Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
160-179)
MR RICHARD
WILLIAMS, MR
RICK HILL,
MR TREVOR
BIRNEY AND
MR PAUL
CONNOLLY
18 NOVEMBER 2009
Q160 Chairman: The Committee is now quorate
which means that we are now being officially recorded. Please
continue with your submission. It is not too long a submission?
Mr Birney: No,
it is not. Last week I was part of a delegation that met with
the DCMS, that is the Department for Culture, Media and Sport,
in London and during that meeting we asked how Northern Ireland
was to benefit from Digital Britain and we were told frankly
that it would not. Northern Ireland, said the senior civil servant,
had "fallen off the end of Digital Britain".
The public funding that will now go to Scotland, Wales and England
would create jobs in Northern Ireland and help tackle the democratic
deficit caused by the lack of investment and deterioration in
the quality of our local television news and current affairs.
Crucially, it would also help pump-prime our digital economy and
ensure we kept up with the rest of the UK. Today, the Minister
for Culture, Arts and Leisure in Northern Ireland, Nelson McCausland,
was due to meet his counterpart at DCMS to discuss Northern Ireland's
role in Digital Britain. Last night that meeting was cancelled.
The Minister, who is indignant at Northern Ireland once again
falling foul of the same London-centric attitudes that have caused
many of our problems, told DCMS that he will only come to London
once this Government has a firm proposal on how Northern Ireland
is to be included in the pilots to be rolled out across the UK.
Today, we applaud the Minister for taking that stance. For too
long Northern Ireland has failed because of a lack of leadership
in our industry on top of soft touch regulation and a narrow commercial
interest. This Government appears satisfied at inflicting a democratic
deficit on the taxpayers of Northern Ireland which may be caused
by a diminished news quality. Most of all, the people of Northern
Ireland will suffer because the DCMS decision points to something
else: that Northern Ireland, its news, its licence payers, its
politics and its institutions simply do not matter as much as
the rest of the UK.
Q161 Chairman: Thank you for that.
That was quite a long statement and I hope the rest will not be
quite as long because we do want to have some discussion. I completely
take your point. Of course, we raised some of these very issues
with the Minister when he came before this Committee, and doubtless
you have seen the transcript of that evidence.
Mr Birney: I have indeed.
Q162 Chairman: I was very unhappy
at even the title of the paper, Digital Britain, which
does not refer to Northern Ireland at all. Mr Connolly, did you
wish to say something?
Mr Connolly: I think I would agree
with what Trevor has said. I understand the Committee is addressing
the totality of broadcasting in Northern Ireland, but this issue
of Digital Britain, IFNCs and the millions of pounds that
could be invested in Northern Ireland has really gone right up
the agenda in the last couple of weeks and we feel the situation
now is quite serious. I would respectfully urge the Committee
to take this issue and run with it because Northern Ireland has
been relegated to the slow lane of Digital Britain. You
were right when you highlighted that the name of the report, Digital
Britain, caused a lot of questions in Northern Ireland. I
am thinking of it now as "Digital Backwater" because
that is the risk that lies before us if we do not go forward.
It shows very importantly a question that I am sure you will come
to later about whether broadcasting should be a devolved matter
in Northern Ireland. Having been at the meeting last week with
Trevor, with DCMS, I now feel that Northern Ireland has been completely
wiped off the radar from DCMS and I feel very strongly that—
Q163 Chairman: Not just Below the
Radar, off the radar!
Mr Connolly: You asked about the
uniqueness of broadcasting in Northern Ireland. The uniqueness
of broadcasting in Northern Ireland is that it represents the
totality of life. The people of Northern Ireland have triplets
and quads the same as people in the rest of the UK, we commit
domestic murders as well as political murders, we shop and buy
stuff in the same way, but when we are portrayed on a national
level none of that is shown at all and we do get the Troubles
stereotype. That is why it is important that a regional flavour
and identity for Northern Ireland is preserved. It is very important
for that. I do notice that the BBC has been making some strides
in improving the portrayal of Northern Ireland at a network level
and we would applaud that.
Q164 Chairman: Mr Williams, Mr Hill,
did you want to add anything?
Mr Hill: From a Northern Ireland
Screen perspective, we see a country where we have dared to re-imagine
the future and creative industries play a really crucial part
within that. We, at Northern Ireland Screen, have what is the
tallest enclosed studio space in Europe in the Paint Hall. In
that studio recently we have had Universal Pictures complete a
film and we have HBO at the moment. We have had notable successes
with TV dramas and film in the last number of years. All of this
despite the fact that very often when it comes to an appropriate
level of network commissioning we find ourselves very much in
the slow lane of how public service broadcasters are advancing.
