“Introducing in Scotland”
The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-01065, in the name of Joan McAlpine, on saving “Introducing in Scotland”. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament expresses its concern that the BBC is considering scrapping Introducing in Scotland, a radio show based at Pacific Quay in Glasgow that aims to find the best new unsigned music talent in Scotland, as part of the BBC’s so-called Delivering Quality First plans; believes that giving new artists a platform for their music is a valuable public service; considers that the show’s producers and presenters, Ally McCrae and, previously, Vic Galloway, have done valuable work over the last 11 years in giving new talent exposure to the listening public; is further concerned that, if such programmes are centralised to London, unsigned musicians from Scotland will have less coverage; notes the support for Introducing in Scotland; notes that the petition to save it has received nearly 6,000 signatures in less than one week, and further notes that the petition is available for signing at:www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/introducingscotland.
17:10
I thank all those members across the parties who supported the motion and who will speak in the debate today. Cuts to the BBC’s radio output are very much in the news this week after it was revealed that one in three Radio Scotland production staff is to lose their job. At First Minister’s question time, we heard the deep concerns about the loss of two high-quality Radio Scotland programmes, “Scotland at Ten” and “Newsweek Scotland”. Their absence will concern members across the chamber and will, no doubt, be discussed in the coming days and weeks. In particular, I look forward to the matter being addressed next Tuesday at the Education and Culture Committee’s timely round-table discussion on broadcasting and democracy in Scotland. However, today I will talk about another radio programme that is threatened by the BBC’s “Delivering Quality First” operational restructuring plans.
Politicians are less likely to have heard the music show “Introducing in Scotland” than to have heard the current affairs programmes that are threatened, and I would be surprised if any had ever appeared on it. Nevertheless, we should be just as concerned at its loss. “Introducing in Scotland” has a loyal following of young people and makes a vital contribution to the creative industries, which are among Scotland’s key economic strengths and a growth area for jobs. The “Introducing in Scotland” radio show is hosted by Ally McCrae and is broadcast every Sunday night from midnight to 2 am. It is the only Scottish opt-out on Radio 1 and listeners can also hear it on the internet. The show has a remit to provide the
“best new unsigned, undiscovered and under the radar music in Scotland”,
and it has an excellent track record—pardon the pun—of doing just that.
Under Ally McCrae, this year, and his predecessor, Vic Galloway, in the 11 years before that, “Introducing in Scotland” has been the only outlet on Radio 1 to showcase up-and-coming bands and solo artists from Scotland to a Scottish audience. In addition to the weekly show, which has been moved to something of a graveyard slot in the past year, the show reaches a pan-United Kingdom audience once a month. Pretty much all Scottish success stories from the past decade are where they are today because of early exposure through airplay and live sessions on the show. In fact, two of Scotland’s most successful pop exports, the producer Calvin Harris, from Dumfries, and the band Frightened Rabbit, from Selkirk, who come from the South Scotland region, were first played on the show. Calvin Harris had his first live session on it way back in 2007 and, in a short space of time, was invited to work with Kylie Minogue. That shows the influence that the show has. The BBC’s proposal to replace the show with a UK-wide programme will mean less exposure for the Calvin Harrises of the future.
The BBC insists that the weekly UK-wide show with which it wants to replace the opt-outs from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales will be an improvement, but that is not what fans think, and 7,000 of them have signed a petition to save the Scottish show. Per head of population in Scotland, that is a higher proportion than the number of people in the UK who signed the petition to save BBC 6 Music, which most people will remember as a very successful campaign that achieved its purpose after a blaze of publicity. The campaigners to save “Introducing in Scotland” have been diligent in their enthusiasm over the past few weeks and months. They are not all people who are involved in politics; they are simply driven by a real love of and enthusiasm for new music. They have taken their case to the BBC trustee for Scotland, to the head of Radio 1 in London, to the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs, Ms Hyslop, and to the Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries in London, Ed Vaizey.
The campaigners point out that, on average, between 21 and 26 tracks by Scottish artists are played on the show every Sunday. If it is replaced by a UK-wide show, that number will be reduced considerably to about one in four songs on the playlist, and it would be even less if it were determined according to Scotland’s UK population share.
