making that service attractive, so that Britain will lead the digital revolution. We faced similar challenges in the transition from radio to television and, in the 1960s, in the transition from monochrome to colour television. We must invest to make the services attractive. The governors have set a cap of 10 per cent on the licence fee revenue as the total that can be invested in all our digital services, including BBC Online. That will be reviewed in the light of the licence fee settlement, which is only a week old; work is being undertaken to set new targets.

Our challenge is to ensure that we continue to serve our core audience, who have access only to analogue. We expect that position to be the same for at least five years. However, in five or six years about half, or more than half, the population will have access to digital television. Planning the change from analogue to digital is one of our greatest challenges and we plan to undertake much more public consultation on it in Scotland. We intend to keep the analogue services strong, and at the core, while investing some of the new funding in digital technology to encourage people to transfer and to provide new services for them.

Much of our submission regarding funds was about the digital opportunity. When Chris Smith announced the money that he was giving us, he said that he expected that uptake on digital television would flatten out at 50 or 60 per cent without the BBC's involvement. Government and the BBC are clearly interested in pushing digital developments as fast as possible.

I will mention digital television but I also want to widen the questioning. Sir Robert mentioned a figure of 50 to 60 per cent without the BBC's involvement. Within a relatively short time, television will have to be 100 per cent digital. How will the BBC and BBC Scotland get the resources to invest in such services? There is speculation that not only will BBC Worldwide Ltd be sold, but www.bbc.co.uk will be sold. Resources are being transferred, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. What involvement will Scotland have in getting a share of those resources and in investing a share of those resources in the digital future of BBC Scotland?

It is my job to fight for that. I am pleased that we have not been circumscribed by being told that we must sell a particular asset, or that we must do any particular thing. We have been given a sum of money to save over a period of time. We have a director general who is a strong believer in programming and we have capabilities for programme making within the BBC. Members should be reasonably assured that we will safeguard those capabilities.

In your opening statement you said something with which many of us would heartily agree—the more that goes into broadcasting and its craft skills, the better we will be able to build a creative Scotland. The more that is invested in broadcasting, the more that can be got out of it—that is key to your job in Scotland. Getting resources for investment and choosing which resources to disinvest the BBC of has resulted in worries that the BBC might be disinvested of resources that it needs. That would be bad for the BBC throughout the UK, but it would be particularly bad news for BBC Scotland in terms of the craft base. Has that option been thrown out of the window?

No options have been ruled out, but it is clear from what Greg Dyke and the governors of the BBC have said that they want to keep programme-making capability within the BBC. We are not merely commissioners of programmes—we have total capability to make programmes.

That is important. I recently had a debate on the radio with Mr Kenneth Macintosh, who described the issue of the Scottish Six as a nationalist plot. I apologise for playing Guy Fawkes in this matter, but could you update us on the progress of the review—which is promised for May—of the suggested Scottish Six? Given the success of "Newsnight Scotland" and the increase in the number of viewers that it has achieved over "Newsnight" UK at 11 o'clock, what expectations do you have of the review? What evidence is being taken and what is the new director general's involvement in such matters?

You will not expect me to comment on the outcome of an issue that we have been investigating for a year. The committee will not hear the results until May. We have carried out a lot of consultation and we have conducted surveys and so on. We have also discussed the issue among ourselves. I imagine that the subject will raise its head when Greg Dyke visits us this week.

The discussion that we are having is much bigger than just the Scottish Six; the Scottish Six is part of a whole. What we are actually discussing is our response to devolution. At the end of 1998, the BBC examined how it should respond to the advent of the Scottish Parliament. Ten million pounds were earmarked for that assessment and other initiatives were undertaken, such as educating people in London about the differences between Scottish, English and British and about our separate education and legal systems. We have, in many ways, a different culture and different ways of going about things. We expect that the results of our investigation will show that there have been changes in the way that the national news and national programmes treat such matters.

The Scottish Parliament exists and money has been earmarked; we have used that money to broadcast a lot about the Scottish Parliament. There has been the "Newsnight" opt-out, and there have been differences in the ways in which the news broadcasts between 6 pm and 7 pm have been treated. Technology has also moved on—many things that affect our response to devolution have changed. We will take all those issues into account.

The Birtian BBC was very slow in responding to devolution. It seemed hardly to notice that it had happened.

