Broadcasting (Scottish Borders)
The final item of business today is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-00630, in the name of Christine Grahame, on Jeremy Hunt doesn’t get the picture, so neither does the Borders. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament expresses its disappointment that the Scottish Borders has been omitted from a list of locations eligible to bid for a local broadcasting licence; notes that Jeremy Hunt, the UK minister responsible for broadcasting has stated “I want people to be able to watch television that’s truly relevant to them, about what’s happening where they live and featuring people they know”; therefore is astonished that he seems to have failed to consider the Scottish Borders and towns such as Galashiels as a location in spite of the fact that the Scottish Borders is served not by STV but by Border TV, broadcasting from Gateshead and covering also the north of England and the Isle of Man, thus depriving Borderers of both national and local coverage; considers that this is further evidence supporting devolution of broadcasting, and, in the meantime and until such time as Scotland establishes its own digital network, would welcome the Scottish Borders being included on the list of possible sites.
17:06
I apologise for the long title. I thank all the members who have stayed behind, whether or not they take part.
In representing Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale, and in my previous capacity as a South of Scotland member, I am acutely aware of the deficit in national and local commercial television coverage, as a substantial area of my constituency and beyond is unable to receive STV—although when I went recently to a presentation by Jeremy Hunt and the Office of Communications about local TV, the Ofcom mannie actually debated with me that Selkirk received STV. That is news to me and to Selkirk.
Worthy though ITV Borders is, as it broadcasts from Gateshead and covers the north of England and the south of Scotland, it cannot provide a satisfactory service to my constituents, who regularly complain that they are left out.
The deficit exists not only in relation to local and national news and sport but to coverage of Scottish elections. For example, the leaders debates earlier this year were broadcast at or around midnight. Someone would have to be a political devotee, an insomniac or, indeed, both to stay awake for that. Some would say that it was a good time to put it on.
Therefore, I was more than disappointed when I examined Jeremy Hunt’s list of potential sites for local TV delivered via digital terrestrial television, otherwise known as Freeview, to find that the south of Scotland—I exclude Ayr—did not appear.
In Jeremy Hunt’s own words:
“These new local services will be a fundamental change in how people get information about their own communities and how they hold their representatives to account”.
As far as my constituents are concerned, and as I explained above, they meet that test better than any other area in the United Kingdom.
In correspondence with Jeremy Hunt—the responses have been, how shall I put it, perfunctory—the apparent problem is the technical capabilities across the region.
I am certainly no techie buff but others are and I have sought expert opinion, which challenges the UK minister’s assertion. Indeed, in exchanges with Ofcom that I have seen, it states:
“Our assessment was carried out on a subset of the UK’s transmitters and given limited time and resources we prioritised those that might serve the largest number of people.”
Without getting too deep into the techie stuff, I understand that the transmitter at Selkirk has the capability to provide local TV but is not on the eligibility list. The Ofcom test of technical capabilities therefore does not stand up.
Are we then left with population? If we add together the population of Dumfries and Galloway and of the Borders, according to the most recent figures that amounts to 260,000. Even if a critical viewing mass is not met, surely that is counterbalanced by the democratic deficit argument. I have put all these points to Jeremy Hunt and, frankly, I have been stonewalled.
I compliment the South of Scotland Alliance, which I know is pursuing the case vigorously. I continue to campaign—I hope, with other members—to at least give the south of Scotland an opportunity to bid for funding.
In the meantime, in parallel, I have been impressed by the operation of URTV in Helensburgh. People can watch it online, which would be a foot in the local TV door.
Let me explain, with an example of an online TV service that might cover the south of Scotland. I have chosen the regional name “Southern Television”.
If we go online to that site, we get a whole host of content. Let us say that I live in Peebles. I click on the Peebles image on the left-hand side of the screen and I get Peebles news, sport and information. I live in Gala, so I click on the Gala image, and so on.
All that is provided on one site that gives regional and local information in one place. Televisions are already on sale, for example in Tesco, that allow us to call up online services on our TV screen in the living room. That is what is called convergence—see, I have been doing my homework. The term has been used many times before but now it is taking useful shape.
Therefore, I could call up Southern Television on my laptop, personal computer or smart phone. I could call it up on my television at home, while I sit on the sofa. That example of local television could become a key player in the sector.
How does that get funded? Perhaps as a pilot with Government funding? Perhaps, then, a local television network could help to deliver the basis of a new digital network.
