Examination of Witness (Questions 1-55)
Q1 Chair: Bore da, Mr Jones.
Diolch am ddod heddiw. Yn amlwg, does yna ddim gwasanaethau cyfieithu,
ac nid yw'r mwyafrif yma yn siarad Cymraeg… [Good
morning, Mr Jones. Thank you for coming today. Obviously, there
are no translation facilities and the majority here do not speak
Welsh…] so we will
carry on in English, if that is all right with you.
Obviously, you have seen the brief, and the
purpose of this is not a political discussion at all; it is just
to look into your abilities as a potential leader within S4C.
May I begin by asking you a fairly obvious question? You will
be aware from what has been going on over the past year—not
to mention our own report—that there have been some issues
and problems within S4C. We actually said in our report that S4C
became the story for a long time. What is it that you will do
to try to make sure that S4C is not the story, and that we are
not reading about the management, resignations and sackings every
week in The Western Mail?
Huw Jones: I think it is indeed
a responsibility of the Chairman to try to ensure that that sort
of thing does not happen. There are several aspects to the solutions
to that. First, I am glad that if I am appointed I will have an
opportunity to be part of the process of appointing the new Chief
Executive. That will enable me, hopefully, to appoint—along
with the rest of the Authority—a person in whom we will
be able to invest our confidence and with whom we will be able
to work in moving the channel forward.
Secondly, there is the need to work closely
with the other members of the Authority to understand issues that
may be of concern to people, to anticipate where discussions and
disagreements may arise in Authority meetings, and to try to ensure
that concerns are ventilated and that agreement is reached on
the basis of the best possible solution moving forward. There
is also a clear need for S4C to be as transparent as possible,
so that the wide range of stakeholders who have an interest in
S4C—the general public, Members of Parliament, Assembly
Members and so forth—have confidence and have an understanding
of how S4C is facing up to the various challenges that it will
face and that it feels confidence in the Authority and the Executive
to face those challenges and to make the right decisions.
Q2 Chair: The relationship between
S4C and the Government appeared to break down completely at one
point last year, to the point where there was talk of judicial
reviews and all sorts of other things. From your point of view,
do you think that that is acceptable—one would assume not—and
what are you going to do to try to ensure that you have a good,
healthy working relationship with DCMS Ministers and other relevant
people in Government?
Huw Jones: The simple answer to
that is to talk to people consistently, regularly and honestly,
so that we have a clear understanding of issues that are coming
our way from Government—concerns that Government may have—but
so that also Government understand what are critical issues for
S4C. Clearly, the period we are going into now is a very critical
period, which is full of difficulties and full of unknowns, and
I would want to make sure that Government are fully aware of our
concerns and how the discussions will work through.
Q3 Chair: Finally from me, it
is very important that the holder of the Chair is seen as being
politically impartial. I cannot help but ask you about your previous,
very strong involvement with Sain, which was clearly putting out
a lot of music that was certainly not very supportive of the Conservative
party—as is your right, indeed, as a private individual.
I look and I listen to it, and I enjoy some of the songs myself,
but I think that the person responsible for this is going to find
it quite difficult, perhaps, to be politically impartial.
Huw Jones: I can only think of
one song that Sain ever produced that was directly critical of
any Conservative party member, and that is in a period of 12 years
of publishing records of all kinds, from folk music to choirs
and all sorts of things. There is a parallel there between the
need for S4C to maintain its editorial independence and the right
to publish whatever it is of quality that artists wish to produce
without fear or favour. I am entirely proud of the part that Sain
played in providing a platform for creative activity in Welsh
at that time. I have not had any political activity for many years.
When I was Chief Executive of S4C, I was scrupulous in maintaining
connections and, I think, good relations with Members of Parliament
and Assembly Members of all parties. That would be my objective
if appointed as Chairman.
Chair: Diolch yn fawr. I will just bring
in the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, then Alun
Cairns.
Q4 Mr Whittingdale: Can I explore
with you how you see your role as Chairman of the Authority? In
some ways there are parallels with the Chairman of the BBC Trust,
in that you have the specific responsibilities as a regulator,
in providing strategic oversight, and as a broadcaster. You will
be aware that there has been a lot of criticism of how the BBC
Trust works, partially because there appears to be a conflict
between being a regulator and setting the overall strategic direction.
Do you not think there is a similar conflict within the Authority?
Huw Jones: I think partly one
of the problems which arose with S4C was that, because of the
awareness of these dilemmas that the BBC was facing in securing
an appropriate distance between the Trust and the Executive, S4C
felt the need to try to replicate that. I never felt that that
sort of rigid separation was necessary. It is entirely right for
the Authority to understand that it is there to hold the Executive
to account, on behalf of the public and on behalf of viewers.
It should have proper structures to do that, of which one is the
regulatory function of dealing with complaints. The scale of the
operation, however, is not such as to require that rigid division
of responsibilities that the BBC seeks. As long as people understand
what the different responsibilities are—that the Chief Executive
is there to lead the executive team and to propose programme strategies
and that the Authority is there to discuss them and approve them,
or reject them if necessary, and to monitor performance against
those objectives—it is possible to have good working relationships
that do not cost the earth.