I dispute that strongly.

We will have to differ on that, Sir Robert, but that is the impression that many of us have.

At our Westminster hearing, some people were concerned that we had forgotten that England existed.

I have always thought that the way in which Westminster looked at Scottish broadcasting was odd.

The reality is that, in the context of developing broadcasting and moving towards digital, you are replacing the whole Scottish Six argument. We are on the cusp of enormous change, in terms of technology and how we receive broadcasting. None of us is worried about that because, as John McCormick has just indicated, digital will give us access to a far wider range of services, which can service a variety of minority audiences. However, when you are considering that, in the context of the Scottish Six, I ask you also to consider the other audiences in Scotland that are ill served. John has mentioned Gaelic and the BBC has done far more to report the Parliament than any other channel in Scotland. The diversity of digital is important; you can perhaps start by focusing on Scotland and the Scottish Six.

Digital offers us all sorts of possibilities. However, we are rather proud of the Gaelic service we provide—that is another area we could get high marks for.

Do you want to add something, John?

I wish to remind the committee that we have been giving evidence to the task force, chaired by Alasdair Milne, that is considering the possibilities of developing Gaelic television in the digital age. If it looks as though we have not been having a public debate about Gaelic, it is because the task force is addressing that issue. We look forward to positive developments coming out of that and to the expansion of the Gaelic base in Scotland.

I remind the committee and others of the outstanding invitation to the new director general to appear before the committee. I am sure that, after the pleasant time that you have had, you will recommend that he take up that invitation.

I am sure that we will remember that. Before we move on, can you outline the timetable for the task force?

I understand that the task force is hoping to publish its report by the end of April.

What you say about the Scottish Six and so on is all very well, and I welcome what you say on the Gaelic front. However, I represent Caithness and Sutherland and, as you are aware, we have a problem on the north coast. From the perspective of the north Highlands, the trouble with Scottish coverage is that there is a danger of us tending to get lost in "Loch Ness monster seen again" type stories. I would like to probe our witnesses about what expansion in regional coverage they would envisage.

Scotland is such a rich tapestry and people in Caithness do not like being submerged in "we're all Clydebank boys" type stories. The national cultural strategy refers to investment in citizenship through the creation of BBC open centres in local communities. I make no apology for coming at this from a regional angle; that is what underpins the culture of communities and the differences within Scotland. I would like to hear your thoughts on that.

We work within the context of broadcasting in Scotland as a whole—we see national broadcasting as our priority. We are very much aware that a choice exists. Our colleagues at ITV provide a regional service—three companies cover the population of Scotland. Our colleagues in independent local radio provide a local radio service. We put the vast bulk—not the totality—of our resources into providing a national service for Scotland as a whole. Our priority is to ensure that within that national service—principally in journalism, but also in drama and comedy—we reflect the different parts of Scotland. We review that coverage intensively every month and publish what we find as part of our annual performance review.

Our coverage of the different regions of Scotland is better than some people believe. However, it is not as good as we want it to be. One aspect of the £10 million settlement that Sir Robert referred to was an increase in our news-gathering capability in areas of Scotland that are under-served in terms of news coverage. In addition to that, we are considering with the Broadcasting Council the opportunity offered by fibre-optic technology to increase the television capability in some of the areas that have been dead spots to us.

We are not complacent about our coverage of the different regions of Scotland, although we think that it has got better year by year. We have put more money into news gathering and, in the non-journalistic areas, we have been sensitive to the criticism that was put to us a few years ago that if someone did not live in Greenock, Paisley or Glasgow, they would not get any comedy on to BBC Scotland. That has been changing—we are looking for a broader range of drama and comedy than we have had before. That is one of the benefits of the increased investment in Scotland that we have enjoyed over the past couple of years; we will see more of that in the next couple of years.

I welcome what you say, but I suggest that, in terms of regional variety in Scotland, television coverage is not quite as sophisticated as the radio. That is a subjective opinion. There are Dounreay and Barmac stories from the Highlands, but the problems in agriculture and crofting in the past year, which are relevant to a huge chunk of Scotland, did not get the coverage that they deserved.

I do not disagree with the general thrust of what you say; we could reflect some areas better, including the one that you refer to. However, the totality of our coverage—we reviewed this recently—on radio and television and in our journalism is comprehensive and the "Landward" series is dedicated to rural affairs.

