CORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 1071-ii

House of COMMONS

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

TAKEN BEFORE

NORTHERN IRELAND AFFAIRS COMMITEE

 

TELEVISION BROADCASTING IN NORTHERN IRELAND

 

 

Tuesday 27 October 2009

Senate Chamber, Stormont, Belfast

 

MR DENIS WOLINSKI and MR STEWART PURVIS

MR SÉAMUS DOOLEY, MS DOT KIRBY,

MS JANNINE WADDELL and MS DAWN SIMPSON

Evidence heard in Public Questions 30 - 116

 

USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT

1.	This is a corrected transcript of evidence taken in public and reported to the House. The transcript has been placed on the internet on the authority of the Committee, and copies have been made available by the Vote Office for the use of Members and others.
2.	The transcript is an approved formal record of these proceedings. It will be printed in due course

Oral Evidence

Taken before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee

on Tuesday 27 October 2009

Members present

Sir Patrick Cormack, in the Chair

Rosie Cooper

Lady Hermon

Dr Alasdair McDonnell

________________

Memoranda submitted by Ofcom

 

Examination of Witnesses

 

Witnesses: Mr Denis Wolinski, Director, Ofcom Northern Ireland, and Mr Stewart Purvis, Partner, Content and Standards, Ofcom, gave evidence.

Q30 Chairman: Mr Wolinski, Mr Purvis, could I welcome you. Thank you very much indeed for coming to this session. Were either of you here this morning?

Mr Purvis: Yes, we were both here.

Q31 Chairman: I thought so. So you heard the questioning of the representatives from UTV, BBC and Channel 4. Have either of you anything you would like to say by way of opening statement?

Mr Purvis: I just thought it was worth reminding us what our role is. Basically, Parliament asked Ofcom to conduct a review every few years of public service broadcasting. That is effectively BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Channel Five. The purpose which I think is most relevant to today was a purpose on those broadcasters "to reflect UK cultural identity, to reflect and strengthen our cultural identity through original programming at UK, national and regional level". What we have done is to monitor that programming, to analyse it and, where appropriate, to offer policy options to the government and Parliament for how the situation can not only be sustained but possibly improved in these uncertain times ahead. Denis, as our Director of Northern Ireland, has been involved in all aspects of those reviews in terms of Northern Ireland.

Q32 Chairman: Is there anything you would like to add, Mr Wolinski?

Mr Wolinski: Just that in the case of Northern Ireland during that Public Service Broadcasting Review we identified some key areas. These were in particular news, which is an area right across the United Kingdom which there is concern about, and in the case of Northern Ireland non-news, which is valued and watched probably more than elsewhere in the UK, the issues which were raised again this morning by yourselves of network production and portrayal of Northern Ireland, and issues around indigenous language, the Irish language and Ulster Scots.

Q33 Chairman: Thank you. Would the two of you say that you see it as one of your prime duties, if not your prime duty, to do all in your power to try and ensure that Northern Ireland has high quality public service broadcasting?

Mr Purvis: Absolutely.

Chairman: So we can take that as the working remit on which we will base our questions today.

Q34 Rosie Cooper: I would like to ask you a two-part question and for both of you to answer it, but each half of it will impact on you differently. The first is whether the cost of being a public service broadcaster has become greater than the benefit. The second part would be what you would envisage as suitable limited public service commitment for Channels 3 and 5 and how you weigh those two things.

Mr Purvis: Absolutely. When we looked at the situation overall we believed, as Denis has said, that the issue of news was important but it was not the only thing. In terms of the Cost Benefit Analysis, as it is sometimes called, of public service broadcasting there is a very simple concept at the heart of public service broadcasting and it is as follows: certain broadcasters are given privileged access, sometimes for money as in the case of BBC through licence fees, sometimes to airwaves, or spectrum as it is sometimes called, which is all those other public broadcasters that I mentioned, Channel 4, ITV and Channel Five, and in return they are expected to provide certain public services. The value of that privileged access to the spectrum has come down and down as there are other ways of getting programmes to audiences, for instance by satellite and cable. What we have tried to do is to balance the declining value of the spectrum with the costs associated with a public service. What we did in our PSB Review was to make another adjustment which in most of the UK meant that the Channel 3 licensees, as we call them, sometimes called the ITV companies, would have to provide public services but at a slightly lower level in order to balance the lower value on the spectrum. In the case of Northern Ireland we literally put those public service requirements a little bit higher and the reason for that is digital switchover, which is already well underway and there is about to be the biggest urban switchover yet in the Manchester area, the Granada area, comes very late to Northern Ireland so the effect of there being more competitors in the market, which you talked about this morning, happens later in Northern Ireland. There is also a series of one-off factors in Northern Ireland which mean that the impact of DSO perhaps is not going to be so great. What you heard from Michael Wilson this morning was a quite confident and optimistic scenario in which, for instance, in terms of public funding the option we put to government was if we were going to lose citizens plurality, in other words if we were going to lose competition, to put it simply, on ITV or Channel 3 against BBC News in relation to the regions there was an argument for a public intervention which can be done in a number of different ways. What you heard from Michael this morning was the case that that is not needed in Northern Ireland, I guess for the reasons I have explained. What we would say to that is that first of all these are decisions for government, all we do is put forward policy options. There are perhaps other scenarios where the situation in Northern Ireland might not be as optimistic as Michael thinks and perhaps there should be a fallback plan for Northern Ireland where if the Channel 3 licensee in Northern Ireland was not able to sustain a competitive high quality service, would there be an argument for public intervention then. What we can say is in Scotland and Wales, where digital switchover is well advanced, there is a passion almost that there must be resolution to this issue of competition with the BBC in relation to regional news. What you have heard today is that is not felt so strongly in Northern Ireland for various reasons.

Q35 Rosie Cooper: As Member of Parliament for an area which is about to switchover on 4 November ---

Mr Purvis: Indeed.

Q36 Rosie Cooper: --- I think a great many more people will read about it than it appeared would be the case because there is a lot of investment in making it work. To go on from there, would you see it as a priority to ensure that limited public service commitments from Channels 3 and 5 were compatible with the desire to have financially robust providers of public service content alongside the BBC as we heard this morning?

Mr Purvis: What we said in our last Public Service Broadcasting Review was we envisage a system in which particularly Channels 3 and 5 are commercially based but with limited but important public service requirements, and I think that is still our view. The question of what exactly those requirements are, the priorities that we have identified are news, some non-news in the nations, not so strongly felt in England, original production, which we think is very important, and an independent quota. Those requirements as a list are not a terribly long list but I think they are all important points. We think you could end up with a situation where that is a sustainable business. I have to say ITV plc has another option as the licence holder and that is to walk away from public service broadcasting and just become a commercial broadcaster. That has implications for Northern Ireland and has certain implications for Scotland and the Channel Islands.

Q37 Chairman: Would you deplore that?

Mr Purvis: I often say, Chairman, that holding a PSB licence is a voluntary activity. Were ITV to walk away from that licence we would have to consider our options and Parliament would want us to consider whether they should be advertised or not. That is a hypothetical situation but it is an option which ITV plc has and who is to know what the next chairman or chief executive of ITV might decide to do. It is material to Northern Ireland, Scotland and the Channel Islands because it would effectively mean that Ulster Television would not have a network schedule in which to insert its programmes, and that is why we have raised it not as a scare story but if you analyse the facts of the situation you cannot ignore that option. If ITV plc stays as a PSB and if UTV continues with the high quality service that it provides today there need be no problem, and let us hope that is the case.