I am enthused by that prospect and I hope that the minister will be equally enthused and will not only press the case with Jeremy Hunt but examine the Helensburgh example and perhaps—if I could put in a bid—commission a pilot in, say, Peebles or Gala.
Of course, it is nonsense that broadcasting is not devolved to this Parliament. I welcome the fact that the Scotland Bill Committee will be taking evidence—after the recess, I think—in that regard. I will provide the committee with a link to this debate.
I hope that progress can be made on all the fronts that I have described. What better place to start than where Scotland is worse served. I look forward to contributions from colleagues.
17:12
I congratulate Christine Grahame on securing the debate. Jeremy Hunt’s quote in the motion goes to the crux of the matter.
However, we must also have one eye on the proposed Scottish digital network and the need to ensure the capacity of the sector locally to contribute to that network. I am hopeful that the debate will register a cross-party desire for a change of heart on the part of the UK Government. The UK Government’s current proposals will leave a gaping hole in local TV coverage in a region that, as Christine Grahame said, most needs such coverage.
In February 2009, as a result of the merger with Tyne Tees Television, some 51 of the 64 staff at Border TV were made redundant, which drastically reduced capacity to cover local news and current affairs and created the gaping hole to which I referred. I do not want to imply criticism of the quality or professionalism of the remaining ITV Borders staff—the quality of what they do is high, but there is simply too little of it and they are underresourced.
There is no doubt that the amount of content of relevance to the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway has fallen substantially, so much so that a recent broadcast of “Lookaround” focused almost entirely on findings from the inquiry into the death of Raoul Moat—admittedly an important issue for the Tyne Tees part of the catchment but of little relevance to the Borders, and still less to Dumfries and Galloway.
The recent election debates debacle to which Christine Grahame referred showed that our needs in the south are subsidiary to those of the majority in north-east England and Cumbria. It adds insult to injury that an England international football friendly was shown instead. As members can imagine, that was not too popular in Selkirk.
The argument that the later screening, at quarter to midnight, had a similar market share of the audience, at around 7 per cent, ignores a huge drop in audience between peak viewing and midnight. Christine Grahame was right to highlight that.
My discussion with executives at ITV Tyne Tees and Border at the time revealed that due to the digital switchover, the ability to broadcast different programmes simultaneously had been lost and that to restore it would require significant investment. The loss of that functionality is simply not good enough.
We regularly suffer broadcasts of irrelevant current affairs content, without sufficient clarification that England-only policies do not apply here. The need for change is compelling. I strongly support Christine Grahame’s motion. However, I also strongly urge the UK culture secretary and Ofcom to create a Scottish national channel 3 licence when the current licence runs out in 2014.
Based on discussion with STV executives, I am confident that such a licence would see STV or its successor investing in enhanced local output. As Mr Hunt put it, viewers would have television that is
“about what’s happening where they live and featuring people they know”.
It might also, for example, allow Scotland’s rugby heartland to watch STV’s coverage of Scottish rugby, which is of course a big gap in current provision.
I will quote a statement from 2009 that I think is relevant to this issue:
“Watering down the coverage in this way will mean far less local news for viewers in the Borders, not least because the resources are likely to be located in Gateshead. This decision could only have been made by people stuck in London offices who fail to understand the importance of regional news and diversity.”
That was said by Michael Moore MP. Given that he expressed that view to Andy Burnham when in opposition, I hope that we will have a response from Michael Moore on the current situation, because he obviously made a very good case for devolving broadcast powers to Scotland in that statement. However, I hope that he would support not only the initiative for a local TV licence to cover the south of Scotland to address the gap in local news coverage but an all-Scotland channel 3 licence.
17:16
I congratulate Christine Grahame on getting her motion debated in Parliament. I apologise for the state of my voice and because I may have to leave before the end of the debate to catch a train. I apologise to the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs if I have to do that.
I did not actually sign Christine Grahame’s motion, because my constituents would probably look askance if I signed a motion suggesting that I support Galashiels as one of the licence locations: there is a strong feeling in Dumfries and Galloway that there should be such a location there.
I used to be quite happy with Border Television from Carlisle, which is the local city for most of my constituents. People were perfectly happy to hear what is going on in Carlisle, and we use its services and facilities quite a lot. Indeed, if minimum unit pricing for alcohol is introduced in Scotland, I suspect that my constituents will use Carlisle’s facilities considerably more than they do now—but that is a debate for another time.