Q5 Mr Whittingdale: In the new
world, once we move to a position where you are receiving finance
directly from a licence fee, your responsibility is to provide
strategic oversight. We are also told, however, that the Chairman
of the BBC Trust sees a role for the BBC in overseeing the spending
of licence fee payers' money. Are you going to consult with the
Chairman of the BBC Trust on the strategic oversight of S4C?
Huw Jones: The nature of the relationship
with the BBC is to be discussed and negotiated in the coming weeks.
Until that discussion has been completed, it is difficult for
me to say, "This is how it will be," because I do not
know how it will be. If we want to discuss the BBC relationship
at this point in the discussion, I am happy to do so, because
for me it should not be impossible to arrive at an agreement whereby
the BBC Trust is enabled to have the degree of oversight that
it needs in order to say that it is ensuring that the licence
fee money is being used for public purposes.
On the other hand, the need for S4C to retain
its independence of operation and its editorial independence is
something I would be keen to secure for practical reasons. The
S4C Authority was created as an independent authority originally
because there was a need to reassure people in Wales and Welsh
speakers that there would be a body whose priority and whole reason
for existence would be to provide a Welsh language service. As
Ian Hargreaves said in his submissions to the Welsh Affairs Committee,
the BBC "has many mansions" and there is clearly a concern
that, if you don't have an authority with proper powers and abilities
to look after the interests of Welsh-speaking viewers, those interests
might at times be subsumed in greater matters.
Secondly, while I was the Chief Executive of
S4C, I am convinced that we were able, because of our independent
situation, to secure certain advantages for S4C that we would
not have been able to do had we not been independent. In particular,
when digital capacity was being allocated, we needed to fight
very hard to ensure that we were allocated equivalent capacity
in Wales to other broadcasters. Likewise, for the position on
the EPG, which is a very important factor in how viewers access
channels, we had to fight to be No. 4 in Wales.
Thirdly, as we get into discussions with the
BBC about cost savings, possible collocation and so forth, I am
sure there will be proposals from the BBC to do something in a
certain way because it will be advantageous all around. But in
that situation, it is very important that S4C should be able to
sit back and decide in the context of Welsh-speaking viewers and
the Welsh language service whether it is a good deal, rather than
looking at it simply in the context of the BBC as a whole.
Lastly, the reality is that S4C and the BBC
are, quite properly, in competition with each other for viewers
in Wales. S4C needs to be able to chase the best actors, the best
ideas, the best events and sports rights, and so forth if it is
to have a chance to compete. So independence of action is a key
criterion for me, and I hope that we can secure it.
Q6 Mr Whittingdale: I understand
the importance to you of independence, but do you accept the argument
that if you are receiving money from the BBC, the BBC is entitled
to have some oversight as to how that money is spent?
Huw Jones: I do, and how that
is achieved is what I am looking forward to discussing. I don't
think it is impossible to have something of the nature of a dual
remit, so that the remit S4C receives from Parliament in statute
is paralleled in the form of a licence from the BBC Trust, with
a parallel accounting path, for example. That is one option which
would work, and there might be others.
Chair: Thanks for that introduction.
We have quite a lot of questions to get through, so I ask everyone
to be as concise as possible, which will help us get through this
quickly.
Q7 Jonathan Edwards: Bore da,
Mr Jones. Llongyfarchiadau ar eich apwyntiad. What made you apply
for the position, because it has been a pretty difficult year
for S4C?
Huw Jones: My whole working life
has been involved with trying to ensure that modern platforms
of communication are available to Welsh speakers and the Welsh
language, going back to the music industry, to which Mr Davies
has already referred, but primarily of course S4C. The arrival
of S4C was a huge step forward in providing such a platform, and
I was privileged to be part of the process of creating an independent
production sector and, later, being involved as Chief Executive
of S4C.
For me, therefore, S4C is hugely important for
the Welsh language and its survival. In fact, I don't think any
minority language is going to survive in this modern world unless
it has modern media platforms available to it, so I was greatly
concerned by the events of the past year. I think that the coming
period is very critical for S4C and if I can play a part in securing
its future, I am honoured to offer my services.
Q8 Jonathan Edwards: Were you
headhunted, informally or formally, or did you reply to a formal
advert?
Huw Jones: No, I applied in response
to the advert.
Q9 Mr Sanders: We, as the Culture,
Media and Sport Committee, asked the proposed Chairman of the
BBC Trust about the amount of time he could devote to the job
given his extensive outside interests. In our report we were quite
critical, despite the fact that he actually volunteered, almost
at that meeting, to give up some of his outside interests. The
role has been advertised on the basis of needing three days a
week. How much of your time do you envisage devoting to the job?
Huw Jones: I anticipate that it
will be three days a week plus. I have other interests, but there's
no question that if I'm appointed, this would be my priority,
and I would devote to it whatever is needed. At the same time,
it is useful and beneficial for a Chairman of such an authority
to retain outside interests. It is a way of not going native too
fast, and of retaining the external perspective that you get from
mixing in different circles. I would want to retain some of those
connections, although some of my current activities would of necessity
be reduced.
Q10 Mr Sanders: What sort of time
do those other commitments take up at present?
Huw Jones: At present, for example,
the Welsh Language Board takes a day and a half a month, and the
Wales Employment and Skills Board ranges between about four and
five days a month. The Welsh Language Board, of course, will cease
to exist sometime next year, and my commitment to the Wales Employment
and Skills Board runs until December. Portmeirion is about a day
a month, or a day and a half.
