Chamber and committees

Norway is home to the Peace Research Institute Oslo, which explores peaceful relations between states, groups and peoples. Our research will consider the Norwegian approach and those of other nations to help us to determine Scotland’s distinct peace offer.

Like other nations of its size, Scotland has a wealth of soft power resources—in other words, assets that make us an attractive and trustworthy partner. The Scottish Government recognises that a good international reputation is produced by the country as a whole, and we will continue to collaborate with others to promote Scotland and our values on the international stage.

Scottish Government officials are working with Her Majesty’s personal representatives in Scotland, the lord lieutenants, to promote the community-led events that are so much a part of the historical celebrations of royal jubilees. We are also engaged with the Queen’s Green Canopy, via our executive agency, Forest and Land Scotland. I would be delighted to hear about anything particular that is planned for Scottish Borders Council, as well as any suggestions about how those particular projects can be further supported.

I will rest on the answer that I previously gave to the learned gentleman, who, as a member of the Faculty of Advocates, is well aware of custom and practice in relation to the convention on legal advice. I will not depart from that tradition today, although I am grateful for the opportunity that he gave me to do so.

I agree; and I welcome the point raised by my colleague. Seventy-two of the 129 MSPs elected to the chamber were elected on manifestos that commit them, and this Parliament and Government, to holding a referendum on Scottish independence during this parliamentary session. The Bute House agreement reached between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Green Party confirms and strengthens that clear mandate. It would be disappointing if democratically elected members of this or any other Parliament sought to undermine the democratically expressed wish of the electorate in elections, as was cast last year.

It is a curious thing that we now have a third member who did not listen to the answer to the question—[Interruption.]

Forgive me, Presiding Officer. Give me a moment so that I can answer the question in exactly the same way as I already have. With your indulgence, it reads as follows: It is the long-established convention of this and previous Governments that legal advice is not disclosed, other than in exceptional circumstances.—[Interruption.]

Instead of barracking, members on the Conservative benches should listen to the answer, having asked for one.

That reflects the public interest in the provision of free and frank legal advice and maintains the right to confidentiality of communications between legal advisers and clients.

I welcome the input of members from all parties on particular issues or causes, or about areas in which Scotland’s peace institute could play a meaningful role. I commend the member—and anyone else who is involved—for becoming involved in that process as we consider the form that a peace institute might take. I encourage the member to get in touch about any issues that she, or colleagues, feel should be considered as we make preparations to stand up the planned peace institute.

I am delighted to lead the debate on the value of public service broadcasting and its pivotal role in Scotland’s past, present and future.

It is no secret that public service broadcasting is close to my heart. I worked as a correspondent for the BBC World Service before I entered elected politics, so I know how valuable such services are in informing people throughout Scotland and across the world.

For me in particular, as the son of a world war two refugee, the devastating events of last week in Ukraine have underlined in a horrifying way the real-life importance of public service broadcasting. On Tuesday night, a Russian missile hit Kyiv’s television tower, which knocked out transmission for a short period. We need look no further than the image of that TV tower, bombed out by an illegal invading force, for a reminder of why public service broadcasting and freedom of speech are at the heart of democracy.

I completely agree with Alex Cole-Hamilton’s congratulations. Should anybody who is following our proceedings not be aware of the strength of the short-wave signal across Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, I encourage anybody and everybody to listen to the authoritative and accurate reporting by the BBC of the conflict in Ukraine.

The principles behind our public service broadcasting systems matter more than ever, for reasons that we have just discussed, so this is exactly the right time to talk about why we need to come together to protect them. Although the BBC and other broadcasters are far from perfect, they offer value not just to our democracy but to our creative life and its economy. As cornerstones of our screen sector, broadcasters have been the training ground for our finest creative talent and will continue to support our creative economy and how we present ourselves to the world.

Although public service broadcasting is important for our international image, it is also crucial for local and minority communities. MG Alba, in partnership with BBC Alba, helps to sustain our Gaelic-speaking communities, while contributing to economic growth in the Highlands and Islands and to creative innovation, with new and original content that resonates with audiences.

I will take a moment to celebrate how far we have come as a film and television producing nation. If we look back even just 10 years, it is fair to say that our screen sector was underperforming. We have always had incredible talent, captivating stories and some of the world’s most beautiful locations, but we were far short of achieving critical mass. Beyond the BBC, we had no significant studios. We missed out on productions, and crew had to go elsewhere to work.

Today, our public service broadcasters have made new commitments to the United Kingdom nations and have stepped up production and commissioning in Scotland—as well they should, given the historical underinvestment in Scotland by the BBC and Channel 4.