The implications are wider than those for one radio show, however enjoyable and popular it is. Many Scottish artists go on to support a network of jobs in Scotland in areas such as marketing, management, tour support, security, promotional opportunities and work for recording studios and session musicians. It is notable that the Musicians Union has been very supportive of the campaign to save “Introducing in Scotland”.
The music industry in Scotland is a real strength. We can see that in the growth of the festivals movement, which results in thousands of tourists coming to Scotland. In the past two decades, live performances here have increased by 82 per cent. Many music business contacts to whom I have spoken, including Paolo Nutini’s manager, Brendan Moon, who is a big supporter of the campaign, believe that the 82 per cent growth is linked directly to shows such as “Introducing in Scotland” and the talent that they promote.
It is the BBC’s role, as a public service provider, to serve hard-to-reach audiences, which includes young people. The BBC has a duty to showcase culture and to support talent development in every part of the UK. The moving of the show to London could damage the vibrant music scene in Scotland by limiting access and opportunities for Scottish artists to be heard.
It is important to talk about access because, at present, the show is based in Glasgow. For people throughout the country from places such as Inverness and Aberdeen and from rural areas such as Selkirk, Glasgow is much more accessible than London, where they will have no relationship at all with the producers.
I will finish with the words of Scott Hutchison of Frightened Rabbit, who began in Selkirk. He said:
“It would be a travesty if the show was cut from the BBC radio schedule in Scotland, and scrapping it would reinforce the popular fallacy that the industry does not exist outside London.”
17:16
I congratulate my colleague Joan McAlpine on securing this extremely important debate on a vital issue that relates to the cultural fabric of Scotland. Scotland’s music has a strong international reputation, not just because of our folk music, but because of major international artists, from Annie Lennox to Franz Ferdinand and Amy Macdonald, who have found success beyond these shores and in charts throughout the world.
A concerning feature of the BBC proposals is the effect on opportunities for new and up-and-coming artists, who sometimes need a leg-up to make themselves known to the industry, which all too often is very focused on existing major acts and less so on up-and-coming ones. Such acts might need a bit of cultivation and assistance to make the breakthrough, and shows such as “Introducing in Scotland” are vital for that.
When I was at university in Aberdeen and not long after that, there was a furore because the local radio station Radio Northsound had dropped its hour-long session in which it played music from local bands. If a local band produced an EP, its songs could be played on the show, which would give them exposure to the wider public in the north-east who perhaps did not go to the gigs that took place in the evenings. When that slot went, the argument was that, if those bands wanted to get exposure, most of them would have to leave Aberdeen to cultivate their reputations in the Glasgow music scene, which often drew bands away from Aberdeen. I do not have a problem with artists leaving the area in which they started to make a success of themselves, but that should be out of choice, not necessity and starvation of opportunity.
That is the concern that I have in relation to “Introducing in Scotland”. I was struck by the parallel that exists between the two cases. The further we force people to go to gain recognition, the more difficult we make it for them to make a breakthrough. Bands that previously would have gone from Aberdeen and the north-east to the Glasgow music scene to make their name and cultivate a reputation—and which might have got a leg-up through “Introducing in Scotland” being broadcast from Glasgow—now might think that, to make the breakthrough, they will have to go to the London music scene. To be perfectly honest, it is much more difficult for a band to make its name and cultivate a reputation in London, because London attracts people from throughout the UK, whereas in Scotland we have a smaller population and therefore, by definition, fewer bands than there are at a pan-UK level.
A number of Aberdeen bands have gone on to make a modest success of themselves and gain a strong reputation. The punk band The Xcerts gained a number of important support and festival slots having started playing in local clubs in Aberdeen. Another band, Driveblind, went to the United States to make a success of themselves. Bands like that, who left after making a reputation for themselves, might now find themselves having to leave to make their reputation if we lose such opportunities for them.
I call on the BBC to look at what it is doing and to think about the impact that its decision is likely to have on cultural output from nations such as Scotland. Let us not forget Wales and Northern Ireland, which are just as important to this issue. We should unite in solidarity with the campaigners in those nations who are trying to save their local opt-out and the opportunities that it provides to their local artists. Hopefully, a united campaign, as is being fought, and as Joan McAlpine has highlighted tonight, will be successful. I call on the BBC to reverse its decision.
