 I welcome you all to the 10th meeting of the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee in 2017. As is always the way of it, I would like to start by reminding members and members of the public to switch off all mobile phones and to say that any members using electronic devices to access committee papers during the meeting should ensure that they are switched to silent. Thank you very much and there are apologies this morning from John McAlpine and also from Richard Lochhead. If we can turn to the agenda, agenda item 1 is declaration of interests and of course our first business today is to welcome Mari Evans MSP to the committee and to invite her to declare any relevant interests. I am a councillor for Angus Council but only for another two weeks. Thank you very much, that is duly recorded and given the weight it clearly deserves. Of course before we move to the second item on agenda, I would like to record also our thanks to Emma Harper for her work and her contributions to the committee during the period on which she served. Thank you very much. Our next item is to make a decision on taking agenda items 4 and 5 in private. Are members content to take those agenda items in private later in the meeting? Thank you very much. That brings us to our main item of business for today, which is an evidence session on commissioning policy from STV and Channel 4. I am delighted to welcome to the committee reading from my left Alan Clements from STV, the director of content in Scottish television, Ian Mackenzie, nations and regions manager and Sophie Jones, head of corporate relations at channel 4. I think that Ian and Sophie would wish to make some opening remarks and thereafter we will go direct to questions. Good morning everyone. It is really good to be here on behalf of channel 4 and my colleague Sophie. I would like to thank you all for giving us the opportunity to contribute to this morning's proceedings. As Channel 4's nations and regions manager, I am based in our only editorial office outside of London through in Glasgow. In discussion today, I hope that we can indicate some of the work that my team and I do to support Scottish independent production companies and why we think that it is having a really positive impact on their contribution not only to our programming but further a field with other broadcasters both here and internationally. Further, I hope to also give a little bit of insight into the growth and multi-genre success that we have seen in Scotland over the past few years and how we feel that more might be achieved in the future. Before I do that, if I may, I would like to hand over to my colleague Sophie. Thank you very much indeed for the opportunity to come and talk to you here today. I thought that it might just be useful very briefly just to talk a little bit about Channel 4 and who we are but also touch on the current process that the UK Government has under way, which I'm sure we can come on to talk about in more depth as we go on. As I'm sure you know, Channel 4 is a slightly unusual beast in that we are a public service broadcaster in public ownership but we are entirely commercially funded. Unlike other broadcasters, we have no in-house production. We were established in 1982 with a particular part of our model to be a publisher. As such, we source all of our commission content from outside Channel 4 as an organisation and we work with hundreds of production companies from all over the UK. Ian's work is very much involved in how we go about that and I'm sure we can talk in more detail about that. That model means that the fundamental question for us when we think about our contribution to the nations and regions and that is a question that we think about a lot and particularly at the moment is where we spend our money. As an investor and as an investor where essentially the profits that we make in the market are reinvested back into programmes, into talents and production companies, that is where we see the key contribution that we make. In the context of the current process that we're in, you will be aware that there's been a review of Channel 4 on going for some 18 months now, but in the last few weeks some further clarity has been put around that, which we very much welcome. The UK Government has clarified that it is not looking to privatise Channel 4 and that's obviously been a question that has floated around for some time. We very much welcome that and the certainty that that gives us about our ownership status. They've also narrowed down the focus and made clear that the priority area is what more Channel 4 can do in the nations and regions. A consultation paper has been published and is open for comments until 5 July and is centred on three core questions. One around Channel 4's location, the second around what more we can do in terms of commissioning, and the third about whether or not we should be able to take greater stakes in independent production companies. We are very much continuing, as we have been over a number of months, thinking about how we can enhance our contribution. We very much agree with the premise of the question that the Government has put there, that this is an important consideration for all of the UK and we are keen to do more to support the nations and regions consistent with our remit as a public service broadcaster and that commercially funded model that we operate. We will say as much as we can today about that. Obviously, we are in that process and we are giving a lot of thought to how we can make a significant contribution there. We may not have all the answers yet, but we'll be as hopeful as we can. Thank you very much. That's very helpful. Clearly, you've set out already a number of the items that I know that colleagues will wish to pursue. I start with a question in relation to the Screen Sector Leadership Group report, which was