Perhaps you would like to add to that.
Mr Williams: Picking up from that,
the concern from Northern Ireland Screen's perspective in relation
to the collective evidence given to this Committee is that two
things have been largely absent from the evidence, although I
would have to say not necessarily absent from the questions from
the Committee. Those two things are, firstly, the tremendous strides
that Northern Ireland is making within the screen industries in
terms of internationalising its activity and producing programming
and exported programming on a global basis. More importantly,
there is an issue to do with the extent to which Northern Ireland
has failed to receive appropriate value from public service broadcasting
across the whole range that public service broadcasting is. One
of the things that has not much featured in the evidence is money.
A very conservative estimate of the annual loss, if you want to
put it that way, to Northern Ireland is about £50 million.
Every nation within the United Kingdom, every region within the
United Kingdom, is very anxious to develop its creative industries.
Creative industries are seen to be the future, a very important
building block for the future of any economy, and certainly Northern
Ireland's. To develop our creative industries without a building
block as large as £50 million is something of a challenge.
The key point from my perspective would be to focus very closely
on that. That completely interlinks with portrayal, but this is
an economic issue. Northern Ireland has been very poorly served
for quite some decades and I would endorse that aspect of my colleague's
comments, that to a certain extent that has been copper-fastened
within Digital Britain.
Q165 Chairman: I think we can take
it as read that there is a sufficient talent base in Northern
Ireland. I do not think any of us who travel regularly to the
Province would for a moment deny that, but one of the things that
came up in the questioning in Belfast, and I would like you, gentlemen,
to briefly give me your opinion on this, was are targets and quotas
the best way of ensuring that Northern Ireland receives a fairer
deal or would it be better to have a rather dramatic gesture?
For instance, somebody suggested to us in Belfast, and you will
have read this, that it would be good if one of the BBC Commissioners
was stationed in Northern Ireland, and somebody else talked about
the enormous boost that Cardiff producing Dr Who had given
to broadcasting within Wales even though, of course, it was not
a Welsh programme in any sense. Briefly, could we have your reflections
on those various alternatives because we will want to make some
recommendations and I would like to feel that whatever we recommend
is in tune with what Northern Ireland needs.
Mr Birney: It is a very toxic
issue when you come to talk about quotas and targets and what
is a quota and what is a target and the semantics that go on around
that. Again, going back to Digital Britain, many of us
in Northern Ireland believed that Lord Carter would cement the
relationship between Northern Ireland and the network broadcasters
in imposing more stringent adherence to targets for the PSB stations.
When you look at the PSB broadcasters it is quite clear they are
saying many positive things about their intentions in Northern
Ireland, and the BBC has gone much further than that, but when
you look at Channel 4's commitment it has been miserable in Northern
Ireland. It has promised to double its output from Northern Ireland,
but twice nothing does not amount to anything more than that.
We do have to look again, unfortunately, at the PSB broadcasters'
intentions in Northern Ireland. The message we would send out
is that there has to be stricter regulation, stricter monitoring
and far more transparency around what exactly is being produced
in Northern Ireland and the portrayal of Northern Ireland. We
think that the soft touch regulation has helped to land us where
we are at the moment in that Northern Ireland has fallen off the
radar in the rest of the UK.
Q166 Chairman: Does anybody want
to add anything to that? Do not feel you have all got to speak
on everything, but equally I do not want to shut anybody up.
Mr Williams: I would like to speak
strongly on that point. I would strongly endorse the proposal
for quotas and I would question some of the logics against them.
The suggestion is that quotas somehow might undermine creativity
or they are an unnecessary interference with the marketplace.
On the latter point, broadcasting is an enormously regulated marketplace
so really introducing this sort of quota is not particularly significant
in that context. The first point is more important. The suggestion
has always been that creativity will be diminished if there are
quotas but there is absolutely no evidence in the context of Northern
Ireland that that is the case. Indeed, the opposite is the case.