Q11 Mr Sanders:
Are you still Chairman of Portmeirion Ltd's visitor attractions
and hotels, and are you still a chair and consultant of a media
training agency?
Huw Jones: I intend to give Cyfle
Cyf up, because I think there is a conflict of interest.
Q12 Mr Sanders:
What about chairing the sub-groups on sector skills councils?
Huw Jones: That is part of the
Wales Employment and Skills Board work, which I anticipate reducing
but not giving up entirely.
Q13Mr Watson: What essential skills and
qualities does the job require?
Huw Jones: In the job description,
or the list of skills in the advert, the two which came at the
top related first to an understanding of and a commitment to S4C's
objectives, and secondly to leadership qualities and experience
of chairing organisations. I think I can offer those two. I don't
think my understanding of S4C's objectives is restricted to the
fact that I was Chief Executive for nearly 12 years; it relates
also to the fact that before that I was an independent producer,
so I have an understanding of its perspectives. I was also Chairman
of a facilities company, so my understanding of how the industry
fits together is an asset.
Perhaps the leadership issues are even more
relevant and important as criteria here. In that respect, I think
most people would give me some credit for playing a lead role
in the development of the independent television industry in north-west
Wales. At S4C I needed to take the lead in forming a strategy
for digital television when it arrived. In more recent years,
the role that I play as Chairman of Portmeirion and of being on
the range of bodies that we have just referred to has given me
a perspective of how other organisations work, the relationships
between Chairs and Chief Executives, and so forth, which I think
will be valuable assets.
Q14 Mr Watson: Would it be fair
to say that, given that the job requires a background in television,
some strategic leadership in a management role and the ability
to speak Welsh, the field of candidates who may be suitable for
the job is very narrow?
Huw Jones: That may be true—[Laughter.]
It doesn't necessarily mean that the quality of those applying
is any less.
Chair: Did you have
a brief supplementary question, Mr Cairns?
Q15 Alun Cairns: With your permission,
Chair, I can probably tie in my question. It relates to the questions
that both you and your fellow Select Committee Chair asked about
S4C itself becoming the news story, and to another question that
he asked—how do you plan to manage the relationship with
the BBC, and lead in that? Mr Jones, it is fair to say that there
have been some pretty destructive members of the Authority over
the last year, to the detriment of the channel. How do you propose
to manage the situation with members of the Authority?
Huw Jones: I propose to take people
as I find them. If you ask me what would be the most useful use
of my time as Chair in these coming months, I don't think it would
be to look backwards and conduct some sort of investigation into
who did what and who said what. There is an awful lot to be done
in securing the new arrangement with the BBC, appointing the Chief
Executive, and coming to terms with budget cuts and so forth.
I wasn't there, so I do not know what happened exactly—I
have perhaps the same perceptions as you from outside. What I
do know is that I have a belief in my own ability to get people
to work together and to act reasonably in the context of meetings
that are conducted properly.
Q16 Alun Cairns: But some members
of the Authority say that they do not want to deal with the BBC
at any cost. How do you propose to get your deal with the BBC
if some members of the Authority are taking that attitude?
Huw Jones: You have the advantage
over me—I had not heard that quote. My view is that a deal
with the BBC is a practical necessity, because otherwise the money
for S4C to commission programmes for 2013 onwards is not going
to be there. That has been made pretty clear to us. I would hope
that the intellectual strength of that kind of argument would
enable everybody to gather round, as long as the agreement reached
with the BBC was a reasonable one.
Q17 Alun Cairns: When will you
resume the process of appointing the Chief Executive?
Huw Jones: As soon as possible.
That would be one of my main priorities.
Q18 Alun Cairns: What sort of
qualities would you be looking for in a Chief Executive in order
to balance your skills and those of the management leader?
Huw Jones: I would be looking
for a Chief Executive with the ability to lead a team, to get
the best out of people and to communicate effectively with all
sectors of the industry, as well as with internal staff. I would
be looking for someone who is able to articulate a vision of the
nature of the service going forward. That ability to work with
people while being a leader is the quality I will be looking for.
Q19 Alun Cairns: There has been
much criticism of the separation between the Authority and the
management. What model would you pursue, and what role did you
play in setting up that separation model?
Huw Jones: I played no role in
setting up that separation model; it happened after I left as
Chief Executive. The advice given by Sir Jon Shortridge is very
useful in providing a model, in that, as I mentioned before, the
rigid separation is not necessary, but a degree of formality is
important. I would want to ensure that Authority meetings are
conducted according to a fairly set pattern of events to be discussed,
so that it is quite clear that when the Authority is sitting,
it is sitting as an Authority, holding the Executive to account,
and using, as Sir Jon Shortridge suggests, a number of sub-committees
to support it in that function. At the same time, it is important
that there is an understanding and dialogue—regular dialogue—particularly
between the Chief Executive and the Chair, to allow the best to
be extracted from both sides.
Q20 Stuart Andrew: I think we
have already covered political independence, but how would you
demonstrate that you would stand up to DCMS Ministers and any
pressure you might get from the BBC, purely in the interests of
the channel?
Huw Jones: As I said, the ability
to stand up—your term—to the BBC depends on whether
S4C has the independence of action to do that. It is a key question,
and this will need to be safeguarded, in my opinion.