You should be aware that that issue never goes away at the Broadcasting Council. The council is geographically diverse, and we have people whose thinking is largely in terms of the Borders or the Highlands and Islands, and so on. The question whether areas are properly represented comes up time and again. There is no sense in which a metropolitan or central belt sensibility sweeps all before it. People are highly sensitised to the issue. As the controller said, the situation is not perfect, so nobody is complacent about the problem.

I accept that. Lastly, I make a plea that you consult—formally or informally, as you see fit—groups in the remoter areas of Scotland now and again. For example, you could talk to local politicians or businesses. Such feedback could only help the BBC.

I wish to return to the issue of transmission, which Sir Robert Smith and John McCormick mentioned. How do you aim to improve analogue transmission, in particular to south-west Scotland? A number of constituents have told me of the problems that they encounter in receiving Gaelic radio. If we are serious about expanding such provision, the role of the BBC is very important. I would be interested to hear how you will tackle transmission problems.

So would I.

Forgive me if this is a long answer. The problem with television in south-west Scotland mainly concerns BBC2 Scotland, as some 70,000 people there do not get a BBC2 Scotland signal. We believe that 50,000 of them would receive that signal if they directed their aerial toward the Sandale transmitter, which is operating on lower power than we would like it to. We should receive a positive response to our application to increase the power there, although we need approval from the Irish authorities to ensure that transmission on increased power from Sandale does not interfere with their broadcasting. We expect to reach constructive agreement on that problem within months.

We will solve the first problem, which relates to radiation, power and aerial switching, so that we can serve the majority of those who are currently under-served—we will run a public information campaign in the south-west about that problem. That will isolate those who cannot be served by BBC2 Scotland, whose number, we think, is closer to 10,000 than 20,000. We will then consider what we can do to help those people, who tend to be scattered across the south-west. It might be difficult to solve that problem without recourse to digital technology.

I stress that 90 per cent of Gaelic speakers can receive Radio nan Gàidheal on FM. We want to make it a truly national service and have drawn up a transmission plan to extend the transmitter chain, to ensure that the gaps in the service are filled in the next year. That requires a fair amount of spectrum planning and investment, but I am confident that we will have completed most of that programme within the year.

Would not large-scale investment in analogue technology be a waste of money? It is fine to increase the power of a transmitter. Surely better reception is one of the carrots that you can use to encourage a faster switch to digital, and in particular to digital satellite. There is a problem in that BBC2 Scotland is not available on digital satellite, although I understand that that will change.

One of the difficulties of the transfer from analogue to digital is that, even by the most optimistic projections, it will take five years for the majority of people to transfer. We do not want to deny the people of the south-west of Scotland access to coverage of this Parliament, for example, for five years. We think that the investment, although significant, is worth while over that period.

There is a technological benefit in being what is called an early adapter. Perhaps you could add some benefit to that—I am not suggesting anything as radical as a remission of the licence fee, but I suggest something that will encourage those who have substantial difficulties in switching. The problem affects not only the south-west of Scotland. There are rural glens throughout Scotland that have their own transmission systems and licences, most of which are coming to the end of their natural life. It might not be a job for the BBC, but it is certainly a job for the Government to encourage early adaptation, given the amount of money that will come from the sale of analogue frequencies. The key group is those with transmission difficulties.

I think that it is a job for the Government, as we do not set the licence fee. That is really outside our ken. Being an early adapter is fine if one can afford it. Some people cannot.

That is the point. Should we find a way of helping those people? Should not the BBC be encouraging the Government—I am sure that you do that all the time, privately—to help early adapters, particularly among those who have been failed by analogue technology?

People who live in rural and island communities and on the peripheries of Scotland are among the early adapters. They have become sophisticated users of technology, so that they can live where they want in Scotland and have a sophisticated information technology base. Every time that someone contacts us about a reception difficulty, one of the first things that our engineering information officer discusses with them is the advantages of digital over analogue. We find quite a take-up of digital. People are reassured by objective information from the BBC that it is worth the investment, because they will get their transmission problems solved.

However, we must be very careful about the information rich and information poor.

Absolutely.