17:21
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak briefly in an important debate, which is attracting considerable interest in the Parliament, on the subject of contemporary music in Scotland and the specific issue of “Introducing in Scotland”.
I congratulate Joan McAlpine on securing the debate and all those who have been involved in the campaign. As an avid listener to “Introducing in Scotland” for many years, and as a keen gig-goer, I fully support the sentiments that Ms McAlpine expressed in her motion and I enjoyed her speech. I also associate myself with the remarks that she made about “Newsweek Scotland” and “Scotland at Ten”.
The contemporary music industry in Scotland is often overlooked, but it makes a significant contribution to the Scottish economy and to our cultural life. My city of Glasgow is, of course, a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization city of music. That designation recognises the extent of interest in classical and traditional music but also the importance of the Glasgow contemporary music scene.
I listened carefully to Mark McDonald’s speech. As a former student of the University of Aberdeen, I well remember the Aberdeen music scene and Mark McDonald made a cogent case for what happens when something as important as the radio slot is removed from the scene and people have to turn their attention elsewhere. I well recall many long nights spent in Drummond’s in Belmont Street in Aberdeen and many other quality establishments. That is a point well made. Without the opportunities provided by “Introducing in Scotland”, which is based in Glasgow but provides a showcase for talent from all over Scotland, contemporary music will have a very serious problem.
In previous parliamentary sessions, Pauline McNeill campaigned extensively with the cross-party group on the contemporary music industry. It developed a music manifesto that focused on recognising the successes of music promoters and the recording industry, and improving conditions, particularly for live musicians. She even arranged for gigs to take place in the garden lobby of the Parliament, which I enjoyed attending. I am sure that, having raised some of these issues again, Joan McAlpine might want to think about what more we can do to promote contemporary music.
I was pleased that, during last May’s elections, Scottish Labour was the only party to develop and promote a comprehensive music policy, which included initiatives on instruments and recording facilities. Pauline McNeill was very much the driving force behind that work.
“Introducing in Scotland” is a vital part of the Scottish music scene. Many successful bands made early appearances on the show and Joan McAlpine mentioned some of them. More than that, the show has been a showcase for live music, and not just music from Glasgow. It allows listeners around Scotland and in other parts of the UK to hear the best of unsigned talent. Later commercial success is only one element of what makes a band great.
I fully endorse the motion. I look forward to hearing what action the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs is taking to put pressure on BBC Scotland or will take if she has not already had the chance to do so. If we were talking about the closure of the BBC orchestra or a reduction in the coverage of traditional music, we would rightly be up in arms. Although I regularly enjoy those types of music, pop and rock is often forgotten by the powers that be, perhaps sometimes because of the stuffiness of the corporation.
I regret that I was not able to attend the lobby that Joan McAlpine organised, but if I can help the campaign in any way, I make clear my willingness to do so.
I call Annabelle Ewing, to be followed by Annabel Goldie.
17:24
Presiding Officer, I hope that that does not cause too much confusion for the hordes of people who are listening to the debate.
To be fair, I imagine that the debate will attract widespread interest, perhaps later on online facilities, among the people whom we are trying to help tonight: the listeners—the loyal fan base, as Joan McAlpine said—of the excellent programme that we are discussing.
I am pleased to be called to speak in this important and timely debate. I congratulate my colleague Joan McAlpine on securing the debate and commend her for her hard work in ensuring that the excellent campaign is brought to the attention of members of the Parliament and the wider public.
I have a confession to make: I am not an alumnus of the University of Aberdeen. However, I am an alumnus of the University of Glasgow and I recall the days when Simple Minds used to play at the Queen Margaret union. I guess that that shows my age a bit, so I will move swiftly back to the topic of the debate.
As we have heard, “Introducing in Scotland” is the only Scottish opt-out on BBC Radio 1. It is Glasgow based and has been on air for about 11 years. It is currently ably presented by Ally McCrae and was previously ably presented by Vic Galloway. It is important to mention the current and past presenters because they know, and are known by, the Scottish music scene. They are well respected, taken seriously and, as Joan McAlpine said, physically accessible. That is of particular significance, as the purpose of the radio show is to showcase the nascent musical talent in Scotland—in particular, to showcase those who are not signed up to a music business contract.