Q38 Chairman: You have this responsibility to the general public.

Mr Purvis: Yes.

Q39 Chairman: It is a responsibility given to you by Parliament. Do you not think that all of those who are purveying information via television to the public have an overriding duty to be conscious of their public obligations, whether you define it as PSB or not?

Mr Purvis: Certainly while they hold a PSB licence, a Channel 3 licence, they have to be accountable to Ofcom and eventually to the government and, indeed, to Parliament for performing their part of the deal. When they took on this licence they took on certain obligations.

Q40 Chairman: Of course, but I did interject earlier and ask would you deplore it if they sought to walk away?

Mr Purvis: For instance, we would deplore it to the extent that Parliament has authorised us to sanction them with a fine. What I am saying is we cannot make them be a PSB if they do not want to be.

Q41 Chairman: Do you wish you could?

Mr Purvis: Certainly that is not something Parliament has envisaged up to now, that you could hold somebody in perpetuity in terms of being a PSB. The situation is much as we have described it. There is a balance and at the moment the balance probably points to ITV remaining a PSB with all the benefits to the nations and regions, but we have to look at an alternative situation that might occur. You referred, Chairman, to the Independently Funded News Consortia and may I just say a word on that because it was referred to this morning?

Q42 Chairman: Please.

Mr Purvis: That is an idea which we put forward and it is now government policy. The idea is that in a part of the UK where, for instance, it did not make economic sense for the Channel 3 licensee to be asked to provide a news service that there could be public funding. Where this public funding should come from is a matter for government to decide and we have put forward a series of options. If there is public funding we believe that should be a contestable process and people should be able to bid to produce that service, a kind of public service broadcasting contract if you like. The people who would bid for that, if there were to be one in Northern Ireland, would be Ulster Television and another two organisations, the Belfast Telegraph in association with an independent producer called Ten Alps, have indicated that they would like to bid for the right to produce that service as well. In a sense, you have a potentially competitive situation for the right to produce the news with public money but if that service is not required then that would not be a very good use of public money. I do not agree or disagree with what Michael said this morning, I just paint an alternative scenario which is one we think should be covered.

Q43 Chairman: Can I just take you back a stage because when I asked my first question you said absolutely you agreed with that.

Mr Purvis: Yes.

Q44 Chairman: At the moment, how far do you think the quality and variety of television broadcasting in Northern Ireland measures up to what you consider to be appropriate standards? Taking the UK as a whole, and the twin-track of our questioning this morning which you heard, how far do you think Northern Ireland is adequately and accurately portrayed in the rest of the UK so that people in other parts can have a balanced understanding of what the country is like?

Mr Purvis: I will give a mostly positive answer to what you have asked but I should explain by way of background that I am a television journalist. I was the chief executive and editor-in-chief at ITN, I first came to Northern Ireland in 1972 as the ITN producer here, so I know a bit about the scene here. On that basis, and as a result of some international experience where I can compare broadcasting in countries of a similar size to Northern Ireland, I think the people of Northern Ireland are very well served by the BBC and UTV. The fact that UTV achieves the highest level of penetration in terms of market share on the early evening news is a remarkable achievement and is one that it has every right to be proud of. I do not think anything Ofcom suggests by way of a fallback situation should problems arise should be seen as criticism in any way of the BBC and UTV. In terms of the perception and how it looks across the UK, perhaps I might ask my colleague, Denis, to speak to this in a second. All I can tell you is the research that we see says that UK audiences believe that the PSB broadcasters cover well the nations and regions, and personally I would agree with that. Where they have a less positive opinion is whether their region or their nation is reflected well to the rest of the UK.

Mr Wolinski: I think it has been identified by the Committee and others that this appears to be a particular problem in the case of Northern Ireland.

Q45 Chairman: Yes.

Mr Wolinski: Some of the reasons for that are quite varied. The television networks are based in London. The process probably is quite London-centric, as indeed many other industries are London-centric. Commissioning editors, I suppose, are risk-averse. There was a story in Broadcast magazine earlier this week where a commissioning editor, for instance, who is required to provide network programming is more likely to go to a big London-based producer rather than, let us say, a smaller Northern Ireland-based producer because the outcomes are that if a big producer, say like Endemol, does not produce the goods the commissioning editor is not seen necessarily as being responsible because that outcome could not be predicted, whereas if they take a risk with a smaller, more minor producer their head is on the block. There are other factors at play. For instance, Northern Ireland is geographically probably further away from London and much of the rest of the UK, and in other ways as well more than physically. Stereotypes persist about Northern Ireland. Much of the programming that has been produced on the networks, going way back to something like Harry's Game, right up to Hunger, very often tended to be to deal with The Troubles, much as people like to get away from that. We have not seen a series produced from Northern Ireland, only one-off programmes, although we get series from all parts of the UK on network television. Even the Channel Islands had a programme like Bergerac. Yet producers in Northern Ireland can produce the goods. A company like Waddell, for instance, has produced two series for US networks. Currently Northern Ireland Screen is backing a pilot for a series for HBO in the States which could be worth up to £60 million. There is definitely progress. For instance, the BBC has committed to doing 3% from Northern Ireland and Peter Johnston described that this morning. There are glimmers of hope about this. There is a range of reasons why Northern Ireland has not punched its weight and they are quite complex.

Q46 Lady Hermon: Such as?

Mr Wolinski: The basis of commissioning, which is London-centric, the geography and it is a lot to do with perception.

Q47 Chairman: How far is it your responsibility to draw attention to this over-emphasis on London?

Mr Purvis: I think in our PSB Review we publish all sorts of data. We publish it annually and every few years. That points to a fairly consistent pattern and that is why Denis is able to draw those assumptions from it. We have raised this issue a number of times. One option we put forward in the PSB Review was a contestable fund for non-news programming, and Michael Wilson mentioned that idea this morning. That was not an option that the Government prioritised in the Digital Britain plan. The Government has put a lot of attention on news and current affairs but in Westminster overall there is not perhaps an awareness of how important this issue is in devolved nations. Certainly that has not been thought to be a priority for funding.

Q48 Dr McDonnell: How do we change? You have described the problem there and it is not quite your responsibility, but whose responsibility is it and how might we open that out?

Mr Purvis: I think the BBC has taken a very clear position on this by setting a series of targets. It is worth saying that we regulate for programme production out of London, we do not actually break it down by nation. The BBC has, in a sense, been more specific in its targets. What you begin to see is clusters of talent. That sounds a little bit airy-fairy but what really happens is a programme gets commissioned in a location, talent moves to the location and other things develop from that. Sometimes in the industry it is said talent follows the money. In other words, if the BBC or a broadcaster says it is going to commission from a certain area and puts some money there people will go there in order to get those commissions. That has been proved to be true over the years. In a sense, the BBC's commitment is a lead. I have to say that Channel 4, as you heard this morning from Stuart Cosgrove, is trying harder particularly in the area of digital media. ITV plc, again Michael referred to it, has not seen this as a priority. It does meet the quota out of London but it only just meets it and when it failed to reach that quota recently we imposed a sanction on it, so it is something that Ofcom takes extremely seriously. I have to say I do not think it has been suggested that regulators should or could go any further than that.

Q49 Dr McDonnell: If we park the regulation, are you telling me when you say the BBC has a quota that there is a willingness beyond the BBC? Has ITV a commitment to it?