As I have already said, we have produced the least amount of network
production for UK broadcasters over any period of time that you
want to look at if you analyse the percentage of that programming
that was award winning, the percentage of that programming that
was critically acclaimed. Recently, after literally in my professional
career a decade of being told that making projects in Northern
Ireland would lead to critical embarrassment for the broadcaster
that chose to do it, one of the first pieces that the BBC made
in Northern Ireland was declared by one of the most well-known
critics as the finest piece of television of the decade. Lord
Carter said that he did not believe in light touch regulation
or heavy regulation, there was only regulation that worked and
regulation that did not. It is transparently clear that the present
regulation does not work and I would, therefore, call for a number
of things. One, for the developments at the BBC, which have to
be welcomed, the introduction of a 2% target by 2012. I would
dismiss the 3% target for 2016 because it is so far away it is
irrelevant. There is at least a 2% target and I would say that
target should be a quota. It should be monitored by the BBC Trust
and that should be overseen by Ofcom to ensure that the spirit
and intention of that is clearly driven through. There has been
so much debate around quotas and from the point of view of Northern
Ireland it has been nearly exhausting. In a sense, it is time
to have less debate about it and more delivery.
Q167 Chairman: The reason that there
is debate is that there is disagreement, and it is quite clear
that this afternoon even between you witnesses there is disagreement.
On the one hand, we have Mr Birney rather dismissing quotas and
targets and opting for regulation, and we have you rather dismissing
regulation and opting for quotas and targets. Is the distinction
as clear as that?
Mr Birney: I am not dismissing
quotas. I completely agree with everything that Richard has said.
We have had so much promised in previous years about targets or
quotas that it renders the two words to be almost meaningless.
If the broadcaster states it is going to do something I believe
that it should be regulated that they do.
Q168 Chairman: So you would have
regulated quotas and targets?
Mr Birney: Yes. Regulation is
the element that is missing.
Mr Hill: Part of the issue here
is that we represent Northern Ireland Screen and our friends represent
another grouping. In Northern Ireland Screen we do see some movement
from the BBC, which is very welcome. 2% by 2012 would be very
welcome, but it ought to be a floor and not a ceiling. We ought
to make the most of the opportunities that that brings. For years
we have been told and given reasons why we could not do it in
Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland Screen commissioning, with
Government funding, has shown not only can we do it but we can
do it in an outstanding fashion.
Q169 Stephen Pound: Gentlemen, welcome.
Before I ask the question returning to quotas, can I just apologise
for being the slow learner round the table. In light of the slightly
iconoclastic opening comments by Mr Birney, which I welcomed,
they were very refreshing, "betrayal", "robbery"
and various other words, could you just say how does digital rollout
work in the context of the Republic of Ireland?
Mr Birney: What we should not
do is get confused between digital rollout and the promises made
in terms of production and portrayal and what this Government
has prioritised out of Digital Britain. In DCMS's response
to Digital Britain they prioritised news and current affairs
at the core of public service broadcasting and what we are saying
is having prioritised news and then rolled it out in Scotland,
Wales and English regions, by not including Northern Ireland it
means there is nothing in the report, Digital Britain,
for Northern Ireland. Despite paying our licences and our taxes
in Northern Ireland, we are not to be included in the only element
of Digital Britain that could have given Northern Ireland
a real shot in the arm.
Q170 Stephen Pound: We agree with
that. In fact, we re-titled the report in front of the Minister,
"Digital UK". Can you imagine a system where you had
a Digital Ireland and a slow-stream Northern Ireland?
Mr Birney: What has happened in
Ireland is that there has been top slicing of the RTE licence
fee for many years which has gone to a separate fund holder, which
my colleagues can talk about in more depth than I, the BCI. That
organisation then takes the money that it gets from the licence
fee and decides how best it should be spent and in what areas
and what areas to prioritise over others. We came forward this
time last year during the whole PSB debate and said that what
should happen in Northern Ireland is that we should have a very
similar fund and we should call it the Northern Ireland Broadcast
Fund which would ring-fence the money that was going to be raised,
whether from digital switchover or industry levy or wherever it
came from, for Northern Ireland, which we estimated at something
like £30 million a year, which should then be spent on production
and portrayal which London-based broadcasters could come in and
take advantage of if they were going to either produce a documentary
or piece of public purpose television in Northern Ireland or,
indeed, local broadcasters and local production companies could
also use. What it meant was that it does not matter what happens
in the future, whether my children watch content via mobile phones
or some other device in five or ten years' time, what we were
saying was let us ring-fence the funding so we accept that what
is sacrosanct is the public purpose television. That is what has
happened in Ireland and we are saying that is what should have
happened in Northern Ireland. We did not get that in Digital
Britain and now we have also been excluded from the IFNC pilots
which has left us, again, stuck in the slow lane of the digital
revolution.
Q171 Stephen Pound: Underlying all
this is the portrayal of life in Northern Ireland and overcoming
the negativities, and I think all of us agree with that. One of
the problems with quotas, and I am actually a fan of quotas, I
remember the quota quickies we had at the beginning of the early
days of television which was some of the best broadcasting ever
seen, how do you actually combine a quota with a light touch,
particularly when it comes to analysing the portrayal of the region?