We are committed to trying to ensure that over the next five to six years we get as close as we can to 100 per cent coverage on analogue. The people who have most difficulty in investing in digital will be the last to switch. How they are helped when analogue is switched off will be a key question for the Government of the day.

As £10 billion—probably—will come from the sale of analogue frequencies, this is an issue for the Government. The Government should be spending money on the switch from analogue to digital. Can you tell us when BBC2 Scotland will be available on digital satellite?

I cannot tell you at the moment. Everything that we have done in the digital committees and structures of the BBC has been waiting on the licence fee settlement. Now that that funding has been announced, we are discussing the digital proposition in the context of it. That will take us a number of months to sort out.

Mike Russell spoke about the success of "Newsnight Scotland", which would be acknowledged by most people in Scotland. Could you say more about the experience of that to date—have any problems been encountered and what lessons have been learned since the opt-out began?

My second question relates to the much-talked-about "Castaway 2000" programme, of which there has been a great deal of public criticism. How would you respond to the accusation that it was deeply insulting and patronising to people who live in the islands, and that it was a gross waste of public money?

I will take the question on "Castaway 2000" head on. For the record, "Castaway 2000" is costing just short of £2 million, rather than £2.5 million, or £3 million, or £3.5 million—the figure keeps escalating.

A bit like the figure for the Parliament building.

I believe that "Castaway 2000" is compelling watching. I have watched all four episodes and am frustrated that the programme might not appear on our screens again for another 12 months. I am dying to find out what happened to the people on the island.

Western Isles Council does not agree that the programme is insulting to people who live in the islands, and has welcomed it. There are 20 firms engaged in building huts and doing various other things in Lewis, Harris and so on, which have benefited hugely from the programme. About £300,000 of the money that we are discussing has gone directly into the local economy. Tourism will also benefit from it. We have received a number of letters and phone calls from people who live up there and are very happy with the programme. The view that there is something wrong with it might be coming from outside the Western Isles, but the people up there are very positive about it.

What was the first question?

It was about "Newsnight".

"Castaway 2000" was the easy bit.

I was misreported in newspapers—which is unusual. What I was complaining about was a very ragged switchover. We went for the "Newsnight" opt-out because we thought that it was the right thing to do. That was our judgment, and part of the money that we received for our response to devolution was put into funding it. The feedback that we get is that we do "Newsnight Scotland" very well. There are people who switch on at 11 o'clock simply to watch it. However, there are also people who write in to complain bitterly. Last week we were on a radio programme in Aberdeen, and several people phoned in to ask what Jeremy Paxman was doing after 11 o'clock, and to say that they were frustrated because they thought that "Newsnight" was an excellent programme and did not want to switch to something else. They thought that "Newsnight Scotland" was also excellent, but that it should be shown at another time. That would get us into all sorts of programming and scheduling problems.

I think that we are doing "Newsnight Scotland" well, but that some people would like to see the whole of "Newsnight" and are concerned that they are missing something. On the other hand, some people switch on purely to see the Scottish version of "Newsnight".

I was complaining that we are sometimes made to look rather silly when we switch across around 11 o'clock. As similar problems do not occur during the news between 6 o'clock and 7 o'clock, I would be surprised if there is a technical problem, so I asked whether someone was making life difficult. I have been reassured that no one is being silly and it might, therefore, simply be a technical problem. John McCormick is there when the switchover happens.

Sir Robert has covered the issue comprehensively.

Why do you think that the switchover during "Newsnight" is ragged when that during the 6 o'clock to 7 o'clock news is not?

As the national governor says, the 6 o'clock to 7 o'clock news, which switches two or three times between Scotland and London during the first half hour, shows how cleanly the switchover can be done. The freer and less structured form of "Newsnight" has made it more difficult for people to perfect that. Sometimes there have been genuine mistakes at both ends, based on the judgments that people make during a live programme. Both sides are working hard to make the switchover as clean as possible, because it is frustrating for the viewers when it is not.

"Newsnight" is about the BBC providing a 50-minute programme of top-class current affairs. It is a different programme depending on whether it is seen in Northern Ireland, Wales, England or Scotland. We are all dedicated to trying to solve the technical problem that is sometimes caused by various external circumstances. They are all within our control, and we are working to make the switchover cleaner and more acceptable.