You referred specifically to independence from
the BBC, but you also mentioned DCMS. There are many aspects of
independence that S4C, like any broadcaster, needs to secure.
There are pressures from all sorts of directions—pressure
not to broadcast a programme, for example, because people are
unhappy about something they think will be said in it. At that
point, you ensure that the editor-in-chief and his team have the
right to broadcast whatever they think it is appropriate to broadcast.
You then take account of any complaints in due course and investigate
them properly and thoroughly; and, where necessary, you apply
sanctions.
There are other forms of pressure that can be
brought to bear that are more benign. One is aware of people wanting
S4C to do things which have a side benefit—maybe an economic
or a cultural side benefit. It is important that S4C retains its
independence in those respects as well, while listening very carefully
to what people want from the channel. Those pressures may come
from the DCMS or the Welsh Assembly Government, for example. There
is a balance to be struck between the willingness to listen to
legitimate concerns and the absolute responsibility to ensure
that, at the end of the day, decisions are made with integrity
for the benefit of viewers.
Q21 Guto Bebb: First, I remember
very well the record about the former Conservative Prime Minister,
which was, if I remember correctly, banned by the BBC. Sain Records
stood up to the BBC at the time, so I hope you will carry on that
track record. However, you were the Chief Executive of S4C for
11 years, and I have a degree of concern about the fact that the
channel is also looking for a Chief Executive, as Mr Cairns pointed
out. Do you think that the fact you were the senior person in
S4C for a long period and will now be the Chairman will prohibit
some people from applying for the job, because they will feel
that you will be a backseat driver?
Huw Jones: I can understand the
concern. I very much hope that that would not be the case. I would
go out of my way to ensure that the Chief Executive has the freedom
to act as Chief Executive. I have been away from S4C for nearly
six years, so there is no question of my going back in to pick
up where I left off—not at all. Also, I have been doing
other things for nearly six years—things which have been
to do with governance in a range of different bodies. For example,
being part of the RSPB Council has been an enriching experience,
which has let me see how a major charity strikes the right balance
between reporting to its council and delivering on its executive
actions. I think I have a clear understanding of what is needed.
Actually, having been Chief Executive, one knows what one wants
from a Chair, and I think I would bring that to bear. I have no
concerns, and I hope I could very quickly allay other people's
concerns on that score.
Q22 Guto Bebb: On the second point,
I reiterate Alun Cairns's comments about the concern that the
Authority is not changing, even though there is a feeling that
there is a need for a fresh, new S4C. More important in my view
are the stories in the Welsh media that indicate a degree of disengagement
and low morale among S4C staff. As the Chairman, how would you
address the continuous stories we get about morale at S4C being
very low?
Huw Jones: Whether that is true,
I am not sure. One has also heard stories more recently of people
gathering and working well together. I would like to think that
the appointment of a permanent Chair is the first step in giving
direction and giving stability. Clearly, there has been instability
there. This is the first step, hopefully. Appointing a chief executive
is the second step. Coming to an agreement with the BBC hopefully
is a third step. This is a period of great change—no question
about it. I will try to provide steady leadership, while addressing
these major concerns and major issues about new relationships.
Q23 Mr Williams: I want to probe
a bit more. You have covered a lot of ground in terms of S4C's
independence and the need to maintain its distinct identity. Sir
Michael Lyons, the outgoing Chair of the BBC Trust, gave a commitment
to a creatively independent S4C. What do you think he meant by
"creatively independent"? Is that a term that you think
addresses a lot of the concerns that have been expressed in Select
Committee reports and, indeed, in the correspondence that many
of us, as MPs, have been getting?
Huw Jones: A number of different
terms have been used to describe the potential new relationship,
haven't they? That is one of them. I prefer the term used by the
Secretary of State in his letter to the former Chairman of S4C,
which is a commitment to S4C continuing as an independent entity.
Now, all these phrases have a quite a lot of wriggle room, and
I am fully aware that the devil is in the detail. I am not quite
sure what more I can say, except that I want to get involved in
those discussions. I know that they have started, but they have
not finished. I welcome the interest taken in this subject by
these two Committees. I think it is very important that people
do understand the nature of the agreement at the end of the day
and what is involved, so that the service can benefit.
Q24 Mr Williams: The Welsh Affairs
Committee had a trip up to visit BBC ALBA. We were very interested
to see the model there. I think it struck many of us that the
origins of BBC ALBA were very different from the origins of S4C,
but there is still reference made to that as a possible way forward.
How divergent do you think that the experience of BBC ALBA and
S4C really is?
Huw Jones: I think they are very
different situations. I think that, having had the benefit of
an independent Authority since 1982, S4C and Wales are aware of
the benefits that that can deliver and what it signifies. BBC
ALBA was a solution to the question of how to move forward in
Scotland from where they were. I congratulate the people involved
in BBC ALBA for making it work as they have, but that does not
meant that it is, of necessity, the right way for S4C.
Q25 Mr Williams: Just one other
point—it is more of a request than a question. The importance
that we in Wales attach to the community work that S4C has always
undertaken should not be understated. I think you appreciate the
need for that to continue in a very robust way. It has been a
great success story.