published recently and which made a number of recommendations bearing on both Channel 4 and STV. Can I ask for your responses to that report in the general thrust of the direction of policy that you intend to follow? Yes. Thank you, convener. Both Ian and I were on the committee that drafted the report and would wholeheartedly agree with its conclusions, I believe not in this room, but in this Parliament I spoke to you before about the lack of focus in the public sector towards growing the industry and the division of responsibilities amongst the many public bodies. The establishment of a screen unit would be a huge step forward as long as it is properly funded and given the responsibility and the power to deal with the growth of the sector. As you will see, Scotland has lagged behind Wales and now Northern Ireland. Before we were challenging to be the second sector for the industry outside of London, we are at best fourth and may well be drifting towards fifth. It is really important that the report is taken seriously and acted upon, but I would wholeheartedly back its recommendations. I will quickly follow from a channel 4 perspective. I would broadly agree with that. I think that to give just a little bit of context specifically for channel 4, our nations spend, which is counted across Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. A very healthy proportion of that comes from Scotland. I think that what we would like to see are more measures that help to continue to support the efforts of the independent production sector here. Broadly, anything that strengthens the ability to deliver at scale and quality of ideas from Scotland is something that channel 4 will welcome. I think that you all alluded to previous inquiries by parliamentary committees. I think that when the economy committee looked at these matters a number of years ago, as you said, there was already a sense of urgency. Have we lost significant space, place and time in dealing with this? Is it time to make up what we have lost? I believe that we have. If you look at the growth of Salford, it is an incredibly impressive set-up with both BBC and ITV and a number of independent production companies. If you treat Bristol and Cardiff as a single travel to work area, you see the building of the studios and the growth, particularly in drama and features, being very strong there. Game of Thrones, which I think that everybody thinks should have been a Scottish series, when you see its effect in Northern Ireland and the building and another studio off the back of the success of that. I think that we have lost ground. It does not mean that we have not improved. I think that we have improved over the past 10 years, but relative to other parts of the UK, we have fallen behind. Can I ask Sophie Jones about the points that she made about the Government's review? Am I reading that until that review concludes, and do you know when it is going to conclude, given general election, a lot of what we might ask today is frankly a bit academic? Well, in terms of the consultation itself, as far as we know, life carries on as before Tuesday, so we are working on the basis that the consultation remains open. We will continue, as we have over some months, even prior to the consultation coming out, giving thought to how we can address the questions that it essentially poses. I think even without the Government asking that question, we and the rest of Channel 4 are very much engaged in an ongoing thought process about what more we can do to support the nations and regions, so that will carry on. As far as we know, the consultation itself will just continue as planned, and until anybody tells us differently, it is business as usual. Was there an end date prior to Monday, as it were? The consultation itself is open for comments until the 5th of July, and no indication in hard terms has been given about when the Government was planning to come back with a response to that. I think that that would be an informal indication within months, and certainly our hope would be that that would be the sort of timescale that they would look to. Clearly, there are going to be many uncertainties that are thrown up around that. However, a lot of work has been done within the Government over the 18 months and in recent weeks, and I think that we will continue, as usual, to try to bring that to the conclusion when we can. Okay, good. Can I ask a couple of questions to Alan Clements, if I may? Two, forgive me that this is probably not directly about your title, but just on behalf of STV, Alan. First is—Lewis McDonnell is the same as me on this—we look back formally on Grampian TV and local news and so on and so forth. Now, STV made a big pitch about local news and local news licences, but you have announced as a company a national news programme, for want of a better word. Does that mean that local news has been dropped down the priorities, or what is the kind of strategy, if I may ask that? As you are aware—well, I hope that you are aware on Monday—we are incredibly excited to launch the SPV2, which combines the five local licences that we applied for and were granted. I guess that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. It was very interesting to see BBC Scotland announcing a channel after we had it. Indeed, a international UK and Scottish news programme at 9 o'clock after we announced one at 7 o'clock will be interesting to see how the SPV2 beds in and how successful it is. However, yes, there will be local news in that. As you said, that is not my operational responsibility within the group of companies, but we will certainly reflect the communities of Scotland. We will also take where it is locally relevant to the other parts of the UK. For example, we did an extraordinary amount of coverage for the Edinburgh festival, but we also played that in the SPV Glasgow, because