We are very encouraged by the public response to "Newsnight Scotland". After only a few months, the programme has established itself as a late-night platform for discussion of issues relating to the Parliament. If it had not been there over the past four months, what would have been the platform for discussion of tuition fees, the controversy surrounding section 28, or the National Westminster Bank-Royal Bank of Scotland-Bank of Scotland takeover saga? The programme has given considerable in-depth coverage to business, politics, public affairs and education. "Newsnight Scotland" was created because we knew that there was a gap in our coverage. Previously, news in Scotland was summed up in three minutes at 9.28 pm, and there was no other service on television. That would be unthinkable in a Scotland with its own Parliament. "Newsnight Scotland", along with all our devolution coverage, will be considered by the governors in May, but so far it has been very successful.

I have a comment on the first answer. Two million quid going to the Western Isles is the best news since the SS Politician ran aground on Eriskay. One could make a programme about clearing dung out of Sullivan's Steadings or dry-stane dyking in Caithness. For the record, I should say that I have received a few gentle representations—not nasty ones—saying that the programme is slightly ridiculous. I take my hat off to your artistic drive on this, but I do not think that it is all undiluted applause.

It would be very strange if we got 100 per cent audience approval for every programme that we put out. That would suggest that we were not being pioneering enough. I find the programme very interesting. We could have set it on a south sea island or on Anglesey, and no doubt we would have come in for criticism if we had done that. I think that this will be good for the economy of the Western Isles. However, it is not about a diversion of public funds to the Western Isles—we are not in that business. We are in the business of making pioneering, entertaining and educational programmes. This is part of that genre.

However, it is super that the pubs and the joiners up there are having a tremendous time. I am looking for a wee island off the north coast of Sutherland for you.

I am sure that you will take Jamie Stone's comments on board.

I echo Jamie Stone's comments. I have many family members who live in those islands, and I have yet to hear anyone say, "I wish the BBC would go and spend £2 million somewhere else." However, I am sure that we could do better for the next series of "Castaway 2000". There will shortly be one or two disused oil rigs close to the coast of Aberdeen, and there would be a welcome in the north-east for a "Castaway 2000" development.

We should row them up and put them on a disused oil rig?

Yes, but that would be next year.

I return to Ann Caldwell's comments on the Broadcasting Council and the way in which you make yourselves collectively accountable to the licence payer. Can you say something about the way in which you make yourselves accountable and collect the views of the licence payers?

Thank you for asking about that, as it is an important issue. Accountability is a key issue, which arises out the licence fee review. The council is part of the accountability pattern, but it is not the whole of it. Other parts of it involve the controller and the governor going live on air and allowing people to respond directly.

Our role is captured in the BBC charter and we are primary advisers to the board of governors. We get involved in the development of yearly objectives and we talk to the governors about the extent to which those have been achieved and about what the next year's objectives should be. We have a major role in promoting the programme-making resources that are available in Scotland and ensuring that the governors understand what we are capable of. That is something that we take very seriously.

We take seriously our direct accountability to the licence payer. I have already mentioned the geographical diversity of the council—people come from all kinds of backgrounds, from different businesses and with different interests. We are informed by the audience research that the BBC is carrying out and by specific audience research that we commission. Comments are received by the audience response unit. That side of things—the direct response over the phone to the audience—has improved and we are much better served now; we are better informed about what the audience is saying.

As members will know, we have held public meetings at various times, which is a slightly equivocal way of doing things; it is interesting, but it captures the views of only a small number of already interested people. It is our mechanism, but is certainly not sufficient. We are pinning our hopes on BBC Online as a means of getting more feedback. There is now a Broadcasting Council for Scotland website, which tells people more about what the council is doing and what its goals and objectives are. We would all like the website to be used more interactively, to provide another open channel of communication to the council.

We cannot turn ourselves into a fully representative organisation—that is impossible. In any case, programmes cannot be made simply on the basis of what kind of programmes viewers are telling us that we should make. That is a way to hell, not a way of getting the high level of innovation and creativity that we want in Scotland. We are doing our best, and the BBC's heart is more in the concept of accountability than it was in the past. As Sir Robert Smith and John McCormick said, we are pleased to be here today, as this gives us another opportunity to discover what people are thinking and what they want.