The programme is pivotal in giving new, young artists the chance to experience some airplay and live sessions in the studio. At the same time, it gives that new, home-grown talent exposure to the public. Over the past 10 years or so, it has played a significant role in bringing on new acts in Scotland. We have heard the views of many of those acts that are now household names here and further afield. It also feeds the music industry, supports jobs and gives pleasure to thousands of the listening public.
Therefore, we must query why on earth the BBC is planning to scrap that successful format. Paradoxically, we hear that the plan is part of the delivering quality first restructuring programme. That is a bit of a misnomer. The BBC is surely scoring an own goal, as scrapping the programme would be the opposite of delivering quality first. It would be relegating quality to the bottom of the ladder and promoting bean counting and penny-pinching to the top of the agenda.
It is penny-pinching, as I understand that the fairly minimal cost savings to the BBC of scrapping the programme would be far outweighed by the potential costs to the music scene in Scotland. That is not to mention the small matter of the £300 million that the BBC receives from licence payers in Scotland.
I fail to see how the decision is well judged. It does not fit with the BBC’s public service broadcasting obligation or its obligation to showcase and support culture not only in the city of London—as great as it is—but elsewhere in the UK. It is simply unimaginable that an independent public service broadcasting organisation in an independent Scotland would ever contemplate abandoning our nascent musical talent in the way that the BBC in London seems intent on doing.
I, too, urge the BBC to think again.
17:28
I was just swithering about whether there ought to be a collective noun for Annabels, and then Annabelle Ewing and I would be included as one.
I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate and thank Joan McAlpine for lodging the motion. It is important that the Parliament debates such issues. It is also important to emphasise the positive presence that Scotland’s music talent represents and to emphasise that the new, unsigned part of that talent is a vital element.
There is much in the motion with which I sympathise and agree, but I am sure that it has not escaped Joan McAlpine’s hawk eye that I have not signed it. That was not because of any major disagreement with it, but because of a slight nagging unease that, perhaps, an opportunity was being overlooked.
I will advance my argument. First, I pay tribute to the very talented musicians that we have in Scotland and to the courage and commitment of new artists. I confirm support for the excellent work that, as Joan McAlpine said, Ally McCrae and Vic Galloway have done in nurturing that new talent and, as the motion says, giving that
“talent exposure to the listening public”.
Undoubtedly, those are positive factors and they should be recognised.
I appreciate that it is hard for new musicians to break into the music business. I am aware that with the growth of social media sites, YouTube and music talent television programmes, there are already more forums available for exposure of that talent and for networking than has previously been the case.
I want to make it clear that in no way do I diminish the efforts on the part of both listeners and campaigners to raise their concerns. They have done so passionately and the social media to which I have referred has been an important conduit for that campaign.
However, prior to the debate I reflected on what talented new musicians who are trying to break through want to achieve, and I think that the answer is publicity and exposure that are as widespread as possible and not restricted to Scotland. That desire must be considered alongside licence fee issues.
I accept the member’s contention, but does she not accept that musicians need first to develop local and national exposure before they can go on to achieve wider exposure and that removing the steps that allow them to achieve that is counterproductive?
If I had more time, I would like to take issue with the member’s proposition. My point is that it is right that we have to try to achieve a degree of exposure and publicity. The argument that I am advancing is that perhaps we cannot always achieve what we would desire to achieve in an ideal world. What we desire to achieve must be considered alongside licence fee issues and what is sustainable, cost wise.
I will explore those two themes a little further. As I understand the current situation, “Introducing in Scotland” is a Radio 1 network programme. For three out of the four weeks it broadcasts in Scotland and on the fourth week it broadcasts UK-wide. I believe that what is proposed is a Radio 1 programme that will broadcast UK-wide every week and on which one of the co-presenters will still be Ally McCrae. At the same time, apart from the other social media outlets to which I referred, music talent in Scotland will continue to be covered by Radio Scotland and Radio nan Gàidheal, which already broadcast a wide range of music.