Mr Purvis: To be slightly optimistic, I would say when Denis and I held an event here about a year ago with independent producers it was a pretty sorry story, I have to say, but I do see signs of progress. It is definitely associated with the growth of talent, the development of production companies and sometimes people with network experience in London come back to live in Northern Ireland and bring contacts that lead to commissions. There is a more optimistic scenario but you would have to say that we are working off very low levels of production. Denis, I do not think there has ever been a series commissioned from Northern Ireland?

Mr Wolinski: That is right.

Q50 Chairman: That is a pretty shocking statement, is it not?

Mr Purvis: It is surprising. It surprises us.

Chairman: It concerns me very much when you consider how many series have emanated from Scotland and Wales. Northern Ireland has not come out of this very well, has it?

Q51 Dr McDonnell: The other point I would make is there is a number of quite successful series organised not very far away in Dublin and throughout the Irish Republic, so it is not as if there is not some potential and some talent in the region. That is really the point of my question: which comes first, the chicken or the egg? We have got to break that cycle here.

Mr Purvis: Indeed. The example that is always mentioned, and it sounds a cliché but it is absolutely true, is Dr Who being produced in Cardiff. BBC Wales pitched Dr Who to the BBC network and they commissioned it in Cardiff and now Cardiff is seen as a major drama centre for the BBC. In a sense, if there was a bridgehead in which there was a series or return of a series, as Stuart Cosgrove referred to this morning, that could be the starting point for a lot more, but that has not happened so far. Until it happens we probably have doubts that it is going to be of any great scale. As Denis said, the fact that Northern Ireland producers are picking up commissions from American networks but not from British networks means something must be up. Denis has identified some of the facts that we think are responsible for it, but I have to say that so many of those are human frailties that could be overcome in a more concerted way and that is the way the BBC is trying to do it, I think.

Q52 Dr McDonnell: Have you any suggestions as to how we might lever or push or move the image of Northern Ireland within the system as well? They are both variations on the same theme. While The Troubles and the very difficult times we have gone through are a very real thing in people's lives, nevertheless that is not all there is here. If there was some production here it would help totally orientate a more positive image of Northern Ireland's contribution or potential contribution.

Mr Purvis: I totally understand. I will ask Denis to speak to the second point, but let me speak in favour of Northern Ireland Screen which has done a lot to bring production here. It has had real achievements. This week's edition of Broadcast magazine, which Denis mentioned earlier, has a wraparound with all the commissions that are actually happening in Northern Ireland, so there is a message and it is going out thanks to Northern Ireland Screen.

Mr Wolinski: Where we are is we are not at the low point, we are at a point somewhere moving up. We have already mentioned that the BBC is committed to doing 3% and that is a huge commitment. It will not reach that until 2016 but, as Peter Johnston mentioned, it includes programmes like editions of Panorama and The One Show as well as drama productions. Channel 4 has committed from a very low base in future as a result of that and the Public Service Broadcast Review to doing 3% in the three devolved nations. That is a starting figure and we would expect that to increase. I do not think we would want to take a completely doom and gloom view of things because I do think that the situation is moving forward. Northern Ireland is not where it was even three or four years ago.

Chairman: Before I bring in Lady Hermon could I just put on the record the apologies of the other two Members from Northern Ireland, but those of you who were here this morning will know that they had to go to London as the DUP has a debate on the floor of the House today. I would just like to put that on the record. It is not lack of interest or anything like that. We are delighted that Lady Hermon is back from the funeral that she had to attend this morning and Dr McDonnell is back from a rather more interesting event on which I do not wish to damage his chances by commenting further!

Q53 Lady Hermon: Thank you very much for being here this afternoon. Before I take you back to the digital switchover, I am a radio addict and I would like clarification about several issues. Let us look at the Digital Britain report - an unfortunate title - which should include Northern Ireland and does include Northern Ireland. I know I am right in that the recommendation of a pilot has been suggested for an Independently Funded News Consortia in both Scotland and Wales but mysteriously not in Northern Ireland. Why did Northern Ireland fail to get a pilot?

Mr Purvis: That is a government decision and I should say that decision is subject to confirmation.

Q54 Chairman: But feel free to criticise it.

Mr Purvis: I am offering you the background, Lady Hermon, and you can come to your own conclusion. That is what we do at Ofcom, Chairman, we offer facts and analyses and people come to their own decisions.

Q55 Lady Hermon: Were you surprised?

Mr Purvis: No, I was not surprised for the reason I mentioned earlier. The driving force is digital switchover. I think we have provided the Committee with some background information. The fact is by 2012, which is only a few years away now, the Cost benefit Analysis of the Channel 3 licences shows that they will be in serious deficit. In other words, economically there would be no point in holding one of those licences under the present conditions. The difference is that in Northern Ireland that is not the case. Arguably, the licences are not even in deficit at 2014, which is the end of the licences. In a sense, if there is not a problem in Northern Ireland, as you have heard from Michael Wilson, why would you make it a priority for public funding. It is no disrespect to the people of Northern Ireland, it is not a statement about the relative values of the nations, it is purely a factual basis, an evidence-based analysis that says the problem has arisen mostly in Scotland and secondly in Wales. There is also an issue about England, which is why potentially there is going to be a pilot in an English region, but for Northern Ireland, for the reasons we have explained, the situation is not so urgent and may never be needed, therefore why would you pilot it in Northern Ireland.

Q56 Lady Hermon: Was that explained in the Digital Britain report?

Mr Purvis: Probably not.

Lady Hermon: Exactly, that is what I thought. Then we would have had it in black and white.

Q57 Chairman: But then you did not write the Digital Britain report.

Mr Purvis: No.

Q58 Lady Hermon: Coming back to the digital switchover, I did take down precisely what you said. You said: "Digital switchover comes later in Northern Ireland". Could you just give us the timescale and indicate what you would suggest should be put in place to help people actually pay for the making redundant of their analogue radios and switching over to digital. Why should I be persuaded to do that when I really have an affection for every radio I own?

Mr Purvis: Understandably, Lady Hermon, there is a crossover here between digital switchover on television and what is I think now called by Digital Britain a digital upgrade on radio. The fact is in television terms you have to turn the analogue signal off in order to make digital television work. What we have got on television is a series of moments when the analogue signal has been turned off in some parts of the UK and is about to be turned off in others. It happens in Northern Ireland in 2012, virtually one of the last places to turn off.

Q59 Lady Hermon: Why are we the last to be turned off?

Mr Purvis: I do not know. I guess engineers would probably have some say in it. I have to say in the United States it was all done in one day but in Britain we have chosen to do it in a series of events, I think partly to learn the experience from each place before moving on. Again, I do not think there is any disrespect meant to Northern Ireland. There had to be an order and somebody chose an order in which it happens that Northern Ireland is one of the last to go. In fact, there are benefits to being last as well as disadvantages.

Q60 Lady Hermon: Absolutely, yes.

Mr Wolinski: I think a lot of it is to do with spectrum co-ordination.

Q61 Lady Hermon: Translate that, please.

Mr Wolinski: We need to do negotiations with those who share the spectrum round about us, so in this case the Republic of Ireland, likewise places like Tyne Tees and Meridian, where there is potential for interference and they are towards the end of the process. It is for purely practical reasons.

Mr Purvis: In other words, where there is a crossover with a neighbouring state, even if it is not a common border, where there are frequency crossovers it takes longer to sort out.

Q62 Chairman: When this has happened in 2012 will the people of Northern Ireland have as ready an accessibility to programmes emanating from the Republic as they have today?

Mr Wolinski: That is primarily a matter for the two governments.