Huw Jones: Yes. One of the things
that I am quite keen to ensure is that S4C's impact on society
is measured as well as possible. It is real, and I think it is
a legitimate performance indicator, which has not been properly
captured to date. As you say, the impact on people's use of the
language and their familiarity with different dialects, and the
assistance given to learners—particularly the contribution
to children learning Welsh and so forth—are all important
social impacts that S4C has achieved. There are economic impacts
as well, but I agree with you—this should continue.
Q26 Mr Williams: But often the
figures do not bear that out. That is the reality.
Huw Jones: That is the dichotomy,
isn't it?
Q27 Chair: Mr Jones, this is a
key issue for us, and I think there is one other supplementary.
As I see it, S4C has been independent but answerable to DCMS up
until now. Surely, therefore, it should be possible to devise
a system that allows S4C to remain independent, but in some way
answerable to the BBC, as it was previously, jointly perhaps with
DCMS, and possibly with the Welsh Assembly having an input at
some point in the future. Surely, it is not beyond our capacity
to devise a system that allows independence with an element of
answerability to one or more bodies?
Huw Jones: I agree. That is my
position.
Q28 Jonathan Edwards: There seems
to be consensus around the need for operational and editorial
independence, but can you state in a paragraph exactly what that
would mean as far as you are concerned for your position?
Huw Jones: I think the key aspect
is that the S4C Authority should have a majority of independent
people on it, and that, although there might well be a member
of the BBC Trust, for example—in fact, I would welcome that
as a development—the S4C Executive is not controlled by
the BBC in any way. It is a genuinely independent executive body
appointed by the S4C Authority. That, for me, is key.
Q29 Guto Bebb: I accept the points
you just made about BBC ALBA not being the same as S4C, but there
are examples of good practice there. One example is the way in
which the BBC ALBA television service is interlinked with the
radio services in gaelic. There is a question as to why we have
almost a competition between Radio Cymru broadcasting in Welsh
and S4C, where you have programmes appealing to the same audience
going out at the same time. Do you think that the relationship
with the BBC will help to create a more integrated approach to
both radio and television?
Huw Jones: I would like to think
it is possible. Radio Cymru is, in many senses, a sister service
to S4C. It has many of the same challenges and issues. In investigating
solutions, we should be happy to share solutions. I would hope
that that would be one of the side benefits of the new relationship,
yes.
Q30 Paul Farrelly: Mr Jones, do
you share my ever so slight feeling of irony that we, as parliamentarians
from both Committees, are having a say in your appointment when
neither the Welsh Assembly nor Parliament nor even S4C had any
say in its future arrangements when it was put under the ambit
of the BBC?
Huw Jones: I share that concern.
It was disturbing that that sort of decision could be taken without
consultation with S4C. The contrast with the level of discussion
that took place with the BBC was obvious and, yes, it is a matter
of concern and I would very much prefer that it had not happened
in that way.
Q31 Paul Farrelly: Have you given
any thought at all to how you might have reacted at the time had
you been Chairman then?
Huw Jones: That is very difficult.
I can only say that I would like to think—although I have
no right to say it—that it would not have got that far and
that we would have been in sufficient communication that options
could have been discussed in the same way as they were discussed
with the BBC.
Q32 Paul Farrelly: We were very
critical in our report that S4C seemed like the innocent victim
of a drive-by shooting, where the target was the BBC but the target
shot back and S4C got caught in the crossfire. Gavyn Davies had
a particular reaction when the BBC was caught in some crossfire
before: he resigned. Would you have had strong feelings about
that in a similar way?
Huw Jones: Again, it is very difficult
for me to put myself in that exact position. As I say, I would
like to think that we would not have been in that position so
that that question would not have arisen.
Q33 Paul Farrelly: You may not
have known about it, but let me ask you a final question. The
BBC has secured itself a settlement until 2016. Will you be seeking
a similar settlement from the BBC, so that you have some freedom
of manoeuvre and certainty for the future?
Huw Jones: There is a logic in
that, isn't there? The question of what happens at the end of
the four-year agreement is a matter of considerable concern to
many people. If ways can be found to allay that concern, that
would go a long way to helping people to believe that, yes, the
Government are sincere in their commitment to S4C's future.
Q34 Paul Farrelly: Is that a yes?
Do you want a deal until 2016?
Huw Jones: What is clear to me
is that the Secretary of State has said that there will be a review
of S4C before the end of this four-year period. Let us take that
at face value and assume that that is what is going to happen.
That gives S4C and myself in particular, because my appointment
is a four-year appointment—there is a certain parallel there—a
very clear focus for a strategy. We want S4C to come out of that
review with all the boxes ticked, with a secure future and a secure
funding formula for the future, and with support from all sectors
of society in Wales and in broadcasting. To do that, the next
two or three years have to be a process of getting things right
on all fronts, ensuring that there is a wide understanding of
what S4C needs to secure its future. That gives us a programme
of work, but, as you say, that secure future is a key objective.
Whether it is to be achieved now or as an outcome of that review
process, both are desirable.
Chair: We will take that as a yes. I
am sure that it will have a lot of support on the Committee.
Q35 Damian Collins: Following
on from that, will you be arguing with the BBC for, effectively,
a slice of the licence fee to be ring-fenced for you rather than
negotiating year by year for lumps of money from the BBC?