The local opt-outs on Border Television ensured that Dumfries and Galloway issues were regularly highlighted and, indeed, politicians of all Scottish parties were often interviewed in that regard. I am sure that Alex and Christine can remember the times when we were brought together to talk about the Scottish budget or whatever, and we had coverage from local television that was envied by many of our colleagues in other parts of Scotland. The general issues in our areas also got a lot of coverage. Unfortunately, since the merger with Tyne Tees in 2009, the situation has gradually deteriorated. We sometimes get good coverage, but mostly the news is local to north-east England and is of little relevance to people living in south-west Scotland.
We now get a sort of Newcastle news. I used to resist the notion that the Border Television area in Scotland should be taken over by STV, because I felt that, like the BBC, it would tend to offer Scottish city news. It is not surprising that that happens, because most people in Scotland live in and around the cities. My constituents would rather hear what is going on locally, but in fact they are not hearing that. As I said, they are hearing Newcastle news now rather than Glasgow news or Edinburgh news, and it is not particularly relevant. There is therefore now a pressing need for a local television channel.
I was quite hopeful in that regard, because the previous UK Government proposed to use some of the remaining digital switchover funding to develop local opt-outs on channel 3. Several strong bids were being developed in Dumfries and Galloway, including one that was headed up by one of the local newspapers. However, the current Government had a different policy, and Jeremy Hunt’s proposals are probably now the alternative to using the switchover funding in that way.
On 25 August, Dumfries and Galloway Council agreed to make a submission to the consultation calling on the Government to include Dumfries and Galloway in its list of potential areas. There was a counter-proposal from a Conservative council to support the Carlisle bid. That would have helped many of my constituents, but only 50 per cent of Dumfries and Galloway would be covered from Carlisle because only 50 per cent of the area gets the direct signal from the Caldbeck transmitter, and there was no proposal in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport framework to include relays.
There is the potential, through the south of Scotland broadband delivery bid, for us to do exactly what Christine Grahame described and develop a local TV channel through broadband. That is but one alternative among others, but I am sorry that the Government does not have an option at the moment that is suitable for south-west Scotland. However, there is potential if we go forward with superfast broadband.
Ms Murray, I ask you to confirm for the record that, when you said “Alex and Christine”, you were referring to Alex Fergusson and Christine Grahame.
Yes, I was.
Thank you very much.
17:20
I thank Christine Grahame for securing the debate. It revolves around a single fundamental problem that has already been well rehearsed: neither the Scottish Borders nor Dumfries and Galloway is currently well served by local or national TV coverage. Christine Grahame has already eloquently explained the nature of the deficit, but the point cannot be made firmly enough.
I ask members to consider this scenario: what if, instead of seeing the first of the ground-breaking prime ministerial debates that were broadcast during the previous Westminster general election, the inhabitants of Cumbria had been offered a Scotland friendly international football match? Border TV viewers in Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders were expected to tolerate the direct equivalent: instead of the Scottish election leaders debates, they were offered an England friendly.
Not only that, but the level of local news coverage that is devoted to either area is paltry. If there was ever an area of Scotland that was crying out for local TV, it is the south. It cries out for such a service not least to redress a historical imbalance in reporting that neglects to transmit many important local and national stories to viewers in the region.
At this point, only Ayr and Carlisle have been offered the chance to bid. It is true that broadcasts from a Carlisle local TV service would reach a proportion of viewers in Dumfries and Galloway, but they would not cover Wigtownshire. In any case, I must remind colleagues that Wigtownshire was historically accustomed to getting clearer transmissions from Ulster, at least in some remoter parts of the county. Of course, the Borders simply drops off the map.
Jeremy Hunt’s decision is particularly disappointing because a good deal of work has been done through the south of Scotland alliance to make the case for local TV for the south of Scotland. The Border TV region was the first to go through the digital switchover process. Back then, the alliance recognised that the switchover presented an opportunity to do things differently.
There is now spectrum capacity throughout Scotland to allow for the creation of the Scottish digital network that the Scottish Broadcasting Commission proposed. That would offer a pan-Scotland service as a single national channel or as a federal channel of more localised services. Such a strategic approach would give the service the critical mass to have a commercially credible business model, especially if it were treated in a similar manner to S4C in Wales or MG Alba in Scotland and awarded funding support under the public service broadcasting principles that underpin those services.