Q63 Chairman: Perhaps you can tell us what the answer is likely to be.

Mr Wolinski: I think the answer is likely to be a positive one because there is a commitment to ensuring that the kinds of services people have enjoyed to date will continue. There are particular commitments, for instance in the case of the Irish Language station, TG Ceathair, that that should be available and the two governments would like to see continued availability of RTÉ's two stations as well. That is work that they are engaged in and we provide advice to them on that.

Q64 Chairman: Do you relate to your comparable body, whatever it is, in the Republic?

Mr Wolinski: Yes. There are two regulators in the South, the television regulator, the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland as it is now, and ComReg, which deals with the spectrum issues. We work closely with them on a range of cross-border issues, including telephones and that kind of thing as well.

Q65 Chairman: Do you have a sort of link committee, a liaison group or whatever?

Mr Wolinski: It is not formal but we have regular meetings.

Q66 Chairman: You are quite satisfied that they are sufficient to help expedite the process we have been talking about?

Mr Wolinski: I think progress is being made in that direction.

Q67 Lady Hermon: Come D-Day when we are all going to be switched over, are we going to be gradually switched over or will County Tyrone or County Fermanagh be last?

Mr Purvis: Are you talking about television as opposed to radio?

Lady Hermon: Do them separately. I have a particular interest in this because I have a particular bias towards radios.

Chairman: Ever since Listen with Mother she has never been able to turn off!

Q68 Lady Hermon: No, since we lost the very, very good Dr Who produced in Cardiff or whatever.

Mr Purvis: Perhaps if I could answer on the television and then Denis will come in.

Q69 Lady Hermon: It is a worry. Switching over is a worry. It is a financial cost to people, particularly those in Northern Ireland who do depend on the radio for so much and along the border areas we rely on the radio for getting news from RTÉ as well as the BBC and all the rest of it. If we could have some detailed information on this I think that would be very helpful.

Mr Wolinski: I will leave the radio to Stewart. On television it may change as a result of the experiences that we are going through already in other parts of the UK. The idea is that you will switch over just on one day.

Q70 Lady Hermon: All of them?

Mr Wolinski: Yes, the analogue service goes off. Currently it is in stages where BBC2 goes first, or rather you keep BBC2. It is quite likely because the difficulties are not as great as were envisaged initially that the whole process might occur in one fell swoop, as indeed Stewart mentioned happened in the States. We call it digital switchover but in many ways it is really analogue switch-off because nearly 80% of people, even in Northern Ireland, now have digital television. It will be a point where it is those last 20% and, given that we still have three years before we go completely in Northern Ireland, it is quite likely most people in Northern Ireland would already be switched over to digital. What will happen is the analogue signals will disappear. You have rightly mentioned that there are analogue signals that come from across the border and that is one of the issues that we are trying to deal with by working with ComReg and the BAI, and the two governments are concerned to try and expedite that process.

Mr Purvis: I will try and give you a concise answer on radio. What is different about radio is that you do not have to turn off the analogue signal, so you do not have to shut anything down in order to make the digital happen because as of today analogue radio and digital radio sit side-by-side. What the government envisages happening, which is why they call it an upgrade, is if you can remember the days when we had long wave and medium wave and then we moved to medium wave and FM, it is a move to FM and DAB. People's analogue radios would still work, it is just that they would no longer receive those stations which had moved to DAB. For some people that will be a major loss in their lives and that is why the whole process of how that is going to be achieved is longer, and 2015 has been mentioned as the first possible date and other people think it will take even longer. It is a different process, a different set of issues, and I think all parties are aware of the politics of asking people to throw away transistor radios. It is a different thing to actually put a small box on your television to enable it to become a digital television. It may be that technology such as that can be adapted for radio, but it is more likely that people will buy digital radios. The slight problem we have at the moment is that people are buying digital only radios without FM when really they should be buying radios with FM and digital on. There is an issue there which the public need to be better informed of, and that is one of our roles.

Q71 Chairman: As a great listener to radio I am interested in what you say and pleased that I bought the right equipment.

Mr Purvis: Its relevance to Northern Ireland is no greater than anywhere else.

Q72 Chairman: I appreciate that and I want to bring us back to that as we come to a close. What we are concerned about is television broadcasting particularly within Northern Ireland and the two themes that came across this morning were first of all the quality of broadcasting within Northern Ireland to the people of Northern Ireland and also the image of Northern Ireland conveyed via television to the rest of the UK in particular. Where do you think there is greater need for improvement taking those two areas? Or, if you want to put it another way, where should we be worrying most or are you entirely happy that admirable progress is being made on both fronts?

Mr Purvis: On the first issue, Chairman, we are working from a very strong position where we have two high quality services in Northern Ireland and a whole series of other services, including radio. What we are about at Ofcom is trying to sustain that high quality situation. We also put forward options in case there is a threat to the status quo. On the other area, in terms of production we do what we can via the information we put out there, by the stimulus we can provide sometimes informally, but there is a limit to what regulation can do in this area. On the issue of portrayal, which is a separate issue, I have to say I think there is a limit to what regulation can achieve there, and you heard some of the reasons this morning in trying to get definitions. I think it comes down to awareness. Broadcasters are more aware of Northern Ireland as such things as your inquiry make people think more. Stuart Cosgrove from Channel 4 gave the most precise response on Northern Ireland and, therefore, processes such as this have a positive role to play but they are not the only thing that can be done.

Q73 Chairman: Thank you for that. We do have a role to play. Speaking for myself, and I hope the Committee, I am passionately attached to this part of the UK and am concerned that the passion of my attachment, which is based on seeing Northern Ireland as Northern Ireland is, is not shared by many people in my constituency because they do not see it and understand it as it is. Those who have charge in whatever capacity, whether it be regulatory or, more importantly, production of television broadcasting have a duty to try and address that. Would you agree with that?

Mr Purvis: As somebody who spent 30 years transmitting negative pictures of Northern Ireland into people's homes, I will do what I can and what Ofcom can to try and offset the balance.

Chairman: Thank you very much indeed for that. Thank you for the evidence you have both given.

Memoranda submitted by National Union of Journalists

and Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television

 

Examination of Witnesses

Witnesses: Mr Séamus Dooley, Irish Secretary, and Ms Dot Kirby, Chair of NI Broadcasting Branch, National Union of Journalists; Ms Jannine Waddell, NI Representative, and Ms Dawn Simpson, Senior Policy Executive for Nations and Regions, Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television, gave evidence.

Q74 Chairman: Could I welcome you very much. It is very good to see you. I understand that one of your number has become indisposed and, Dawn Simpson, you are here to replace him.

Ms Simpson: I am the last minute replacement!

Q75 Chairman: Would you like to introduce yourselves, starting with Dawn Simpson, so that we know precisely what you do.

Ms Simpson: Dawn Simpson. I am the Senior Policy Executive for Nations and Regions at PACT.

Ms Waddell: I am Jannine Waddell. I am the Northern Ireland Representative of PACT and am also Managing Director of Waddell Media.

Q76 Chairman: You have already had an honourable mention in dispatches today.

Ms Waddell: I have been delighted.

Mr Dooley: Séamus Dooley, Irish Secretary of the National Union of Journalists responsible for representing journalists on the island of Ireland both from an industrial relations point of view but also in terms of policy.

Q77 Chairman: You are based in Dublin, are you?

Mr Dooley: Based in Dublin but I spend a great deal of time in Northern Ireland.

