Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 22 Feb 2000

Meeting date: Tuesday, February 22, 2000

Official Report 153KB pdf

---

Reporters

The next item is a report from Fiona McLeod. Fiona has submitted her report, but is unable to be with us today because of an illness in her family. Her absence gives us more time to consider her report, which we will discuss at a future meeting.

The next item is—

I wanted to hear from sporty Karen.

Sporty Spice.

I am sorry. We have also to discuss other reporters. Karen, could we have an update on your report into sport in schools?

I have to confess that, because of other pressures, I have not gone into as much detail as I would have liked, but I now have a programme of visits to various schools and educational facilities. However, given the timetable of the bill, my report is likely to slip until May.

Thank you, Karen. We now turn to Mike's report on the Scottish film industry.

I have had discussions with the clerk and others. I also find that there are pressures on my time and I would like the opportunity to consider this subject in a little more detail. Given the fact that Jamie Stone's report and the one on children and young people will be of considerable importance to us when they are published in the summer, I would like to continue my inquiry at least until the end of the parliamentary year and possibly until September. That will allow me to take a wider look at the subject.

I am also examining the technological aspects of the report, as a small amount of funding is available. It would be nice if my report could be seen as well as heard, and I am considering including in it one or two little bits that demonstrate the good things about the Scottish film industry as well as some of the problems.

Although I agree with Mike's time scale proposal, I am concerned that Scottish Screen seems to have selected a site for a studio that is dependent on public funds. A number of other proposals are not so dependent on public funds but, had they the support of Scottish Screen, they might have been in a better position to move forward. I would like Mike to take a look at Scottish Screen's rationale for selecting that option, which might ultimately result in there being no studio at all. If there is any possibility of a verbal update on that subject, I would like him to give that information to the committee.

That would be helpful.

I have had discussions about the studio options, among other things. It is not at the heart of the current debate on film in Scotland, largely because—no matter what Scottish Screen has decided on—the dynamic for a studio in Scotland will come from the available throughput. There is no sign that Scottish Screen's plan—or indeed any of the other plans, save one—has guaranteed throughput. One plan might have guaranteed throughput, and that is the one that is most likely to go ahead. Apart from the usual funding for incoming industry, that plan will not require the type of public funds that Scottish Screen is talking about.

We could get a little hung up on the studio question. Experience elsewhere—in Ireland, for instance—has shown that spending a lot of time and effort on studio developments tends to create a sink down which film industry money goes. Effort becomes centred on maintaining the studio rather than on allowing a critical mass to develop. The critical mass will come if there is throughput of product. Throughput of product will dictate the studio. The equation that Mr Monteith is talking about is, therefore, not real.

I shall try to keep members updated. A number of other issues arise from the inquiry, including the development of certain craft skills and the question of a national film school, which is one of the more interesting issues that the committee will discuss.

If there is any follow-up on the question that Brian Monteith has raised, let me know and I shall put the issue on the agenda.

If members have concerns, I will be happy to address them.

Jamie is not here, so we cannot get an update on his report on rural schools.

What is the time scale?

The original time scale that we set was April, but I do not know whether he is able to meet that.

Given the discussion that we have just had, I presume that we want to promote that report so that it is the first report that we receive, in which case perhaps Jamie can be encouraged to let us know how quickly he can come back to us.

I am happy to speak to Jamie on behalf of the committee to impress upon him the need for this inquiry to progress as quickly as possible.