Therefore, it is especially disappointing that the UK minister has come down in favour of the simplistic view of commercially viable, large-scale local TV operations, by and large in the main urban centres, rather than the more enlightened dialogue for which he was responsible beforehand, which actively encouraged consideration of alternative models to re-invigorate local press businesses. A federal approach to a Scottish digital network would be predicated on that kind of thinking. Local organisations could gather and produce local interest content and would be able to distribute it across print, internet, radio and TV channels, providing employment and skills enhancement where they are needed most, as well as fulfilling the audience appetite for local content in news and other entertainment genres.
In short, the approach on which Jeremy Hunt has settled in no way fits the needs of the south of Scotland, but I contend that, however inadvertently, he has made the case for a Scottish digital network with a strong local focus even more clear cut than it was before.
I want Mr Hunt to reconsider and to make the same offer to the south of Scotland that he has made to other areas, but I am also under no illusion that the only long-term solution is a Scottish digital network that has the capacity better to reflect the rich and varied life and culture of the region that I represent and of Scotland as a whole.
17:24
I am pleased to speak in the debate on the important issue of local broadcasting. Christine Grahame deserves congratulations for bringing it before Parliament.
The story of broadcasting in the Borders has been mixed in recent years. I will explore some of the background to the debate and consider how we have to got to where we are.
For almost 50 years, ITV’s Border Television provided local news and programming to the Scottish Borders, south-west Scotland, north Northumberland, Cumbria and the Isle of Man. It had the second-largest geographical region in the ITV network. Despite the difficulties in catering for such a wide and differing audience, the flagship daily news programme “Lookaround” had one of the highest ratings of any BBC or ITV regional news programme in the United Kingdom. Indeed, one survey in 2005 found that, while “Scotland Today” and “North Tonight” drew a 26 per cent audience share and “London Tonight” took a 28 per cent share, Border’s “Lookaround” was watched by a whopping 42 per cent of the population at 6 pm on a weekday evening.
The affection in which “Lookaround” was held by Borderers was further made clear when, in 2007, ITV announced plans to merge Border with Tyne Tees. I remember well in my first few months as a member of this Parliament the volume of correspondence from constituents who were concerned about losing such an important service. Nevertheless, ITV pressed ahead with the merger and, since then, many Borderers have expressed to me their frustration at the reduction of a local service.
In August, the UK Government announced 65 locations across Britain that could be in the running to run local television services, including nine in Scotland. According to the Government, the locations have been selected because they have appropriate transmitter coverage, and the list will be whittled down further before the final decisions are made. Despite that, I am disappointed that the Borders and the wider south of Scotland are not included for consideration. The roll-out of the new scheme by the UK Government is to be welcomed, but I have made it clear that ideally the proposals should be modified to allow our region to benefit from a genuinely local TV service. My colleague Alex Fergusson and I have made a written submission to the culture secretary Jeremy Hunt on the issue and to ask why the region appears to have been left out.
The Borders and the wider south of Scotland region are already at a disadvantage due to the poor broadband service in many areas. There are also some concerns about the lack of coverage by STV and the recent decision by Freeview to include the BBC Alba channel at the expense of a number of Scottish digital radio channels, on which many of my constituents relied as their only means of local radio reception.
I think that we all want local TV to work, but we must also ensure that any local television service is not only local but sufficiently good quality, relevant local TV. I have made clear my disappointment at the Borders being excluded from the list of potential locations for the UK Government’s proposals, and in my final moments I want to bring to the debate a point that some of the local broadcasters in my constituency have raised with me.
A number of local reporters have expressed the concern—which we should all bear in mind—that there may be a trade-off between scale and quality when it comes to providing relevant local output. When we talk about local news services, we often hear about local television in a United States context, but those examples often cover significant areas of population consisting of several million people. That is clearly not comparable with the situation in the Borders, in Dumfries and Galloway or in other parts in the south. We should therefore be realistic about what we can expect from a local TV news service, and we should bear in mind the advice from the professionals who deal with the work on a day-to-day basis. We have to strike the right balance between scale and quality if we are to move forward effectively.
I congratulate Christine Grahame again on securing the debate.
17:28
I, too, congratulate Christine Grahame on securing the debate. I am disappointed that Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders have been left out of the list of proposed locations for local TV licences. The decision once again leaves the areas unsatisfactorily provided for.