That is interesting. I was struck by what you had to say about BBC Online, as that is critical to future development. I am also interested in the issue of accountability to the two Parliaments. Sir Robert Smith mentioned that the formal accountability is to Westminster. How do you think the relationship between the council and this Parliament will develop in future years?

Much depends on what you decide. The council will always be happy to discuss with members of the committee or the Parliament the issues of audience needs and wants. We would be failing in our duty as council members if we did not do that. However, there is no way of knowing what formal arrangements will be made. Perhaps the governor has some thoughts on that.

I went out of my way to visit the spokesmen of all the political parties in Scotland, in the first two or three months of taking the reins. We did not detect too much tension in the Westminster select committee. It wanted to establish that the council was accountable to it, but I did not detect great tension arising from the fact that we were talking to MSPs. Neither do I believe that our appearing here regularly will be a problem.

We have discussed with MSPs the fact that, although we are aware that broadcasting is a reserved matter, many of our activities—as you mentioned in your opening comments, convener—contribute to areas that are the responsibility of this Parliament and the committee. You mentioned education, culture and sport, and we play a key role in those matters in Scotland. When Gaelic policy is developed, and the policy relating to the Gaelic broadcasting fund, we are keen to ensure that our role is not forgotten because broadcasting is a reserved matter. Also, when screen policy is being discussed, and the development of the film industry, our key strategy is to play a major role. Our strategists aim to build on the successes that we have had in recent years and to play a key role in the development of the screen industry in Scotland.

Finally, it should not be forgotten that one of the three national orchestras in Scotland is funded not by the Scottish Arts Council, but directly by the licence fee. The Scottish Symphony Orchestra is at the height of its creative powers and is visiting parts of Scotland that other orchestras find it difficult to reach.

All those contributions should not be ignored because they fall within the reserved area of broadcasting. I hope that the Parliament and the committee will provide proper scrutiny of those issues, and give credit where it is due, in recognising the contribution that the BBC makes in areas that are their concern.

The issues that I was going to ask about have already been covered. However, I have a couple of things on my mind. We are having bother with our headquarters, the Scottish Football Association is having bother with its headquarters, and the national theatre, if we have one, might have bother with its headquarters. I understand that the BBC has plans for new headquarters. Can you tell us about those plans?

I also want to talk about sport, and the way in which big deals for rugby and soccer internationals will change the role of BBC Scotland in covering sporting events. Do you have plans to cover other sports? Can you talk a wee bit about the way in which financial pressures impact on your budget and your coverage of sport?

As committee members will know, the market has changed, particularly in respect of the rights to football coverage. We are aware of the importance of football coverage to Scottish broadcasting, as our sports programmes are among our most popular, with sports coverage on Radio Scotland on a Saturday afternoon, during the week, and on "Sportscene". We are keen to compete in that market and to continue to bring coverage of Scottish football action to a wider audience. I am sure that other people in this room are also interested in that. In the past, ITV and BBC Scotland have been able to bring a range of football to audiences in Scotland, which is appreciated by audiences in every part of the country. We receive positive feedback about that.

We also provide extensive coverage of other sports, including shinty, curling and bowls. We provide coverage of a range of sports that other broadcasters, operating in the commercial market, would find it difficult to cover. We are proud of the broad range of sports that we cover on radio and on television. We will provide extensive coverage of the world curling championships, which people expect as it is one of Scotland's national sports.

We are sometimes unfairly criticised for being dominated by football, to the exclusion of other sports. However, over many years we have developed educational programmes on rugby, within our children's programming output, and have covered women's rugby and women's golf. We have covered a range of sports that go largely unsung, but which are important to our output, and we have received a positive reaction from the wider audience to such coverage. The audience in Scotland wants to watch football primarily but not exclusively, and we hope to continue to serve those people through providing a broader range of sports coverage.

I would like to go back to the discussion about "Newsnight" and develop the more general point about the availability of studio space at which Ian Jenkins was hinting. On many occasions, one of the people being interviewed on "Newsnight Scotland" has had to go from Edinburgh to the Glasgow studio, while another person is in the self-op studio in Edinburgh. That is because the self-op studio can handle only one person. At other times, the discussion seems to be between people on screens, rather than between people in the studio. Is there a plan to develop more studio space, particularly for programmes such as "Newsnight", at the Tun? I know that "Newsnight" is not always about the Parliament, but much of the locus of its discussion will relate to the Parliament.