Ms Kirby: Dot Kirby. I am the Chair of the Northern Ireland Broadcasting Branch of the National Union of Journalists.

Q78 Chairman: Thank you very much indeed. You are all very welcome. I think I am right in saying that most of you have been here throughout the sessions. Has anybody not heard everything?

Ms Simpson: I was not here this morning.

Q79 Chairman: Were you here this morning?

Ms Waddell: No, I was not.

Q80 Chairman: As you know, we are looking into this whole area and you will have heard from the last questions that I asked that we are concerned on two fronts. First of all, in the face of change the quality of broadcasting, television broadcasting in particular, that people receive here in Northern Ireland is not sufficiently indigenous for their needs and is there a good link-up with the Republic and is that going to continue after the digital switchover and so on. We are also concerned about the image of Northern Ireland which television portrays -using the word properly - in a unique way in a way in which most people gather their impressions of most things these days via television and downloading. We are concerned about the quality and the accuracy of the picture of Northern Ireland that people in the rest of the UK and the wider world, but particularly the rest of the UK, receive. To be able to benefit from the experience of people such as yourselves, journalists, production executives and so on, is something that we are very grateful for. I am sorry that we do not have our other two Members from Northern Ireland but, even as we have this session, they are disembarking at Heathrow to go and take part in their debate in Westminster. That is why we are a little thin on the ground. One of our number is indisposed as well. Would any of you like to say anything by way of opening statement before I call Lady Hermon to ask the first question?

Ms Simpson: As an observation on the representation of Northern Ireland, because there is such a lack of network broadcasting coming from Northern Ireland there is naturally a lack of representation from Northern Ireland. There are many factors, which I am sure we will come on to later, as to why that is. I know from the Ofcom report they stated that 80% of people in Northern Ireland found that it was more important to them than anywhere else in the UK which averaged at 61%, so there is a natural interest both within Northern Ireland to see themselves and represent the country that it is but also if there is a lack of network production then there is a lack of people understanding about Northern Ireland, its culture and its surroundings. It really stems back to a lack of visibility. The portrayal, probably from history, has been very much that the producers in Northern Ireland have always been good at current affairs and news and it is time for commissioners to move on and realise that there is a lot of talent in other genres, in entertainment and drama. Until those are recognised we are going to be in the same position where there is going to be lack of representation outside of news and current affairs.

Q81 Chairman: I will go along the table, that is probably the best thing, and after that if you dive in and take the questions as you think most appropriate.

Ms Waddell: I totally agree with what Dawn has said. Historically there has not been a huge range of programming made here. The sector in Northern Ireland has changed and moved on but the commissioners in London have not moved on. We need to convince those commissioners that we can make returning series from Northern Ireland. That is what needs to happen.

Mr Dooley: I would agree with the issue and I am going to approach it from a slightly different angle. That is, I would agree that there is an issue about the portrayal of Northern Ireland but I would link it more not to how others see Northern Ireland or not the story of "Isn't Northern Ireland wonderful? Yes, it is, and there is a need for positive images", I would have grave concerns that the reduction in current affairs output as distinct from news means there is a lack of analysis which tells the unfolding story of Northern Ireland. Among news managers, and this was an issue which we had very stern arguments over during the restructuring of UTV, there is a notion that in post-conflict Northern Ireland you can do less current affairs whereas I believe that in terms of the portrayal of Northern Ireland we need more investigative journalism and more analysis in relation to health, education, poverty, immigration, all of those issues. Those stories of Northern Ireland in post-conflict Northern Ireland are not receiving coverage. That is both from indigenous media and I would be quite critical of some of the media from Dublin that came up and spent a great deal of time here but have now walked away. In terms of the portrayal of ordinary life in Northern Ireland, the current affairs issues in Northern Ireland, that is also an issue as well as the issue which my colleagues have mentioned in relation to the wider issue of production and coverage and documentaries.

Ms Kirby: I would go along with that, but just to facilitate the Committee I wondered if you had come across this line in a recent Ofcom report, which says: "In Northern Ireland the value of programmes produced in the Province in the last two years increased from £4 million in 2006 to £6 million in 2008. As a proportion of total programme budgets this represents a small increase from 0.2% to 0.3%". I do not think you need to say anything more than that really.

Chairman: That is a very revealing statistic. Thank you for drawing it to our attention. It is on the record, it will be produced in our report and we may well want to comment on it. Thank you very much for that.

Q82 Lady Hermon: It is very nice to have all of you here to give us an insight into the wealth of knowledge that you have at your fingertips. If I could just put on the record my sincere gratitude and admiration for journalists who through the most awful years in Northern Ireland very courageously reported in Northern Ireland, many of whom bear the scars and some of them did not live to tell the tale. We do appreciate that.

Ms Kirby: We will be delighted to pass on your kind regards to our colleagues.

Q83 Lady Hermon: Not at all. Post-conflict, and Mr Dooley referred to that several times, what are the main sensitivities and other issues that inhibit broadcasting, particularly television broadcasting, which is the main focus of our inquiry, still in Northern Ireland?

Mr Dooley: First of all, much of this comes down to money. I thought it was interesting in the first session this morning that the broader subject of money and resources was something that did not feature very strongly. You cannot have investigative journalism and meaningful analysis without the allocation of resources. It is as simple as that. Obviously the NUJ has a bias towards public service broadcasting because public service broadcasting recognises the need for investment in editorial resources. We recognise the need and it is important to say that in the commercial sector these are extremely tough times. Broadcasting is a national resource and when you are engaged in the business of broadcasting you cannot do serious broadcasting on the cheap. When you ask what is the big issue, the big issue is resourcing and how you provide the resourcing. It was interesting in the earlier discussion when you made reference to why Northern Ireland had been "left out" of the idea of a pilot project. I have serious reservations about the pilot project. It has not been thought through. For instance, at an employment level there has been a huge decline in employment in journalism, the same as in many other sectors, and what would you do with the people currently engaged in journalism full-time. Not just my members, the commercial sector, but the others, the secretarial and administrative staff. What would happen to those people engaged in the current service while you had your experiment? They would not be covered by a transfer of undertakings and what would happen if the pilot worked or if the pilot did not work. The union is not opposed in principle to the models that are being talked about but it raises many questions that have to be asked about the provision of an alternative service. I have disagreed with Mr Wilson on many issues, but his warning today that you cannot apply a template in Northern Ireland that you have taken from any other region is something that I think the Committee should heed very seriously. There is a particular characteristic about the broadcasting in Northern Ireland and there is a particular challenge, cultural, political and social challenge, which means that you cannot just superimpose a template.

Q84 Chairman: Would you like to expand on this particular character? Not because I disagree with you, in fact personally I agree with you, but I would like to have on record some of these particularities and peculiarities.

Mr Dooley: I would say particularities rather than peculiarities.

Q85 Chairman: Using it in its strict Dr Johnson sense and not in its odd sense.

Mr Dooley: I will give you an example. In most areas of the United Kingdom coverage of sports would be seen to be a relatively uncontentious or non-controversial area, other than the sharp divisions which exist in the pub afterwards between two sets of fans. In Northern Ireland the editorial decision as to what victory or defeat leads a bulletin, the placing of an all-Ireland hurling final, a football final or a rugby match is not just a statement of sporting priority on the part of an editor, it is a statement of political allegiance as well and great care has to be shown. Equally in the area of language coverage we have to recognise the importance of both the Irish language and Scots Gaelic. They are not issues which many other regions or nations have to deal with. There is a delicate balance which journalists over the years covering The Troubles in Northern Ireland would have been aware of. My own union is very proud of the fact that it is a British and Irish union and we never entered the political divide. All of our members managed to stay united. Media organisations managed to provide by and large, and I disagreed with one of the statements issued here this morning, a down the line fair and objective service. They are challenges which continue. It is not just the PSB, the public service obligation, every broadcaster has to make that balance work every day. That is why I say it is different in Northern Ireland. That difference is important. It should not be looked on as a negative. The work of the BBC and UTV in Northern Ireland has been to hold a mirror to the community and in the changing development of that community we would like to ensure that the resources are there to maintain that same work.