Huw Jones: Certainly, S4C does
not want to be in a position of negotiating year by year. What
we have on the table at the moment is a four-year solution, of
which the last two years are being funded by the BBC, so in a
way we have a two-year BBC arrangement at the moment. I think
we will be looking for a formula, whether it is related to a proportion
of the licence fee or to something else, as it could well be,
but there needs to be stability that gives S4C independence of
action of the same kind that it has enjoyed in the past, and of
the same kind that the BBC seeks and enjoys through its funding
arrangement with the Government.
Q36 Damian Collins: Going back
to questions that have already been raised and that are linked
to this, are you concerned that, even if S4C has independence
of action, the responsibility for how you act and how you spend
public money will ultimately rest with the BBC Trust? When the
Chairman of the BBC Trust came before the Culture, Media and Sport
Committee in December, he was very clear that, in terms of value
for money and the use of public funds, it would be the BBC Trust's
responsibility to determine your actions.
Huw Jones: Value for money, of
course, is a key consideration. The S4C Authority will have a
duty to ensure value for money as part of its own function. I
understand that the BBC Trust will also wish to reassure itself
regarding value for money. We also know that there are questions
about whether the National Audit Office should come in to ensure
that the BBC Trust is providing value for money. There is potential
there for an excess of zeal in respect of value for money. It
is obviously a key question, and ways will have to be found to
ensure that the appropriate mechanisms for identifying value for
money happen at the right level without duplication along the
line.
Q37 Damian Collins: I used the
words that the previous Chairman of the BBC Trust used. On that
basis, are you concerned that, if the Trust turned around and
said, "Actually, we think we could deliver pubic service
broadcasting in the Welsh language, through BBC Wales, more effectively
than you can in certain areas," it may decide to divert some
of the resource there?
Huw Jones: That would depend on
whether it had the right to do that. As things stand, it does
not have the right to divert from S4C, as I understand it. The
question is what happens at the end of the four years. I think
that that is where it is legitimate to have an open discussion,
with all parties contributing their views as to what is the best
way of delivering this service. With that in mind, my intention
would be to ensure that it is clear that the best way is through
an independent Authority.
Q38 Chair: Are there other ways
in which you think S4C can increase its income?
Huw Jones: I think the commercial
environment is challenging. It is going to be difficult for S4C
to increase its advertising income, and commercial activities
opportunities come along once in a while. S4C does not have a
commercial structure, anyway, to take advantage of new opportunities
as they come along. It is quite difficult for it to act as a venture
capitalist, if you like. I am not entirely sure. I think co-productions
and sales into the international market are always opportunities
if the product is right. The opportunities are probably more in
that direction than in others.
Q39 Damian Collins: You do not
think you will grow your revenue from commercial advertising.
Presumably, that means you do not think there is an opportunity
to grow audience share for S4C programming, which will be linked
to the value of the airtime.
Huw Jones: This is a question
of scale. I think the question relates to whether there is a substantial
opportunity to increase commercial revenues as a proportion of
total revenues. That is what I was reflecting there. Obviously,
I would like to hope that there is a chance to increase audiences,
but the scale of S4C's advertising revenue is something in the
region of £2 million at the moment, so it is a question of
proportion.
Q40 Chair: Do you think that providing
senior members of staff with BUPA health care is value for money?
Huw Jones: I noted this discussion
at the—
Chair: It was only a thought. I call
Susan Elan Jones.
Q41 Susan Elan Jones: Bore da,
Mr Jones. I noted your predecessor, John Walter Jones, argued
in his resignation letter for a process of renewal for S4C. As
you will know, the Welsh Affairs Committee has spent a long time
looking at issues to do with S4C. One thing we did quite successfully
was debunk some of the nonsense, to be frank, seen in some elements
of the popular media in terms of things like share of viewership.
We proved quite conclusively, for instance, that the Welsh version
of "Question Time", "Pawb a'i Farn", had a
more than equivalent share in terms of the numbers of people who
speak Welsh. Ditto with "Pobl y Cwm" and "EastEnders",
and on we went through many of those issues. We very much came
to the conclusion that S4C was providing value for money. We saw
many positives. Of course, we saw many things that we wanted to
see improved, but what I want to know is this: do you think there
is a need for a root-and-branch review of the purpose of S4C and
how do you think that will work?
Huw Jones: I think probably yes.
I think it is timely, given everything that has happened, given
the number of voices which have wanted a say about what S4C does
and given the proliferation of new media and new platforms which
are out there now and the questions about what S4C's duty or opportunity
is in respect of them. That does make it timely to think about
all these questions from a new basis, if you like. It does not
mean that some of the old questions go away—the old questions
having to do with how to provide for a core audience whose expectation
is that there will be at least three hours of new programming
every day, and the expectations of a lighter viewer who wants
something occasionally to energise them and make them excited
about the Welsh language.
I would like to think that there are programme
solutions that bridge those different aspirations. It is right,
I think, for the independent sector to have its say. It is right
for different viewing representatives to have their say as well.
I would like to think that that is precisely what we will do,
as I said, working up to the review, which is going to take place
in about two and a half years' time, as I see it. That is precisely
what we will do: engage with people to find new solutions.
Q42 Susan Elan Jones: One of my
fears from all this, when people speak about viewer share, is
the sort of nightmare world where we think, "Right, let's
have a programme that's popular. Actually, all that's going to
happen is that people will press the red button and watch it in
English, but we get the numbers up that way." That is not
what S4C is for, is it? How do you see S4C being able to engage
with more people in terms of watching high-quality programming?