Given the decline in the industrial base—much of the industrial news was generated from the west coast—and the development of financial services and political news in Edinburgh following the devolution settlement, is there a question mark hanging over the location of new studios in the west? If there is a case for a new studio, should it not be located more centrally, or even on the west side of Edinburgh?

Or indeed, in Inverness or Wick?

We have developed a clear property strategy for different parts of Scotland. We are pleased that our new broadcasting centre in Aberdeen is on target to open in the summer. That centre will have state-of-the-art digital facilities for both television and radio. It is our second television centre in Scotland. We are also on target to move our operation in Edinburgh to the Tun building next autumn. Originally, that was designed to be operating in time for the Parliament at Holyrood—I hope that we are not there for too long on our own. As members will know, we have developed a television studio in Queen Street as a temporary solution, while the Parliament is based at the Mound.

We cannot insist that people come to Glasgow at 11 o'clock at night to take part in "Newsnight Scotland"—we do not have that power. I am glad to say that many people have made the journey—and continue to do so—and we appreciate that. However, at 11 o'clock at night, some people find that they prefer to broadcast from a studio nearer their home. As part of the property development strategy, we are trying to ensure that we have facilities in different parts of Scotland to allow people—members of Parliament and people in other walks of life—to play a part in programmes such as "Newsnight".

There are television facilities planned for the Tun building. As far as Pacific Quay is concerned, we are in the early stages of discussing the relocation of our headquarters in Glasgow. We are committed to keeping our headquarters in Glasgow and we have no plans to relocate outside the city.

Nothing is certain in life. When I was building the new Museum of Scotland, until it was up and finished, I did not believe that it would ever be finished, because things were always getting in the way. I believe that the new headquarters will be built at Pacific Quay—subject to bridges being built and so on. That work should start at the end of the year and the building should be open by 2002-03.

However, when one uses public money for a building, one must plan carefully. [Laughter.] I am talking only about the BBC. It is a complex building. There are a few bridges still to be crossed, including the one that is yet to be built.

Have you got any spare time to help us now that you have finished the Museum of Scotland?

No.

One thing to emphasise is that by the end of four or five years, if all the plans are put into practice, our main centres will have state-of-the-art digital technology. We will be ahead of the pack and able to exploit new technology for the benefit of Scotland. That is very exciting.

Thank you. We appreciate your comments.

I want to pick up on what you said about being at the forefront of digital technology. When talking about your strategy, you mentioned increasing analogue coverage over the next five years. That does not seem to be part of the digital revolution. In Scotland, we are concerned that we are at the forefront of the digital revolution and we need a coherent and integrated strategy covering all the different media and information services. How much contact has the BBC had with the digital Scotland task force?

As we have been developing our digital transmission, we have been in touch with all the different interest groups in the enterprise network. There is good communication between us. We have particular contact in terms of education and the digital task force because we have shared objectives. We are investing about £6 million—that is about 10 per cent of the local investment in Scotland—in our digital television services for local consumption and online services. The reaction to that has been encouraging. The take-up of digital services, particularly BBC Online and the opportunities that that presents to enhance our services—not just for people in Scotland, but for those with an interest who live much further afield—is very exciting. We have some more detailed figures on that.

It might be helpful to talk about new media, rather than digital television specifically. The biggest response to BBC Online has come through the standard grade bite-size material, which we have made available to schools. That is where much of the future development will come from. We get about 750,000 hits a month on the BBC Scotland site and since the bite-size material was added, the number of hits has risen to over 1 million. Some people would credit part of that rise to programmes such as "Off the Ball" and some of the Gaelic output. However, it is important to get the development of the new media services right and to extend those services to new audiences. Teachers and pupils can use that material systematically, through a curriculum, but there is also a great deal of interest in extending the boundaries to the home, the workplace and centres such as the ones to which Mr Stone referred.

The final part of my question was about the amount of contact you had. You talked about contact between the BBC and other agencies to discuss strategies. However, I want to know how much direct contact you have had with the digital Scotland task force. We are trying to produce an integrated, national strategy.