Chairman: Do any of you wish to add to that? You obviously have the unanimous support of your colleagues, Mr Dooley.

Q86 Dr McDonnell: I have some questions here and some of them refer to broadcasting and some to production. If I could come to the production people first. I want to go back on the production because how do we make it happen, and by that I mean how do we get more local production going? We raised this issue earlier with Ofcom. Have you any views coming from the production end, if you like? How do we make this stack up because at the end of the day that is what we have to know? There are so many bits of the jigsaw and obviously they are not falling into place.

Ms Simpson: There are. There are a couple of elements. The BBC now have committed to their 50% out of London, 17% for the nations with an ambition to get 3% from Northern Ireland. They are setting quotas where they have to meet them. It still goes back to commissioning attitudes and this is where the real battle has been for many years. Whether that starts to change because they have now got targets to achieve is another matter. We have found that commissioners will come in and spend five minutes with producers. Ofcom hit on that earlier when they were saying that to have a relationship with a commissioner, if they make a mistake and they have commissioned Endemol and the programme does not reach the target audience it is not seen as so bad but if they are less risk-averse and opt to choose somebody they have never commissioned before on the back of a really good idea and it does not achieve what they need then they are less likely to take those risks again. In order for them to find out what the supply is in Northern Ireland they need to spend time with producers in Northern Ireland. Currently, coming in for a couple of hours doing five minutes' speed-dating with the production companies does not set and build any relationships and they have a lack of understanding of what the supply is. We have recently done a production supply across the whole of the UK and Northern Ireland in the past 18 months had the highest amount of commissions per hour for international programming in the whole of the UK outside of London. They beat every nation, every English region across all of the UK, so the supply is there. People recognise that there is talent here that can deliver, it is quality and they have got good ideas, but unfortunately the London-centric commissioner attitude has still not been broken through. Setting quotas and targets is a start because they have to achieve them and come out and start to work with producers outside of London.

Q87 Dr McDonnell: Is there a case to be made for some high risk-taking within the quotas, not just a quota but a quota for dealing with new producers?

Ms Simpson: Absolutely, yes.

Q88 Dr McDonnell: That 25% of the business should go to new producers?

Ms Simpson: Yes.

Ms Waddell: You also have to look out for the indigenous companies who have been fighting and have lasted the course through this time and put in the investment but have always been turned back just at the last hurdle. If there are two good ideas on the table they will take the London one, sadly, rather than the one from Northern Ireland, Wales or even Scotland. Going forward we need to break that cycle. BBC Archive are making efforts in that area by putting some commissioners in, but we need a commissioner here who has got power and a pot of money to spend. They need to have some money to spend so they can actually ---

Q89 Chairman: Money provided by whom?

Ms Waddell: By the BBC. The BBC would need to put a commissioner into the region who actually has money to spend.

Q90 Dr McDonnell: Purchasing power.

Ms Waddell: Yes.

Q91 Chairman: Just help the Committee. If we were going to take up this recommendation, what sort of sums are we talking about?

Ms Waddell: If the BBC meets its targets by 2016 it will be £30 million coming into the sector here. That is a lot of money coming into the sector. We need to make sure we meet that target otherwise that money will go to the other nations and we will miss out and Northern Ireland will never get the chance to get on that ladder again.

Q92 Chairman: Just to pin you down on this, if we were to take your argument that there should be such a commissioner funded out of the public purse, because that is the licence payers' money, and I am not saying there should not, what would the cost be?

Ms Waddell: The BBC will just have to move a genre commissioner. Manchester is getting children's and sport, why do they not move arts to Northern Ireland. Religion has gone to Manchester as well. It is not going to be a huge cost.

Q93 Chairman: Perhaps they should move religion to Northern Ireland.

Ms Waddell: They could do.

Q94 Chairman: It would be very interesting.

Ms Waddell: It has just moved to Manchester but we are very happy for it to make the swap over here.

Q95 Chairman: What you are talking of is a repositioning of an existing person with the necessary administrative back-up, but this is not a whole pot of new money, it is using money here rather than using it in Manchester and the add-on costs, therefore, would not be appreciable.

Ms Waddell: No. They would not just be commissioning out of Northern Ireland.

Q96 Chairman: I appreciate that. We are just trying to pin you down because if we are to make recommendations, and whether we will or not I will have to consult my colleagues, it is helpful to have that on the record, and thank you for that.

Ms Simpson: I think the alternative to that as a suggestion is, as we said before, commissioners fly in and out and do not spend enough time, but I think what Jannine is saying is if you have somebody here you would naturally build a relationship up and, therefore, you are more likely to get a commission from them. If we had commissioners of all genres, because we have companies here that produce different genres, not just in one specific area, and they spent quality time - I am talking days per month - to get to know them and understand what their business is and how they can deliver, then I think that would also impact as well. Up to now there has been no commitment for any commissioners. We have got the commissioning executives in place now but the danger with this is they could end up becoming gatekeepers and actually stopping independent companies themselves creating that relationship.

Q97 Chairman: You want them to be cash buyers, not gatekeepers, is that right?

Ms Simpson: Absolutely. If we had commissioners here with budgets and power that is a completely different thing. The commissioning executives currently have no money, no power and they are more a messenger who goes back and sells the products.

Q98 Chairman: You have made a clear proposition and we note that, but what do your journalist colleagues think of that idea? Is that something with which you can go along?

Ms Kirby: Certainly, but I would not just have it as a BBC recommendation. I think the BBC have made moves in that direction and have said that by 2016 17% of their production will come from the nations and the nations together - Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - have 17% of the population, so that is fair. Just to take other public service broadcasters as an example, Channel 4 have 35% of their output that must be from outside the M25 and their current target in the nations is 3%. That is 3% for all the nations. 17% of the population, 3% of the output. That is not fair.

Q99 Chairman: That does seem to be a strange imbalance, does it not? Mr Dooley?

Mr Dooley: Yes, I would go along with that.

Dr McDonnell: I wonder if I might make a move to current affairs and broadcasting rather than production.

Chairman: He is very interested in current affairs!

Q100 Dr McDonnell: Yes, at the moment. For the next three months especially. I gather Channel 4 suggests an opt-out from main news bulletins. What impact would this have on the portrayal or projection of Northern Ireland and vice versa?

Ms Kirby: It would depend how it is done. If you are talking about Channel 4 coming into Northern Ireland with a revised remit to cover local news properly and on a cross-platform basis with built-in safeguards on editorial independence and impartiality, guarantees on reach and impact which would be measured presumably, and there would be a financially stable model, that they would bid for that every two or three years or whatever, I presume you are talking about it as an alternative to the UTV coverage?

Q101 Dr McDonnell: Yes.