we think that people in Glasgow, despite what many people think, are very interested in both Edinburgh and culture. We think that that was a huge success. The Homeless World Cup, again, we covered it in Glasgow, and we played that across the Edinburgh channel, and we gave it to a lot of the local channels across the UK. We see that as the model going forward. The second question that I was going to ask was about football in terms of content. BBC Alba, obviously taking a lot of football and, for that matter, pro-12 rugby as well. Do STVs have plans in that area, because it strikes me that the investment that you might make as a company in that is going to use the economy, independent production companies would probably be hired to film and so on and so forth? Is that part of the plans for the future? As far as I'm aware, there are not plans to cover football much, as you know. It's a great passion of mine personally. However, my colleague Bobby Hame would be better to speak to that to the committee. I certainly wouldn't want to mislead in any way. Sport in general is something that we intend to cover and have covered. I think that the Homeless World Cup is a great example. We've covered swimming, badminton, so I think that sports that are sometimes not covered so well in television, there's a great opportunity to do that, because there is a great focus in football, as you know, in television coverage in Scotland. Thank you. It's a question for Sophie Neane, just regarding the headquartering of Channel 4. Certainly Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds have all been quick to put in bids to try and secure the ASQ out of London. Do you think that Scotland certainly has the capabilities and the skills to put a bid in and for an ASQ to be relocated from Horsley Road to Sombia and Scotland? I'll start with that. One of the questions that the consultation poses is whether relocation of Channel 4 in whole law or substantial part is an option that should be explored further. Our starting point with this is to go back to the first principles of what Channel 4 is here to do, and that is two things, really. One is to ensure that we fulfil our remit, which asks us many things in terms of being alternative, diverse, representing a different point of view and many other things. It also requires us to ensure that the organisation is sustainable for the long term in order to fulfil that remit. Those are the questions that we ask ourselves when we look at the questions that have been posed to us in relation to location. As I said at the start, our starting point here is really how do we best make it our contribution to the nations and regions? As a publisher and commissioner of content from production companies all over the UK, our belief is that the most substantial contribution we make is investment in those companies. It's where we spend the money rather than where we spend the money from. In relation to location, we haven't really got into the detail of where the most appropriate location would be because we are really asking ourselves the question about what is the most effective and sizable contribution that we can make to the creative economy and in terms of representation and portrayal across our programmes. To do so on the most sustainable basis, one thing that is clear from the independent analysis that we have done so far is that relocation would incur significant cost and disruption to the organisation, so that is clearly a consideration in our thinking as we go forward. From my perspective, being based in Scotland, we hope that there is something of an advantage to the Scottish independent production sector that we have an editorial presence here in Scotland. Already, the nations and regions team recently had an executive join my team who worked as an executive producer at one of our key suppliers, raised the roof productions in Glasgow. That person's role is about effectively becoming an extra development executive or almost executive producer to as many of the indies that we partner with as possible. To go back to Alan's point about where Scotland may have slipped to in the broadest respect across the UK, what is heartening from a channel 4 perspective is that the Scottish production sector is a significant contributor to our overall nations and regions spend. We have crucially seen, since 2011, an increase in spend each and every year, and most importantly on a sustainable basis as well, where we have worked as much as possible to work with the indigenous production sector on that basis. The second question that I posed was in terms of the things that Scotland actually has the capabilities to house an HQ. I think that what I would say is that the independent production sector, there is no shortage of skills in the independent production sector in Scotland. Some of our key longest running shows, highest rating shows, are delivered from Scotland. There is no shortage of production talent in this part of the world. I have a question for Alan. In terms of the STV, I will not be standing the questions from my colleague Tavish Scott. What work does STV undertake in other countries, such as Ireland, and what benefits do you think there are for STV in any of your external activities? As I am sure that I have made clear, my operational job is to run the production business. STV productions hardly make anything for STV the channel. We are focused on the UK and international market. Just two weeks ago, I was in Cannes for the MIIP TV Festival. We work with a distributor that is based in Munich, Red Arrow International, and we either co-produce or sell formats or, indeed, buy formats internationally. We are very much involved in that. In fact, this month for ITV, we are about to launch a show called Babushka, based around Russian dolls and guessing the amount inside with Rylan Clark presenting it, which