Mr Williams: The quota only relates
to the value and volume of the programming.
Q172 Stephen Pound: What is the value
of the programming?
Mr Williams: How much it costs.
Q173 Stephen Pound: Sorry, you mean
the commercial value?
Mr Williams: Yes.
Q174 Stephen Pound: I was thinking
aesthetically.
Mr Williams: The quota is that
£10 million, £20 million, £30 million has to be
spent, and that is the best way to construct it in my view, or
it could be by the hour, 30 hours, 40 hours whatever. The editorial
decision as to the nature of the portrayal has to remain with
the broadcaster and the production company involved in making
the programming. The regulation is merely of the funding and where
it is channelled to. There has to be separation between the Government
and broadcasters in terms of editorial. Does that answer the question?
Q175 Stephen Pound: When we had the
2003 Act, one of the debates was about the BBC having a quota
for regional broadcasting which did not specify which regions.
Do you see the future for Northern Irish production being broadcast
in Great Britain? Do you feel that would be positive?
Mr Hill: I think it has to have
a future. We have seen some good examples of it in the past, but
it is quite a challenge sometimes.
Q176 Stephen Pound: Which is the
best example, could I ask?
Mr Hill: Occupation, a
three-part drama on the BBC starring James Nesbitt.
Q177 Stephen Pound: They always seem
to star James Nesbitt!
Mr Hill: He was particularly good
in that drama.
Q178 Stephen Pound: That is not a
criticism.
Mr Hill: We can be very proud
to be associated with it. It was a good drama featuring a leading
Northern Ireland actor and a Northern Ireland accent. Sometimes
to get a Northern Ireland accent on the network is hard work,
never mind a programme on the network that might actually be about
Northern Ireland, that is a step even further. It is one thing
to have our accents heard, it is another step to have, say, a
returning drama series or a regular series in Northern Ireland
as you might find in other parts of the UK. That is the challenge.
Chairman: Mr Simpson?
Q179 David Simpson: It is more of
a comment really. By the way, on the last comment from Rick Hill,
I am very proud of the accent, too, I can assure you, but, having
said that, I take his point it is very difficult to get someone
from Northern Ireland because of the accent or whatever. In some
of the opening comments I think Paul Connolly said that the landscape
is changing, and it is changing. For 30 or 40 years Northern Ireland
came through hell on earth with a lot of difficulties. We are
now trying to get our lives together for the betterment of the
next generation coming behind us. I think it is very sad that
the Government has taken this decision that we are not going to
be equally treated to other regions of the United Kingdom. The
point has been made that we are paying our licences, we are paying
our taxes, and we believe that we should be treated exactly the
same. It gets to a very bad state when a government minister has
to cancel meetings with other government officials because of
this and that shows how—and I will use the word `bitter'—how
bitter it is getting because it is unacceptable. It is not right.
Northern Ireland should be treated exactly the same as every other
part of the United Kingdom. For many years the old saying in Northern
Ireland was that we were the poor second cousins to the rest of
the United Kingdom. That day has gone and I believe that we should
be getting a fair crack of the whip. Hopefully, the point that
has been raised in relation to lobbying, I think the Committee
is right in taking this on board and, with your help, Chairman,
perhaps we can push this forward and try and get some good positive
results from that. There is just one question I want to finish
with. Maybe you could outline for us the opportunities. What opportunities
would the presence of an independently funded news consortium
provide to local television operators or local print media? Could
you outline some of the benefits?
Mr Connolly: We view that sort
of opportunity in two ways. There are potential commercial opportunities
for consortia to raise revenue by leasing office space in existing
buildings, by providing skills training and various other things.
We would also see the benefits of sharing editorial copy throughout
groups in the country with weekly newspapers and our colleagues
in other parts of the media. I think also funding could be unlocked
for newspapers in particular to get reporters back into the hearts
of local communities. What you are seeing across the UK—and
Northern Ireland is no different—is newspapers and radio
stations and television retreating from the organs of our local
democracy like councils, like courts, like health trusts. I feel
very strongly that a pilot IFNC programme for Northern Ireland
would allow us to start seeding reporters back into communities.
Everyone talks over here about the Londoncentric approach. That
happens in Belfast, too. The papers and television stations are
highly Belfastcentric and have retreated in a lot of ways from
councils and courts. A lot of the meat and drink of most local
newspapers used to be that sort of stuff.
|