Ms Kirby: So UTV would be able to throw their hat into the ring for that contract as well, and so would other news consortia. That would be something we could probably support. We would need to take a careful look at exactly what the components of the arrangements were, but if you are talking about Channel 4 doing a happy little opt, and an opt sounds to me like something that is very quick and over before you realise it is on air, if you are talking about a three minute, five minute or ten minute opt as an alternative to what we have now, which is half an hour every night at six o'clock and another half an hour at 10.30, that is not anything that we could support. The other thing to come to on that is what Channel 4 would probably say is it depends on the resources: "If you give us the resources we will do it properly. If you want it cheap and cheerful, we can do it cheap and cheerful". An important point that has been lost in this whole debate, and it has not been made in the submissions to the Committee, is that what happens with regional news across the UK at the moment costs between £40 million and £60 million according to Ofcom. That is something which the public at the moment does not pay for because it is basically paid for out of the advertising revenue of the network. What you are being asked to approve with this new Independently Funded News Consortia, which is cross-media and more localised, will cost between £60 million and £100 million, and that is new money, money that the taxpayer at the moment is not paying.

Chairman: That is very helpful of you to emphasise that.

Q102 Dr McDonnell: UTV's news requirement has dropped from five hours 20 minutes to four hours a week. What impact has that had on journalism?

Ms Kirby: Huge. They have lost their mid-morning bulletins. We have lost Insight, or Counterpoint as it used to be known. As well as the five hours 20 minutes to four hours, they have also been allowed to reduce their non-news content from four hours to two hours. The initial proposal was that it dropped to one and a half hours. In terms of a reflection of the community back at itself and the analysis that has a profound impact on their journalism. The BBC needs a strong commercial sector. We think what you want to be aiming for is a strong BBC versus a strong commercial sector and they will drive one another up if there is proper competition, but the competition needs to be robust and credible. You do not want to weaken the opposition.

Q103 Dr McDonnell: Do you think that regional news partnerships sharing infrastructure and raw material would restrict the neutrality of journalists or affect or compromise them in any way?

Ms Kirby: Potentially it could, yes. Presumably you would build in safeguards in terms of editorial independence. Certainly there would be a danger in reducing audience choice. I can see that is an attractive idea, but one of our members put it quite eloquently at our branch meeting last week when he described the idea as being "a nonsense". You probably could not get the existing two studio sets of UTV and BBC into one studio physically and give cameras enough room to move around, but I am sure it is not beyond the wit of man or woman to design a couple of studio sets that could sit side-by-side. It probably sounds like a good idea because you have got one big expensive studio being fired up at six o'clock and then half an hour later the BBC does the same thing, but on a practical level it would not work because both studios would be involved for at least an hour, probably an hour and a half or more, in rehearsals before they go on air, and how do you have Paul Clark telling people the UTV news whenever Noel Thompson is over in the other corner of the studio trying to do the local BBC headlines into the London output. Studio sharing would not work. You could share some crews on some stories like big court cases or where there is a double fatality, say.

Q104 Chairman: But you could not have the competition of which you recently spoke if you had that?

Ms Kirby: No, you could not. You could send two reporters and pool the cameraman or woman. I think Ofcom has said that it would not really reduce the burden of producing regional news. As I say, regional news costs £40 million to £60 million. Ofcom reckon that in 2011 the sharing of regional news facilities on the news side of the house could save £1.5 million and by 2014 £5.7 million. It would be a lot of effort for not the sort of savings you want to be aiming to achieve.

Mr Dooley: Can I just make one other point. I would welcome the comment that was made this morning about the potential for the sharing of facilities in relation to training. Anything that would enhance training in a strategic manner is something that we would welcome. We believe there should be more work done in the area of training. This is not just an issue about the sharing of technical resources, it is also about the sharing of the editorial decision-making process, and by definition if you are talking about using one crew to cover one story that means that some other story, be it the announcement of a contender for the election of the leadership of a political party or whatever, is going to be jointly decided to be taken off not one list but potentially off two lists. There are delicate editorial issues there, it is not just a question of sharing.

Chairman: Surely it would also blur editorial integrity.

Q105 Dr McDonnell: Diversity too.

Ms Kirby: Yes, absolutely, there is a danger of that. I do not think anybody would dream of having the pooling of crews on all stories, that would be absolutely crazy, you might as well not bother having an opposition if you were going to do that. It would just be on one, two or three stories depending on the news day where you know that both sides are going to be there. As was said this morning, really outside of news there would be huge potential for the sharing of resources. When you get into the digital side of the house and things outside of news you could do it, and you could do it a lot more comfortably than you could on news.

Q106 Chairman: Of course, at the moment one has that with the printed media PA existing happily side-by-side with the individual newspapers and that may be something that to a degree could be an example, but the blurring of the distinction would be the negation of the competition that you believe is the lifeblood of vigorous journalism.

Ms Kirby: That is a very good way to put it.

Mr Dooley: I think the analogy about PA and the use of agencies is an interesting one because traditionally in the print media, and we will use the home example, PA and other agencies were used to enhance own staff coverage of Northern Ireland. Independent News and Media no longer have an office in Northern Ireland, they rely entirely on agencies, so you have the largest media organisation on the island of Ireland relying either on one of its sister papers, The Telegraph, or on agency copy. I think that is an unhappy comparison. We believe that agencies play an important role but the use of own staff by even sister papers within the print industry is something that we would all see as being desirable because you need many voices. There is a lesson in how the print industry has moved on that one and we would regard that as retrograde.

Q107 Rosie Cooper: I have two questions. What impact do you think the new production targets for the BBC and Channel 4 will have on Northern Ireland? It is easy to say, but realistically do you have a sufficient production base here because you are arguing that it is drifting away and you are not getting enough production here? Do you have a sufficient production base to increase local programme making if that were to happen?

Ms Simpson: There is a production base here, it is just not recognised. From the recent survey that we did it proved that across the BBC, for instance, only 2% of their overall average network turnover came from the BBC, yet there is lots of production in cable and satellite, in overseas and international. It exists. The additional spend and income, as my colleague has already indicated, just from the BBC could create another £30 million. That will trigger more talent to move here so there will be companies moving in and it will also give indigenous companies the confidence in developing and buying in additional talent as well provided the commitment is there. It should not just be left to the BBC. I think the BBC has made a good step forward in their first commitment, particularly ring-fencing about 17% to the nations. Channel 4 does very little within Northern Ireland and in 2007 I think they spent £300,000 out of their nearly £600 million budget in Northern Ireland. The figures that I have seen from 2008 look not much improved on that. If Channel 4 were to equal the 50%, as in the BBC, then you would have two competitive broadcasters that were investing in Northern Ireland and that would create a catalyst for indigenous companies to grow and develop but also for the new companies and development to move into the region as well.

Q108 Rosie Cooper: We heard before that the move from £6 million to £8 million meant an increase from 0.2% to 0.3%. The 2009 PACT census indicated that two-thirds of independents were based in London and Northern Ireland was the lowest of the regions having 1%, Wales 4% and Scotland 5%. How confident are you that the regulators can ensure that you get your fair share for Northern Ireland?

Ms Simpson: It has been an ongoing battle. It is a matter of trying to convince the commissioners. We know that the talent is there and if more investment was made and more commitment to Northern Ireland it would attract and build and grow that talent and spread. If there was another commitment from another broadcaster, such as Channel 4, to increase spend that would give people confidence to invest more in their own companies and also to move into the Northern Ireland area. It is a battle and it is not an easy one. You can go to the BBC, Channel 4, ITV and say, "The talent is here" and you can show them figures and graphs about how much they are doing internationally, and as I mentioned before Northern Ireland rated the highest amount of hours in the past 18 months for international commissions with over 400 hours, so they can produce in volume and good ideas, but the battle is down to the commissioners and unless they are targeted specifically, and we talked about a target for investment and taking more risks on new companies and they start to do that and see development, it will not happen. There are things in place and it is still very early on with the BBC, but the problem of leaving it to just one broadcaster is a big problem.