Notwithstanding the issues of quality that have correctly been raised, local TV has the potential if properly funded to enrich a community with a number of services. Its benefits include economic activity and the provision of local jobs, as well as the opportunity to provide a platform for local advertising and boost commercial activity in rural areas.
Jeremy Hunt’s plans bring nothing of the benefits to a region that is, as we have heard, already deprived of media and insufficiently provided for in Scottish news, current affairs and cultural programming. Aileen McLeod and Christine Grahame highlighted that, during the elections, many viewers in the south of Scotland were insufficiently informed of the real issues at stake in May.
If provision for local TV were based on need, our area would surely be the first in the queue, as 250,000 viewers in the south of Scotland fail to receive adequate programming on a daily basis and are, therefore, cut out of the democratic debate. Although the region receives BBC Scotland, the reception of Radio Scotland is very poor. I am sure that members have had the experience of driving down the M74 and, on reaching the Lowther Hills, having to switch to Radio 4. It is absolutely ridiculous that people across the south of Scotland can hear Radio 4 as clear as a bell but they cannot hear Radio Scotland. For example, even when Radio Scotland broadcast a debate from Dumfries during the election, people could not hear it.
I submitted a response to Mr Hunt’s consultation because, given the unique need in the south of Scotland, I would have thought that we were deserving of the local TV licence. Unfortunately, the proposals from the UK Government and Ofcom address areas that are already well served by the media. The parameters that have been set out to identify proposed locations may be open to challenge on public interest grounds, given the fact that they are designed to identify only transmitters that serve the largest number of people in the UK and are weighted in favour of urban conurbations.
In my consultation response, I stated that I believed that rolling out superfast broadband to southern Scotland was an absolute prerequisite and that only its introduction can truly meet the aspirations of the people who live there. It is plain silly that, at the moment, the south of Scotland is considered less Scottish for broadcasting purposes. It is, after all, the place that gave us James Hogg and Walter Scott, and Robert Burns produced his best work there. It is also the birthplace of the rugby sevens and home to Queen of the South and dozens of other Scottish football clubs.
Mr Hunt’s belief that, in the future, all local TV should be made available through something called internet protocol TV again highlights the fact that he does not get the picture. In order to make IPTV available to viewers in the south of Scotland, the UK Government would have to fund superfast broadband adequately, and a number of organisations throughout the south of Scotland have indicated that £68 million for the whole of Scotland simply is not enough to fund broadband. As the cabinet secretary pointed out earlier, we have 32 per cent of the UK’s geographic area, and we are already behind the curve when it comes to access.
Mr Hunt’s energy should be focused on that and on the issue of an all-Scotland licence for television. I accept the argument that has been made about STV being too focused on central Scotland’s cities. I have had talks with STV executives, who have assured me that an all-Scotland licence would adequately serve the rural areas in southern Scotland. However, we should not wait until 2014 to get that coverage. Although the licence will be renewed in 2014, we can put pressure on to have Scottish news provided for the south of Scotland before then. For that reason, I will write to Jeremy Hunt, Ofcom in England and ITV, urging them to act to make that happen as soon as possible, to address the unique interests of the area.
17:33
I, too, congratulate the member on raising this matter and securing this evening’s debate. I am grateful for the opportunity to participate.
I share the member’s disappointment that no pioneer location was to be found in the Borders when the list of 65 towns was published recently. I have no doubt that Galashiels would have made a fine location, as would Dumfries—which Elaine Murray mentioned—in serving the interests of the good people of Dumfries and Galloway. However, I understand that technical reasons may be behind the omission of a station in the Borders and Dumfries and Galloway rather than a deliberate oversight, as members may believe. Locations such as Falkirk, Greenock and Dundee do not have to contend with the same topographical issues as many communities in the south. Members can take my word for it, as an amateur radio operator who lives in a deep valley, that it is an unfortunate fact that part of the spectrum to be utilised to make the stations possible suffers from inherent gaps and can be undone in hilly regions.
However, despite the unfortunate omission of large parts of the south, I welcomed the inclusion of Ayr on the list. I trust that the people of Ayrshire will embrace such a local TV station, and I was pleased to hear of the reports from the BBC last month that one company was “certain” to bid for the Ayrshire licence. I also welcome assurances that
“the Government is clear that it would one day like everywhere in the UK to have access to a local TV service”.
I will certainly campaign for that.