I move to what I accept might be the slightly tedious but nonetheless inescapable issue of cost. Some rather stark facts have to be considered. The BBC informs me that the listening audience for the existing programme is about 9,000 people. Interestingly, in Wales, whose population is only three fifths of Scotland’s population, the listening audience for its counterpart is 12,000. My information from the BBC is that the current programme costs about 22p per listener, whereas the average cost for other specialist music programmes is only 0.8p per listener. I am informed that the cost of the new programme will be about a fifth of the cost of the current one.
I bring those facts into the debate, because whatever we want or might aspire to achieve in an ideal world has to be balanced by the other relevant factors. On the one hand, I can totally understand the interest in and support for “Introducing in Scotland”, but I am anxious that a better opportunity and a bigger potential audience may be provided by the new programme.
Let me conclude as I began. There is no major disagreement with the motion. It has been important to debate the issue. I think that the BBC will understand the obligation to ensure that the reservations expressed in the motion, and what has been said in the debate, are taken into account and to ensure that the new proposed programme manifestly addresses the concerns.
Thank you. Perhaps, in the spirit of the debate, the collective noun for a pair of Annabels could be a peal of Annabels.
17:34
First, I thank Joan McAlpine for bringing the debate to the chamber. It is good that we recognise that there is strong public support for retaining “Introducing in Scotland”. She made an important point about BBC 6 Music and the successful campaign to save it. I am happy to add my voice to the campaign to retain “Introducing in Scotland”.
Annabel Goldie made some points about the BBC. We recognise that it faces financial pressures and that there will be some changes to output, but it is right to question the proposal that is on the table. “Introducing in Scotland” promotes unsigned music talent in Scotland, and it plays an important role in doing so.
Scotland has a vibrant music scene. Its contribution to our economy, at both national and local levels, is often overlooked, but it does play an important role. It is one that is often delivered on a shoestring budget. Alongside the big corporate events, such as T in the park, that bring people from all over the United Kingdom and further afield, there are lots of smaller venues, practice rooms and studios and lots of local networks of music enthusiasts, bands and people who are passionate about promoting and creating music in their communities. “Introducing in Scotland” gives them the opportunity to engage with a wider audience, as well as providing an effective showcase for their talents.
Annabel talked about the level of exposure that bands get and how there might be opportunities for Scottish bands to reach a wider audience, but Mark McDonald was right in his comments about stepping stones and different levels of exposure. There is more immediacy in having something that is rooted in Scotland, with the knowledge that goes with that, and having presenters who engage with the gig scene here. It would be a shame to lose that.
There have been huge changes in the way in which we consume and have an interest in music. Annabel talked about internet promotion—
Perhaps you might wish to be a bit clearer.
I am sorry. I meant Annabel Goldie. It is quite an informal atmosphere tonight.
Annabel Goldie talked about the importance of self-promotion and how the internet has opened up such opportunities, but we should recognise that mainstream promotion is still hugely important. Radio 1 and the “Introducing in Scotland” programme give valuable exposure and support important talent development. I very much welcome this evening’s debate.
17:37
I join other members in congratulating Joan McAlpine on securing the debate. I thank all members who have spoken in support of retaining the “Introducing in Scotland” programme on Radio 1. I listened to the programme when it was on an earlier slot, when I travelled around my constituency in my car.
I am interested in some of the remarks that have been made by members. I am particularly pleased that punk is alive and well in Aberdeen, and I say to Drew Smith that we should make no apology for recognising the status of contemporary music alongside classical and traditional music.
Many cogent points have been made, and I hope to pick up on some of them during my remarks. It is also important that we look at what has brought us to this situation. A number of people have made remarks about the other cuts that are happening in the BBC, and during question time earlier I made it clear that the Scottish Government has already raised its concerns with the BBC about quality, range and output, in relation to proposals for news programmes in particular.
Today’s debate focuses on “Introducing in Scotland”. Joan McAlpine arranged for me last month to meet a delegation from the music industry, including artists who have appeared on the programme along with others from the wider music sector. They told me how the programme supported and fed the talent and material that can be produced and how that is then exposed on the programme.
Annabelle Ewing made the important point that the programme is meant to be about delivering quality first—the BBC’s agenda—but that there is a damage in limiting the finding of tomorrow’s quality. It was important to make that point.