Ms Waddell: Also Northern Ireland Screen has invested in several companies coming into the sector as well, which is another boost. What the sector really needs is a returning series from the BBC or Channel 4 to kick-start everything happening here.

Q109 Rosie Cooper: You talked about trying to convince the commissioners, but the second part of my question was about the ability of the regulators to ensure that whatever levels were set were at least adhered to. What confidence do you have that that can happen?

Ms Simpson: We do our own reports on that as well. From our last report in 2008 that was comparing what Ofcom produced and what we feel has really been produced and should be attributed to Northern Ireland or the nations and regions. We constantly question that. We highlighted some anomalies in ITV and Ofcom mentioned earlier that they had then gone back and realised they had not hit their targets. We try to oversee that. One thing that has recently arisen is a change in the out of London definition. Ofcom only regulate the fact that it is out of London and up until recently you could spend a minimum spend in Northern Ireland to qualify for a Northern Ireland production and that could only mean 20% of the production base, so economically Northern Ireland does not really benefit from that but it takes away what has been committed to Northern Ireland. We have recently proposed to Ofcom that those out of London definitions should be specific to a particular nation or English region if they want to qualify and take a piece of that target otherwise there is no sustained growth, no economic impact or benefits. We have a doubt as to whether those targets would mean anything if they could just ship people in and out, spend a minimum amount and they could tick that box and qualify and that would take that away from the nation.

Chairman: Could you let us have some illustrative figures later. I do not want to put you on the spot here, that is not fair, but if you could let our clerk have some illustrative figures that would be rather helpful when we come to frame our recommendations.

Q110 Rosie Cooper: This is a question and a statement from me too. The question would be, would you believe that more production in Northern Ireland would improve the portrayal of Northern Ireland? I believe that is a given. As somebody who has been coming here since I was a child the view I have of Northern Ireland - great people, beautiful country - does not necessarily reflect the view of people who have seen Northern Ireland over the last 50 years via the news, so you really have to work very hard at getting more of that production so that people see the real Northern Ireland. I am answering the question myself. It is so important that you get that over. Do you share that view?

Ms Waddell: Absolutely. The more production you get, the more portrayal of the country and accents. We need to get the business in first of all.

Q111 Chairman: I think we would all agree with that. If you had to make a choice as to which area needs the greatest attention, would you say that it is the production and programmes for what I might call indigenous consumption within Northern Ireland or the production of programmes, such as Rosie Cooper just alluded to and has come up time and again in our session today, which help to give people outside, and especially in the rest of the UK, an adequate picture of what life in Northern Ireland is like? Which of those needs most or more attention in your view?

Ms Waddell: It is the second half, the portrayal in the UK. I think our local indigenous programmes are very good.

Q112 Chairman: Personally, I would concur with that. Would you all agree with that?

Ms Kirby: I think it is a chicken and egg. If you have the production ability the programmes will follow, and equally the reverse is true. You almost have to put the commissions in Northern Ireland and the talent will come.

Ms Waddell: I think we would argue the talent is already here.

Q113 Chairman: I am just very concerned that those of my constituents who do not have the privilege that I have of coming here frequently and regularly have a very different impression of Northern Ireland, not the one that I know to be the truth. Because most people derive their information these days from either television or the Internet and things being on-line I do believe this is a great challenge and a great opportunity for all of you who have influence, whether it is as journalists or producers, over the transmitted television programme and subsequent Internet use and so on. Would you agree with that?

Ms Waddell: Absolutely. We welcome this Committee because this is a very big step forward for us.

Chairman: Good.

Q114 Lady Hermon: Could I just ask you about the morale. What about the morale of journalists in the BBC, UTV and producers? You seem terribly enthusiastic about what you do but I heard you say that there is speed-dating of commissioners coming to Northern Ireland. It has a completely different meaning but leaves a lasting impression. It has been a very interesting session, I have to say.

Mr Dooley: First of all, I believe that morale in the media is generally very low because there has been a dumbing down. I would be quite critical of standards. The real difficulty in that area is there are less journalists and, therefore, less time to do the things you want to do and many journalists find themselves in the position of fire fighting. There is more and more demanded in less time. Quite frankly, forget about portraying what is happening at a wider level in the United Kingdom, there is very little of what is called "fresh air" journalism, ie the opportunity to go out onto the street, a greater reliance on spin doctoring, on media releases, lack of time and resources for analysis. That is very, very demoralising. If I were to identify what may be outside the scope of this meeting in answer to your question, morale is low everywhere because we are in a recession and times are bad, and we understand that, but in terms of the specifics of journalism the real lack of morale is the denial of the opportunity to tell the story of what is going on and have the time and space in broadcasting, in print or on-line to give people the time to give the long version of their story. That is a really depressing aspect of the media. I am sorry to end on a depressing note.

Q115 Chairman: That is very helpful. Frankly, I find that a very positive answer because I share your view of dumbing down, that we live in the era of the news clip and the sound bite and what people both need and deserve is more extensive coverage and to be treated as intelligent people. It is a paradox that in an age where we are all the time talking about education and increasing the capacity of people to understand that we give them colour supplement civilisation, and I find that rather depressing. I am glad you said what you said. Does anybody else want to add to Mr Dooley's answer on that?

Ms Waddell: Morale amongst producers has been low due to the lack of network commissions in the last two years and then we were hit by the recession. BBC Northern Ireland has had a consistent commissioning policy over the last 18 months and we are just coming out of that at the moment. It has been a tough time. Equally, we are beginning to see improvements. There are commissions there and we are all willing to get to the table, so this should be a different picture.

Ms Simpson: Partly because the morale was so low there was a lack of engagement with broadcasting and producers. As Jannine has highlighted, there was a problem with the commissioning so there was no commissioning happening. Even throughout 2007 there was only ten hours of independent production coverage across the whole PSB network. That was ten hours across a whole year.

Ms Waddell: Less for 2008.

Q116 Chairman: That is about what the BBC presents on snooker in two weeks.

Ms Simpson: If you talk about portrayal, there was not really any portrayal throughout the last two years of anything on Northern Ireland. There is a glimmer of hope now. We have spoken to the BBC about engagement and we have agreed to set up a working group with the BBC and independent sector to try and work through strategies and look at the problems and work together on that. That is a good step forward. The BBC has just done their commissioning round. There is starting to be a glimmer of hope, but it has been quite a depressing time over the last two years and morale has been down. With all the independent companies here, they do not take it lying down and have managed to support their companies by going out to international markets as well. Also, the PSB is a really important side. Not only does it have the highest income for them, so they pay a lot more for the commissions, but because of the terms of trade they have the right to then sell those programmes internationally and recoup and make more than just on that one programme.

Chairman: Thank you very much indeed, it has been extremely helpful evidence and we will certainly be studying it carefully when we get our transcripts. You will have those sent to you very shortly. Thank you for saying you would supply some of those figures, that would be very helpful. If there are any other points that you feel you would have liked to have got across and when you see the transcript feel you did not make a point sufficiently strongly, please make sure that you tell our clerk because we will be aiming to produce this report in the very early part of next year which means that there is a little more time. Thank you very much indeed.