Ofcom’s statistics show that significantly more people in Scotland cite television as their main source of news and information on what is going on locally. The figure is 62 per cent, compared with 52 per cent in the UK as a whole. That would suggest something of an appetite for local TV stations, and I do not doubt that such an appetite exists throughout the south of Scotland. I agree with the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs, who said:
“Local TV services have the potential to bring benefits to viewers across Scotland.”
An obvious example is the ability for small, local businesses to target advertising to their customer base. In an age when there are so many media platforms and we can receive news at the most local level in print and on radio, the television proposal would seem to be just an extension along those lines.
I understand that the local TV initiative will be rolled out in two stages, the second of which involves the eventual introduction of internet TV. That will benefit the 40 per cent of the UK that cannot receive the spectrum, so it is obviously relevant to the Borders and Dumfries and Galloway. Clearly, that development is a few years down the line and it will necessitate the roll-out of superfast broadband. I look forward to that coinciding with the south of Scotland broadband project, which has been approved by Dumfries and Galloway and Borders Councils. I am glad that Galashiels has already been earmarked for superfast broadband, and I trust that the Scottish Government will be equal to the task when the time comes to deliver the service more widely across the south of Scotland.
17:36
I have an interest to declare. Some years ago, in the 1990s, in my role as a company troubleshooter, I was asked by the owners of a troubled local television company in Dundee, Channel 6, to join the board to see whether we could change its fortunes. We failed not just because of the inherent skills of the team but because of poor transmission opportunities, a shortage of incentives to succeed, capital costs and a lack of access to local and national frameworks. Happily, most of those things are now surmountable.
Before talking about local television in the Borders and parts of Ayrshire, which are not covered by the Hunt list, let me consider the wider framework of television services in the area. As Paul Wheelhouse pointed out, Jeremy Hunt said that he wants people to be able to watch television that is truly relevant to them, to have information about what is happening locally, and to see programmes featuring people they know. It might surprise Mr Hunt to hear that what is relevant to Scots people in the Borders and parts of Ayrshire and what is happening to Scotland, its people and its governance at this moment in its constitutional history are not what is currently broadcast from Gateshead.
I am disturbed by the comments and e-mails that I have received, particularly from the rural areas that I represent, complaining about the lack of, the timing of, and the high-definition needs of TV programmes, be they sport, news or drama programmes. As Joan said, it is critical that Ofcom, ITV plc and the minister, Jeremy Hunt, act before 2014 to have STV replace Border Television in servicing customers in the south of Scotland.
Mr Brodie, will you clarify that you were referring to Joan McAlpine?
I was. I beg your pardon.
The Borders and Ayrshire are Scottish and the main provider should be STV. That would permit one quality provider to talk to the many, but in today’s world of multifaceted communications, we need to have more and many people talking to the many, with a network built across not just the south of Scotland but all of Scotland.
People in Scotland spend an average of four and a half hours per day watching television, which is the highest figure in the UK. According to Ofcom, nine out of 10 adults consume some form of local news and 75 per cent rate local news and weather as important types of media. That local communication is unquestionably an integral part of overcoming any democratic deficit.
The London Government has selected 65 areas of the UK, nine of which are in Scotland, that are eligible—not chosen—for local television. It said that it engaged in a detailed analysis of the technical issues, but also that it considered the costs, timings, feasibility and the testing of commercial viability and interest in the marketplace. If that is so, we shall seek that data in detail, to help us to understand why a large swathe of Scotland has been neglected on such an important issue. If it is argued that the spectrum of local television does not allow provision on digital terrestrial television, the answer is to secure the Scottish digital network as soon as possible and, until that can be done, to accelerate the more-to-many provision of a network through internet protocol television.
17:40
I welcome the debate that Christine Grahame has initiated on television services in the south of Scotland, and I welcome all the speeches that have been made.
The Scottish Government has long been concerned about the inadequate coverage that viewers receive in the south of Scotland and we have frequently raised the matter with the UK Government. I recently met Jeremy Hunt in Glasgow and raised the matter with him again. I can tell Paul Wheelhouse and other members that I also raised channel 3 licensing.
We responded to the local television consultation, we have written to UK Government ministers about the issue and other broadcasting matters, and I have established on-going dialogue with my counterparts in Westminster about the future for broadcasting in Scotland.
We also publish today the third and final progress report on implementation of the Scottish Broadcasting Commission’s recommendations. Indeed, in this time of historic change for broadcasting, one of the reasons why I established the Scottish digital network panel was to enable us to be fully involved in providing constructive solutions, not least of which is the Scottish digital network, which members mentioned.