In the past five years, Channel 4’s creative hub has opened in Glasgow, and the BBC launched a dedicated Scottish channel to be a platform into the industry. It has produced new and original content, including the acclaimed series “Guilt”. Drama series such as “Screw” are produced by STV Studios for Channel 4, and are filmed entirely on a set in Glasgow’s Kelvin hall. Our excellent factual TV sector has gone from strength to strength, with Scottish companies building a much wider range of content alongside the lasting success of series such as “Location, Location, Location”.

We need to recognise Channel 4’s role here. It has spent more than £200 million on Scottish productions since 2007, and its targeted equity investment and unique publisher-broadcaster model allows independent production companies to grow sustainably.

Recently, I have seen the changes for myself when visiting several of our studios. At the Kelvin hall, a state-of-the-art multicamera studio is being built. The studios at the Pyramids Business Park in Bathgate are now hosting “Good Omens 2”. FirstStage Studios in Leith has hosted Amazon’s “The Rig” and is now hosting “Anansi Boys”. There being productions of such calibre and scale is becoming habitual in Scotland. People in Glasgow can see “Batgirl” being filmed on its streets. At Wardpark Film and Television Studios in Cumbernauld, the successful “Outlander” series has been being filmed for nine years, with successive training schemes that have been backed by Screen Scotland producing dozens of excellent new crew.

The change is nothing short of transformational. Of course, the step change has not come without investment. I am proud that, five years ago, the Scottish Government took the bold step to significantly increase investment in screen, thereby enabling more support and, which is important, widening investment to television.

Already we can see the benefits. For instance, Screen Scotland estimates that the production growth fund, which has awarded just under £10 million since 2015, has generated direct economic spend in Scotland of more than £140 million over the period. Because the issue is not just about funding but about expertise, in 2018 we created Screen Scotland, which is our specialist creative partnership within Creative Scotland. Its creative passion and industry knowledge have been invaluable in growing the sector.

Unfortunately, I do not have time to list all of our recent achievements, nor can I set out all that we still want to do. It is a long list, and I know that this is only the start. We know that we need to increase skills training, and we have already started the long but essential job of nurturing the influential writers and showrunners of tomorrow. We are determined to keep creating the conditions that allow us to develop more creative projects and talent, so that even more production will take place in Scotland.

Although the rise of global demand for content and streaming companies is an important factor in our progress, future growth should continue to have our public service broadcasters at its heart. Initiatives such as the Screen Scotland partnership with the BBC will be crucial. We also expect the BBC’s contribution to our creative economy to be strengthened by a greater share of investment here in Scotland.

Broadcasting policy should be devolved so that budgets can be allocated and commissioning decisions can be taken here in Scotland. Short of that devolution, I will continue to press the BBC to spend in Scotland a proportion of the licence fee that is equitable with what is raised here, in order to put us on a par with the other nations.

I would like to return to how recent events have again shone a spotlight on the value of public service broadcasting. Given that value, it is astonishing that one of the biggest threats to our broadcasting system comes not from outside but from the United Kingdom Government itself. The UK Government has hobbled the BBC by freezing licence fees for two years and refusing to commit to stable funding in the future. The UK Government is refusing to back down on plans to privatise Channel 4 when there is no reason to put that unique public asset into private shareholder hands. We in Scotland have no such doubts about the value of public service broadcasting and its principles, so we are determined to protect them unequivocally.

I trust that members will agree with me and support the motion. I look forward to working with all members to ensure that Scotland’s views and needs are recognised, reflected and supported, and, more widely, to ensure that the essential principles behind public service broadcasting are upheld.

I move,

That the Parliament believes that public service broadcasting has a valuable role in society and provides vital platforms for the creative economy and cultural richness of the nation; recognises that substantial progress has been made in the last decade in increasing the volume of screen production made in Scotland, and welcomes Screen Scotland’s actions to continue to attract productions; notes that broadcasters and producers like the BBC and STV have a vital role in the Scottish screen sector to help develop talent both on and off screen; condemns any efforts to undermine the BBC and Channel 4’s operational independence by the UK Government; calls for BBC Scotland to receive a far fairer share of licence fee revenues raised in Scotland, and further calls for the Scottish Parliament’s role in BBC Charter Renewal to be respected.

What about you?

Can I clarify that we are not in favour of the freeze on the licence fee—that is pretty simple.

I have a question for the member, if I may. On Channel 4 privatisation, what is the position of the Scottish Conservative Party on the lack of guarantees being sought for the retention of commissioning across the nations and regions? Does the Scottish Conservative Party believe that conditions should be set to protect those, or not?