is based on an Israeli format from Armoza formats that we developed, the UK version. We know that our version has now been optioned in the US by Warner Brothers. It is a very international market. In terms of Ireland, not really much specifically, we worked with Ulster Television ourselves, Ulster and the Smithsonian Channel in America. We did a series with Senator Jim Webb, who was briefly a candidate for the Democratic candidate for the president about the Scots-Irish and how they shaped the United States. We are always looking for those opportunities. I think that both for STV2 and, indeed, the new BBC Scotland channel, when it comes on board, we will have to look, given the funding, to look to co-produce internationally to be successful. You mentioned the new BBC Scotland channel. How do you think that that is going to affect the operations of STV and what does it really mean for you? There will also be the increased competition. As our chief executive has made clear, we welcome competition. That is the nature of a commercial organisation. Ironically, for us, STV productions also offer an opportunity to win commissions. There are producers of scale and volume that the channel will need in Scotland, so we think that with my commercial hat on, there is a great opportunity there. I believe that the interviews are taking place just now for the new head of the channel, so I think that it will be clearer in the next few weeks what the direction of the channel will be. I am sure that they will look forward to coming to the committee and outlining their vision to you, but it is not really for me to speak for their vision. I am just one for all the panellists. On Scotland's film heritage, how are Channel 4 and STV, what are you doing to get involved in the digitisation of Scotland's film heritage? Are we talking specifically about film archive and Scottish film heritage? I would need to refer to our colleagues in film 4 to give you a more full answer on that. Most of our work in Scotland, in a film capacity, is through development and production. You will have noted at the start of the year the, I will hope, long-anticipated sequel to train spotting, which was, I suppose, a very good example. It is not a portrayal of Scotland that everybody loves, but it is nonetheless one that is striking. It was an example of Scottish talent on-screen and off-screen, so I may have to ask for the opportunity to give you more detail on that. The nations and regions department in Channel 4 is predominantly focused on working with the TV commissioning teams on developing independent production companies. I would need to check and come back to you. I do not know if there are any plans currently. If I may, I would like to pick up on the Channel 4 point. For us, I think that Sophie Neane of Outline is absolutely correct that the issue is really about where the money is spent rather than where the headquarters are. There is an argument if we have gone down a less centralised UK. If we go to Germany, there are major centres in Hamburg, Munich and Berlin, in digital, in film and in TV. That would probably be a healthier way, perhaps, for the UK to be, but to move one headquarters out of London is making one company pay for the sins of many. This is really about commissioning, isn't it? Correct. That is an area that I suspect that some colleagues will want to pursue a little further. For example, Channel 4 moved towards the BBC's commitments. Currently, it is 9 per cent for all the nations, and the BBC is 9 per cent for Scotland. If it moved towards there, not necessarily saying that we would get there, then that would be an enormous boost to the Scottish sector without moving a single person. That is the important thing on our nation's quota number, the 9 per cent number that Alan refers to. We have never seen that in the long term as a ceiling. We see it as a basement, and it is important to note that we have overachieved on our overall out-of-London quota for many years now, and that would be the ambition. As I also mentioned, it is heartening that Scottish Indies, in terms of spend and hours, contribute considerably more than Wales and Northern Ireland combined. Good morning, and thank you very much for joining us. So much of our concentration has actually been on the BBC, and you have participated in the Scottish Green Leadership Group report. Again, it is a tremendous focus on the BBC. It is good to have Channel 4 and an STV here to discuss those issues with us as well. It is a slightly related but different question for both of you. For Alan Clements and STV, he will know that I have had an ongoing interest in the development of continuing drama here in Scotland and STV's role in that, which at one time was, I would say, more prolific than it potentially is today. I understand the way the ITV network has completely changed in how you now stand as almost the only independent company in that relationship. Rob Woodard has, on each of his business breakfast presentations to MSPs, repeatedly assured us of imminent announcements on exciting ground-breaking new drama production in Scotland, which might lead to continuing and recurring drama production, all of which, of course, in the discussions that we have had in relation to creative arts in Scotland and in relation to the BBC and beyond, have been felt to be part of what would lead to a sustained creative arts renaissance here in Scotland, and we can touch on studio capacity in due course. I am interested in where STV is in the long path towards its creative renaissance potentially in that particular area of spend. I note and recognise that STV is one of the independents who contribute to BBC television because regularity productions that you now produce are there. Hello again and thank you for the question, which, as you say, has been a recurring question. The problem, fundamentally, for