Another thing that we also debunked was the
view that people have of the numbers of Welsh speakers and the
role of the Welsh language in Wales. There is a view that about
20% of the people in Wales speak Welsh and that what Welsh broadcasting
is about is giving these viewers a little pat on the head every
now and again. If we are to look at Welsh as a growing language,
and I hope we are, how are we to deal with that, in families very
much like my own, where some people speak Welsh and some do not?
How do we do it in a creative and relevant way, which is not just
about getting junk programming on there that people could watch
through the medium of English, which would make a nonsense of
what S4C is for?
Huw Jones: I agree that distinctiveness
has to be one of the features of the service—originality
and quality. It is hugely important, in order to achieve that,
that the commissioning processes strike the right balance between
efficiencies and economies of scale on one hand, which need to
be sought, and on the other hand, making sure that priority is
given to the most creative solutions and the best ideas. I don't
think that that's impossible, but work needs to be done on it
to ensure that that takes place.
Q43 Jessica Morden: Given that
Mark Williams put his pitch in for community impact, I want to
ask about your commitment to children's programming, which I think
is excellent and one of the great things about S4C. Given the
new relationship, the spending cuts and the difficulty of measuring
viewing figures for children, if successful, will you have a commitment
to maintaining children's output?
Huw Jones: Yes, because if there
is agreement about anything, it is about the impact of children's
programmes—the children's service, Cyw—on so many
people, especially, obviously, on parents trying to raise their
children speaking Welsh.
It is important to strike an appropriate balance
between different performance measures. First, one clearly needs
to measure who is watching, and when and how many, so you need
measurements of share, reach and numbers and we need to discuss
exactly which ones, because I noted the discussion you had in
the Welsh Affairs Committee—was it 15-minute reach; was
it monthly or weekly 15-minute reach, or whatever? There is a
bit of confusion out there. The question of appreciation is hugely
important, because we know that S4C is working when people say,
"Did you see that programme? Wasn't it fantastic? I'm really
glad I saw that. Are you going to watch it?" So we need to
capture audience appreciation—there are ways of doing that,
and at the moment it is not done sufficiently. We have talked
about value for money, another major heading. Fourth is the question
of impact, which is what you were driving at there. If we can
get a balance between those four performance headings, I think
we have a way of discussing, honestly, whether S4C is doing what
it's meant to do.
Q44 Jessica Morden: In the Welsh
Affairs Committee report we recommended a greater scrutiny role
for the Assembly. Do you think that is a good idea?
Huw Jones: Engagement with the
Welsh Assembly is very important. If there is agreement that measuring
these indirect impacts is important, clearly, in that sense, the
Welsh Assembly Government would be the right body to comment on
whether S4C is achieving that sort of impact, because language
policies and economic policies are the responsibility of the Welsh
Assembly Government. Maybe there is a way of formalising that.
Q45 Jessica Morden: How would
you like to see a formalised arrangement done?
Huw Jones: S4C could report, possibly,
to an Assembly Committee which would have a brief to form a view.
Q46 Geraint Davies: What criteria
would you use to measure the success or failure of your chairmanship?
Huw Jones: It will be very much
in terms of the outcome of this review, which sets the future
of S4C for the period following the comprehensive spending review
period. I would be looking for that review to give S4C a seal
of approval and a firm foundation for the future.
Q47 Geraint Davies: On direct
outcomes and outputs, what about the quality and quantity of viewing
figures, engagement with the Welsh community, with universities
and schools, and the reputation of S4C?
Huw Jones: I would hope that those
four performance headings that I have described would capture
all of that, and that they are sufficiently broad to reflect what
people think S4C is for, and that therefore S4C is achieving what
they think it is for. It is about all those things: programme
quality, audience appreciation and a wider role in the community.
I am not sure how much time we have, but there are so many headings
to that. For instance, there is the whole question of the contribution
to digital skills in the wider community. S4C is a major independent
Welsh organisation, which has contributed enormously in all sorts
of different ways, and can do so again, and will do so again,
I am sure.
Q48 Mr Whittingdale: Can I press
you a little on the performance of S4C? There are about 600,000
people who speak Welsh. One assumes that the vast majority of
them—probably 95%—watch television. While I accept
that there are various different ways by which you can measure
reach, the most common one is whether 15 minutes has been watched.
On that basis, you are reaching one in four of Welsh language
speakers. Since they do not have any other Welsh language television
station to watch, do you not think that that is a pretty poor
figure?
Huw Jones: No broadcaster would
say that they wouldn't like better viewing figures. Certainly,
I would be driving for the most striking viewing figures possible,
but all these questions about performance have to be looked at
in the context of the role of the Welsh language more generally
in people's lives. What we know about those 600,000 Welsh speakers
is that probably only 46% consider themselves to be fluent in
Welsh. There are others within that 46% who are living in homes
where not everybody speaks Welsh. So the role of the Welsh language
in people's lives varies enormously. That has to be taken into
account and is the essential challenge for the broadcaster in
deciding what sort of service it provides. As I said, the people
who live in homes where everybody speaks Welsh are likely to want
an S4C service that is there for them all the time. People who
don't have the Welsh language as a core part of their everyday
life are looking for something different from the language. They
want to be excited by content in the language and want reasons
to turn to the language, and that maybe means a different kind
of programming. The need for talked-about programmes—for
highlights—is real and very important. Maybe that is a focus
that S4C will need to return to in order to try and achieve those
dual objectives.