The Scottish Parliament has long and unanimously supported a Scottish digital network. The Scottish Government has made it clear that the Scottish digital network would be the best option for providing the host or spine broadcaster for local television services in Scotland. Christine Grahame’s vision of a southern television service would fit well into such a model. Through the work of the Scottish Broadcasting Commission and the Scottish digital network panel, we have presented plans that were rigorously researched and developed. However, it is apparent that the UK Government has not given proper consideration to that important work.
Local television offers the potential for improving television services for south of Scotland viewers by locating a station there. In our response to the UK Government’s local television consultation, we stressed the importance of including the south of Scotland in the list of potential locations for a local television service. In addition, in our recent response to the UK Government’s communications review we highlighted the clear need for better news provision in the south of Scotland on channel 3.
I was therefore astonished that the anomalous situation in the south of Scotland was not addressed in the UK Government’s most recent announcement. However, I am aware that Jeremy Hunt said at the recent local television event in Glasgow that the current list of possible locations for local television is not definitive. I hope that that is the case.
The UK Government is intent on making local television a purely commercial prospect, with very limited public funding, other than a contribution of £40 million from the BBC’s share of the licence fee up to 2014. In that context, the question is how we make local television commercially viable and ensure that there is quality provision—John Lamont made the point well. The Shott review, which Jeremy Hunt set up to investigate the commercial viability of local television, found that commercial viability would be difficult to achieve and most likely would result in only larger cities getting a local television service.
The UK Government’s latest announcement confirmed that and suggested that only Glasgow would be a suitable option in the context of commercially viable local television. The Scottish digital network panel arrived at much the same conclusion and commented that it would be ironic if the only public support—from licence fee payers and taxpayers—to be offered to local television in Scotland was for a service in Glasgow, which it can be argued is the most media-rich location in Scotland. Potentially, local television will not reach where it is most needed. There must be a south of Scotland test when we consider local television.
Jeremy Hunt has placed great store on the roll-out of superfast broadband as a way of promoting local television. He has suggested that that is the solution in relation to the Scottish digital network. The Scottish Government fully appreciates the importance of ensuring the availability of superfast broadband across our nation. That is why we announced in the spending review that the Scottish Government will at least match the £69 million of television licence fee revenue that is allocated to Scotland by the UK Government. However, we doubt that superfast broadband can address the significant deficit in public service broadcasting content for Scotland. The deficit is experienced by viewers everywhere in Scotland. Superfast broadband offers, at best, only a partial means of distributing local television across Scotland, whether that be in the south of Scotland or elsewhere. There will need to be additional provision for local television.
The UK Government admits that it cannot definitely work out a timeframe for getting local television on the internet. It also concedes that a television platform is still better suited than the internet for broadcasting. Basically, people prefer to watch television in their living rooms, rather than viewing something on a computer screen. However, as Christine Grahame points out, that might change—behaviour patterns can and should change.
At the moment, the position of the UK Government represents a missed opportunity to meet the needs of viewers in Scotland.
Christine Grahame referred to another important aspect of broadcasting in Scotland: broadcasting responsibilities for the Scottish ministers. We made it clear in our Scotland Bill broadcasting paper that there is a set of quite sensible and workable broadcasting powers that could be devolved to the Scottish ministers. The matters that we have discussed this afternoon underscore the importance of those powers, which include the right to establish public service broadcasting institutions, such as the Scottish digital network; the right to be involved in future licence fee setting arrangements, because of the consequences of the rapid imposition of the licence fee arrangement, which has, as we have heard today, had consequences for jobs in the BBC; and the right to have responsibility for approving licensing decisions that are made by the UK Government for local television within Scotland.
I thank Christine Grahame for raising the matter. The Scottish Government supports local television if it is able to deliver greater choice for viewers in Scotland. As it stands, the initiative presents more of a missed opportunity than anything else. The UK Government has not considered the option of establishing a Scottish digital network. It also has not addressed the increasingly urgent need of viewers in the south of Scotland to have access to a comprehensive Scottish news service on channel 3—points made by Joan McAlpine and others. If local television is to work, it has to work in the south of Scotland. I commend the south of Scotland alliance for continuing to argue that rational and pragmatic case, and note the cross-party support that has been expressed in this chamber.
I do not think that this is the last that we have heard of the matter, but I thank Christine Grahame, again, for bringing it to the chamber.
Meeting closed at 17:47.