us is a lack of power within this because we have no power over ITV commissioning. Fundamentally, the way that the system works is that we remit an amount of money to ITV network centres, which then commission programmes on behalf of all the licences across the UK. They happen to own all the licences now that they own also television, apart from the two licences in Scotland held by STV. We encourage them, as much as we can, to commission drama. In fact, there is one on this year that is based around Loch—I think that it is called the Loch—it is its final title, all shot around Loch Ness. It is not made by us, it is made by ITV studios, so it has had a hope-some effect. However, as you rightly say, a lot of the focus is around the BBC because it has both an industrial role in creating those dramas but also a representational role to show all the nations and regions of the United Kingdom on it. We have, I can say, two scripts paid for by the BBC awaiting the head of drama and the controller of BBC One to give their tech or not, both of which would be based in Scotland. Does that mean, for example, the drama in plain sight, which was, I think, very highly regarded, viewed and watched in Scotland? Was that an ITV studio's commission as well, Peter Manuel? Yes, it was commissioned by ITV network centres, and I think that it was ITV studios that made it. However, the problem is that ITV also owned a huge in-house production company and have bought, I am sure that you are all away, a number of other production companies, including, for example, Sew Television. The Graham Norton show, one of the absolute shining jewels in the BBC schedule, is made by an ITV owned company. If you remember, there was also the huge debate about Victoria against Poledark, which was going to win the Sunday ratings. Both of those dramas were made by Mammoth, a company owned by ITV, so whatever way the ratings battle went, ITV won. I am afraid, much as I would love to have more influence over that. I really do not. When Rob Woodward briefs us of pending exciting announcements in relation to potential continuing drama, he is not a fantasist. He is obviously massaging our expectations. Yes, or putting more pressure on me. Are you saying effectively that you have referred to a couple of potential creative ideas, which are then you are pitching presumably what potentially either into the ITV studio's ITV network or to the BBC or to whoever else might take those forward, or to Channel 4. We have one big Scottish project with an international platform, but it is not a huge one. However, the idea that STV, unlike the BBC, which is a national broadcaster, the idea that STV could invest a significant summoner continuing drama that might then only have an audience across the Scottish region over which it has control, that is not a financially sustainable proposition. No, it is not. Can I come to Channel 4, because you made reference to the support that you give to independence? I am interested to know in other particular areas of the independence sector in Scotland that you have developed relationships with who produce particular type of programmes. Again, I am interested to know what they were. I would be good to have some examples of that, but where does drama potentially sit in terms of commissioning? I suppose that this might then lead round to the fact that we have had this exciting announcement that planning consent can now go ahead for penal studios, which could significantly increase studio capacity to complement the natural locations that we have in Scotland. Might that have a potential influence? Has studio capacity been an issue in any of the decisions that you have arrived at in terms of ideas that have been pitched to you or the ability that you have to commission? I recognise the documentary and that kind of sector, which can very often operate from a broom cupboard in terms of the resource locally, albeit that it can have produced some startlingly good programming, but in terms of just trying to develop this wider creative base on the ground in Scotland where Channel 4 sees its potential opportunity or an opportunity for Scotland to respond to the percentage of quota and non-glass ceiling quota that you referred to earlier. I will go back to the genres and perhaps company examples. Scotland over the last few years has developed quite an enviable track record in what we refer to as features in lifestyle programming and by extension daytime programming. I totally understand that daytime programming may not sound quite as exciting as returning drama, but it is the closest in many respects in the factual genres that provides lasting throughput for production companies. Although it is not a Channel 4 show, STV productions, the long-running success of something like Antiques Road Trip on the BBC is an example of that, where a company can retain its talent and develop its talent. I mentioned the result of productions that we have recently been lucky enough to bring somebody in from, but they continue to be a key supplier and they spun out of the already successful IWC media who continue to deliver location, location, location. It is not necessarily a show where every single either couple family or individual that you see buying a house is based in Scotland, but crucially it is made in Scotland, made by Scottish production talent. Also by extension away from those genres, we are starting to see a documentary storytelling tradition of quality in Scotland. We are starting to see the emergence of companies in the specialist factual space. Indeed, STV productions are one of the suppliers in that space for us, but also, from another perspective, we are now working with a new company, Red Sky Productions, headed by Jane Rogers and Ross Harper. Their expertise is in factual entertainment and in specialist factual. The importance for us in that