Further written evidence from UTV
As UTV was one of the first parties to give
oral evidence to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee Investigation
into Television Broadcasting in Northern Ireland, I would appreciate
if you would accept this further submission as I would like the
opportunity to respond to the oral evidence submitted by others
this week.
As you are aware, the public were excluded from
the earlier stages of evidence giving on Wednesday, but it is
apparent from the time I joined the hearing that Mr Birney from
Ten Alps had made an earlier statement along the lines of Northern
Ireland being "robbed and betrayed" by the decision
not to have a pilot Independently Funded News Consortia (IFNC).
The purpose of the IFNCs is to provide high
quality, plural news for areas that are currently underserved.
As UTV already provides a high quality and valued news service
in Northern Ireland, it is hard to understand how it can be claimed
that the province is missing out by not having one of these pilots.
If this claim is meant purely in relation to
the funding that Northern Ireland is "missing out" by
not being selected for a pilot, this is also misleading as any
central Government award to a commercial company or companies
would not benefit the people of Northern Ireland for a public
service that is not required. UTV funds the provision commercially,
rather than having it subsidised.
On a number of occasions Sir Patrick, you stated
there was disagreement between witnesses as to what is required
for Northern Ireland moving forward. Where I think there is some
agreement is that a fund is needed to boost non-news production
here to enable independent producers to apply for project funding.
UTV also believes this is a positive move, as non-news provision
does require strengthening. This is where we believe the Committee's
assistance would be most valuable in negotiations and lobbying
of DCMS.
To lobby for a news fund is to try and overturn
a decision already made. To lobby for non-news funding is a positive
move to stimulate the creative and digital economy of Northern
Ireland. Many more organisations could benefit from the non-news
fund than could from an IFNC pilot.
An IFNC will not increase the representation
and portrayal of Northern Ireland to the wider audience of the
United Kingdom, something that it is clear the Committee has a
significant interest in promoting. A non-news fund would create
a fund which could indeed be used to promote the portrayal of
Northern Ireland throughout the UK and further afield.
I was surprised to hear the Committee being
told by one of the witnesses this week that the BBC Northern Ireland
news website receives 350,000 unique users per day as this figure
is astounding. I took the opportunity to check this with the BBC
and as I suspected this figure was wrong, the real figure is 134,000
unique users. This is a fantastic level of users for a website
in Northern Ireland, but still far below the number of people
who receive their news from the early and late evening news programmes
from UTV.
Mr Birney is a former Editor of UTV's Current
Affairs output and one of the most experienced current affairs
producers in our region, but he is incorrect when he tells the
Committee that UTV "does not do investigations". The
format of UTV Current Affairs has indeed changed. Our late news
programme has a significant proposition of short exclusive investigations
into issues relevant to our audience lives, such as health, policing
and politics. As Northern Ireland has developed since the Troubles,
so has our current affairs output.
However, we continue to provide some long form
current affairs programmes and we were the only ITV region to
send a team to the inauguration of President Obama this year,
producing a half hour current affairs programme looking at US-Northern
Irish relations. In addition, a major investigation is currently
in production on child abuse which should be broadcast before
Christmas.
Northern Ireland has always had a greater demand
for current affairs given our troubled past than other regions.
To ensure this demand is satisfied I believe the non-news fund
we suggested which of course includes current affairs would be
most welcome and a vital life line for independent production
companies in Northern Ireland.
Mr Hill from Northern Ireland Screen stated
that UTV's service was at risk from the handback of the Channel
3 licenses by ITVplc. This is a very old debate. To my knowledge,
it is many months since ITV threatened handback. As I've submitted
to the Committee before, the process of handback is long and complicated,
and if in the very remote possibility were to happen, UTV would
put in place an alternative quality programme supply.
To conclude Sir Patrick, it is very easy to
knock the incumbent. Usually however those doing the knocking
suggest a brave new world of opportunity and suggest how the incumbent
should be delivering a better service or is failing in its obligations.
Throughout the oral and written evidence I have seen and heard,
this has not been the case.
As Mr Grogan said, most other regions of the
Untied Kingdom look upon the audience offering delivered by UTV
with envy. We thank him for those kind words. We are proud of
our achievements and, while not complacent, we hope the Committee
has seen our commitment and our business acumen is core to delivering
quality public service output for Northern Ireland.
As always, should you or the Committee require
further information relating to the content of this or any of
our previous submissions we would be delighted to assist.
Michael Wilson
Managing Director
23 November 2009
| 