We had a meeting with Peter Peacock and some officials to discuss such matters in Broadcasting House, Queen Margaret Drive, about three months ago. At that stage, most of the discussions were about infrastructure. The BBC transmission network was privatised about four years ago. We have given a lot of information and we are happy to continue to talk, but there has not been much concrete progress since that meeting.

Would you like to have a more formal role within the task force?

We would be happy to talk about the possibilities.

We are short of time, but I would like to ask a brief question. You have spoken about the coverage of the Parliament and how effective it has been. Could you comment on the coverage of our temporary move to Glasgow in May and the coverage of the committees? How can we put across to people the way in which the committees operate? As the committees start to move out and about in Scotland, how do you envisage developing that coverage?

We are grateful for the early discussions with the Presiding Officer and his colleagues to ensure that we can provide television coverage of the Parliament when it moves to Glasgow in May. Although the coverage of the Parliament in Glasgow may not be as sophisticated as that from the Mound, it will certainly be of an acceptable level.

We give balanced coverage of the committees and Parliament meetings in our regular programme "Today in the Scottish Parliament" on Radio Scotland. We have reviewed that nightly digest and are broadly satisfied that we achieve the right balance. The area that we could consider more carefully is the coverage of committees that meet on a Wednesday.

Our coverage of Westminster and Holyrood combined on Wednesday afternoon means that we do not devote as much time on Wednesdays to the committee work that is generated on that day, but we are looking at that. Otherwise, we are broadly satisfied with the balance of our coverage between committee and Parliament, but it is part of the review and we would welcome members' comments on it.

What will happen when the committees start moving outside Edinburgh?

We are committed to that coverage.

Do you accept that the coverage at this stage of the evolving process of Holyrood is comparatively simple compared with Westminster? In other words, there is no equivalent to question time profiles and character pieces on the background. At the moment, the coverage tends to be committees, soundbites and shots of us looking very B & Q-ish in the chamber. I would have thought that there could be more probing.

Mike, you wanted to make a point.

I wish to follow up the point about coverage. Most people believe, particularly with the radio programme and the television programme "Holyrood", that you are doing a great deal, but the digital BBC Parliament channel is patchy. One tends to sit through debates between groups of old age pensioners in the House of Lords whereas there will have been something of interest in the Scottish Parliament that day. There is some introduction to what is happening in Scottish Parliament committees. I understand that there are plans to develop that channel. Can you tell us how it will introduce the Scottish Parliament more?

The Parliament channel gives a fair amount of coverage of Parliament and committee meetings. The problem is that the channel does not have much live coverage. It has covered debates live, but it does not cover much of the Scottish Parliament live because of the contractual commitment that was made when the Parliament channel passed to the BBC. There are contractual commitments because the contract was drawn up in a Westminster-only world. We are reviewing that, but it is not just a matter for the BBC, so we will extend our discussions.

The BBC is keen to develop coverage of the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly as part of the Parliament channel, but it is too early for me to give any commitments because the discussions are complex.

The American channel C-SPAN is now taking Scottish Parliament question time fairly regularly. The Parliament channel needs to recognise that it has an obligation to provide live coverage.

Online and broad digital technology gives us great opportunities for streaming the output from here that we are covering live. We are discussing that, in conjunction with looking at the Parliament channel and its output.

On Mr Stone's point, the lion's share of the answer concerns the technology that was installed in the Parliament at the outset. A range of technologies could have covered the Mound. The decision was taken by the appropriate body to accept the tender for the kind of coverage that was offered at a particular cost. There are technological constraints on that coverage, which we do not expect be replicated when the Parliament moves to its permanent place. Because of the nature of the technology, there are things that we cannot do, but might like to do. I accept that, on the production side, there are things that we do not do that Westminster does. That forms part of our review.

Scottish question time on the radio would be easy to do.

We have to wind up now. Thank you for attending this morning and answering our questions. I am sure that we will have a continuing relationship—I look forward to that. I reiterate Mike's comment that there is an outstanding invitation for the director general when he has settled in to his new position—we look forward to meeting him.

I will deliver that message to him personally tomorrow night.

Although we will change witnesses, I ask committee members to stay in their places rather than have a break—we are pushed for time. While we are doing that, I will do what I should have done at the start of the meeting, and welcome Richard Lochhead to the committee. I also welcome Lloyd Quinan, who seems to have left us again. I am sure that he will return.