More recently, when we issued the Scottish Government’s response to the BBC trust’s consultation on how it will operate within the constraints of the current licence-fee settlement, we were able to draw on the experience of the delegation in highlighting the real cultural impact that is made by “Introducing in Scotland”.
I was impressed by the delegation I met and what the people had to say. They talked about how “Introducing in Scotland” has made a real difference to many careers of new and emerging musically talented individuals and bands, but they also talked about how the programme has supported the producers and the creative industry in general and how it has kept them informed of new and emerging bands and solo performers.
The BBC has responsibility for public service broadcasting generally; it also has a leadership role in the development of creative industries, as it frequently reminds me. In that context, “Introducing in Scotland” has not just artistic and cultural value but social and commercial value, which might not have been foremost in early thoughts about cuts to BBC funding and output. The creative industries are hugely important to the Scottish economy. The sector is one of the seven key growth sectors in the Government’s economic strategy. It generates well over £5 billion annually and supports 60,000 jobs.
The commercial and international success of performers such as Biffy Clyro, Calvin Harris and Franz Ferdinand, who got their first break from “Introducing in Scotland” and went on to make us proud, demonstrates that performers can come from Scotland, be exposed in Scotland initially and then have a big international impact. That relates to Annabel Goldie’s point. “Introducing in Scotland” has played a key role in giving opportunities to emerging talent. An important part of the message that we heard in the debate is that bands do not have to start out in London if they are to succeed.
When I met the delegation of young performers I was struck by their energy and commitment. I am sure that if programmes such as “Introducing in Scotland” exist to give them a chance, they will seize such opportunities. For me, the case for preserving “Introducing in Scotland” is clear. It has been great to hear many other members make a persuasive argument in that regard.
I will draw out three further points that are illustrated by the threat to “Introducing in Scotland”, which we all hope will soon be lifted, when the BBC reflects on the result of the consultation and the petition, which has received well over 7,000 signatures in a short time. The BBC has responded to other campaigns and I hope that it gives a good hearing to the representations that are being made.
First, we should note that the threat is not just to “Introducing in Scotland” but to “Introducing in Northern Ireland” and “Introducing in Wales”. Our focus is on potential harm in relation to the promotion of new and innovative popular music from Scotland, but I am sure that all members also wish the campaigns in Northern Ireland and Wales well. Vigorous campaigns are going on in all three countries, which illustrates how important it is that the BBC live up to its duties to the nations in these islands.
Secondly, the situation is by no means entirely, or even mainly, the fault of the BBC, which has been forced to make decisions as a result of the damaging licence-fee settlement that the UK Government imposed after talks that were held behind closed doors over 48 hours. That reinforces Scotland’s need for greater accountability and responsibility for broadcasting. As a result of the cuts agenda, the licence fee is being top-sliced for purposes other than the BBC’s purposes.
We must think about the direct consequences of the licence-fee settlement, whether for the news or for contemporary music. We argue that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government should have an opportunity to influence licence-fee settlements. That simple request has been made by the Scottish Government in the context of the Scotland Bill. Had there been such an approach to the licence-fee settlement in the past, we might perhaps not have the wider concerns about what the BBC delivers and the continued quality of its output in Scotland, particularly in news and current affairs, on which we have sought assurances. At a time of momentous importance for our nation, the issue is resonant. We have deep concerns about the impact of programming cutbacks and job losses.
Thirdly, the issue that we are considering illustrates the risk of having only one publicly funded public service broadcaster—the BBC—however great it is in many regards. If there were greater diversity and plurality of public service broadcasters, for example through a Scottish digital network, as was proposed by the Scottish Broadcasting Commission and unanimously endorsed in the previous session of the Parliament, we would have a great opportunity to develop and preserve the kind of innovative broadcasting that “Introducing in Scotland” so well exemplifies.
I reiterate my support and the Scottish Government’s support for “Introducing in Scotland” and my firm hope that the campaign to preserve the programme will be successful. The issue is not just one programme and its listeners, as we have heard, but the impact on the wider music and creative industries scenes. We should all call on the BBC, the coalition Government and others to reflect on the lessons that we can learn from the campaign. We want to create truly world-class public service broadcasting for Scotland, and given what I have heard in the debate I am sure that many members want “Introducing in Scotland” to be an integral part of that.
Meeting closed at 17:44.