Q49 Mr Whittingdale: They may
not be entirely fluent and other members of their household may
not speak Welsh, but we are not expecting them to watch nothing
but S4C. We are expecting them to watch 15 minutes. It does not
seem too much to ask that you should aim to improve quite dramatically
on one in four.
Huw Jones: I would not disagree.
Perhaps I am being cautious in acknowledging the scale of the
challenge because, at the same time, the viewing opportunities,
the choices and the multi-platform opportunities are increasing,
not reducing.
Q50 Mr Watson: Just a small question.
I am sorry that I do not have the benefit of knowing Welsh pop
music like everyone else. [Laughter.] Can you give me the
name of that song that was banned by the Beeb?
Huw Jones: Guto has the full collection.
Q51 Mr Watson: Is it the sort
of song that you would play on S4C?
Huw Jones: As a historical titbit,
yes.
Chair: Okay. I would have thought, as
I said before, as a follow-up to "Pen Talar" showing
the role of the Conservative party in creating S4C.
Susan Elan Jones: If Mr Jones has to
perform that song, could I respectfully suggest that he also performs
"Dwr"? That is much better.
Q52 Alun Cairns: There will be
a lot of staff at S4C watching this session and worrying about
their future and where the industry is going to go. While you
were Chief Executive, staff numbers grew, but we are in a difficult
period now, where budget realities probably mean that that needs
to be different. How do you propose to tackle that?
Can you also give me a summary of where you
see the industry being at the end of your chairmanship in terms
of the numbers of companies and the sorts of contracts and commissions
that S4C will seek to achieve in your time? Will it work with
lots of small different companies, where money might arguably
be wasted on development funding, or will there be the sort of
strategies that we have seen in recent years?
Huw Jones: To take the second
part first, as I have said a balance needs to be struck between
securing efficiencies and economies of scale and ensuring that
priority is always there for creativity and originality. We know
that there have been frustrations on the part of smaller companies
that felt, rightly or wrongly, that the avenues to commissions
were closed to them.
It is important that S4C says clearly what its
policy is. That policy has to include an open door for genuine
production companies of a smaller size that have something special
to offer, as well as to larger companies that are better able
to compete for large tenders, for example. I am not willing to
say that in four years' time the size of the industry will be
this rather than that; it will still be a diverse industry. I
note that this week the Chief Executive of Channel 4 said that
it wants to go back and re-energise smaller companies, so that
it returns to where it was in the early years. I am not saying
that we should do that, but there has to be an open door for smaller
companies as well as larger ones.
Q53 Chair: Mr Jones, I am sorry.
May I ask you to finish this answer quite quickly? There are two
very quick supplementary questions coming in afterwards, and then
we have to move on.
Huw Jones: Okay. I cannot envisage
cutting S4C's programme budget without at the same time having
some savings internally, and I think that that exercise is already
under way.
Q54 Geraint Davies:
John Whittingdale mentioned a figure of 600,000 Welsh speakers
and suggested that you are hitting about a quarter of them. I
wonder whether your strategy should be to maximise the share of
people who speak Welsh, or whether you should use Welsh speakers
as a way to get a broader audience, because those 600,000 probably
live with 1 million people who may not be fluent in Welsh. Is
your strategy a narrowly defined one, or do you think there is
a case for anchor products in the schedule, so that a mixed family
can all enjoy one of your programmes without having to have a
surge of Welsh—that, even though it is in Welsh, it is done
in such a way that that accessibility broadens your horizons?
Huw Jones: I do believe that.
The question is always how much of each do you do. For me, it
has to be a bit of both, although when you are conducting a root
and branch review you will want to revisit those questions. To
date, clearly some types of programming—whether sport, music
or high-quality drama with subtitles—offer an opportunity
for viewers who do not speak Welsh to enjoy. When those programmes
are found, in our experience they are greatly appreciated as being
different, distinctive and enriching people's lives.
Q55 Guto Bebb: On the question
of the independent television sector, which has obviously gone
through a very difficult period in view of the uncertainty surrounding
the channel, it is fair to say that the ownership of Welsh speakers
towards the channel in north-west Wales, which is one of the strongholds
of the language, has been affected by the quite obvious decline
of the television sector in that part of the world, not least
the loss of the facilities company that you used to chair. Do
you think that, in terms of claiming that there is an economic
role for the channel in Wales, S4C has a duty to look at spreading
the money throughout all parts of Wales and not just being stuck
to the Cardiff bubble, as it were?
Huw Jones: The answer to that
is that the S4C service needs to reflect the whole of Wales. Therefore,
that should give an advantage, if you like, to ensure that companies
from all parts of Wales have a logical role to play in providing
programmes for the channel. It is a dangerous route for S4C to
go down to suggest that there should be quotas for different areas.
I was not in favour of that as Chief Executive, and I think S4C
has to prioritise its programme priorities and make sure that
everybody is able to compete for them.
Chair: Mr Jones, thank you very much
indeed. Diolch yn fawr. That brings this part of this joint session
to a close.
| 