is that those are probably growth sectors for Scotland, if you like. There is definitely the capacity for us to do more, but we do long-running daytime series such as 15 to 1 from Scotland, which is recorded down at the BBC specific key studios. As a neat segue, I suppose, to your studio's question about capacity, I can only think of one specific example of it. I think that it was a daytime quiz show back in early 2015, where, due to a lack of capacity, the production company in question was forced to record elsewhere. I believe that it was a show called Benchmark. From Victory Television, I'd need to double check the details on that. In answering the question about scripted content, I think that channel 4 is an important part to play, but also, honestly, there's a limited number of slots across any given year on channel 4 for scripted content. It's clearly, of course, arguably the most enriching in terms of reputation for any channel, if you can find something that will bring a big audience and will have so many, if you like, halo effects in terms of audience appreciation, but also, of course, for employing people in the production sector. We have on-going dialogue with a small number of Scottish independent production companies that likes the synchronicity films, also, crucially, Sarah Brown at SDV, who is very highly respected by the channel 4 team and in on-going development conversations. I think that it's interesting that you mentioned Alan and Rob's discussion around drama. Drama development can be quite a tortuously long process, and I don't think that any company in that business would disagree with that. Of course, it remains a great opportunity for Scottish production companies to try and find something that comes in that space. We don't have it. What we do have is a real strength in multiple factual genres. What those genres have allowed is more production companies to emerge, a trust in the skills that are in the sector and because of the relatively long-running nature of daytime and features programming, retention and training of quality staff, which is really important. John McCormick was with us discussing the green sector leadership group report, which he participated in. He made reference right at the start to the advantage that, potentially, Northern Ireland's screen has secured across. There seem to be two aspects to that. One is the structural focus that is on all of this. The other which I have heard represented and which John McCormick didn't distance himself from at all was the strength of leadership that was actually fronting the organisation concerned. Northern Ireland's screen has a particularly strong leadership and that has driven things through. Whereas here in Scotland, Scottish enterprises' attitude to investment in programming has been lukewarm. It sits well below its understanding of things and what is needed is really strong leadership. Do you think that the establishment of a screen unit in itself is enough, or does there have to be the real creative drive given to this by a strong leader who can work with Government to try and pursue some of those things through to actual fruition? I think that the establishment of a screen unit is a very important step in the right direction. If I am to talk about Channel 4's experience of working in Northern Ireland, it is important to just state from the outset that our spend in Scotland is still eclipses, our spend in Northern Ireland by quite some distance, but what we have had there is a very constructive co-investment approach from Northern Ireland's screen. That has actually been very much directly through the work that my team carried out in our funding via a development fund called the Alpha Fund, which is working with Indies on front-end development. For Northern Ireland's screen to be able to come in and co-invest with us each time we support an Indie has been quite transformational for a number of the companies there. To illustrate that, we had no returning series in Northern Ireland in 2015. We had three the following year, two of which returned this year. That shows what impact can be made when not just broadcasters but also funding bodies work in partnership to leverage the impact for the independent suppliers. I can only speak with regard to my knowledge of Northern Ireland's screen and say that having worked with Richard, Richard understands the potential benefits to the production sector. We are saying that we will not want to support this Indie. Can you help us to do that? Is that the contrast that you are drawing between the experience there and the current experience in Scotland? That is, to some extent, yes. We have had on-going discussions, but they have not led anywhere of late in Scotland. I could not agree more with you, Jackson. It is about clarity of purpose. If you go on in Northern Ireland's screen's website, it says that we aim to be the second sector of production outside of London and everything flows from that. It is also about leadership. I am reminded of Henry Kissinger talking about Europe saying about who do I call. It is about having somebody say that my sole purpose is to drive up production out of Scotland, and currently we do not have that. I will take Ross Greer and then Rachael Hamilton. Two questions. First of which is relatively brief to Ian Sophie, because she covered it previously. One of the issues that has been raised with us in the past by the independent production sector is the location of commissioners, commissioning editors, whatever the title may be, that those whose responsibility is to commission content from the Scottish sector are often not or not consistently based in Scotland, so it is harder to build up that relationship if the familiarity is not there. Naturally, there is somewhat of a tendency towards commissioning from those that you know, so if you are not based in an area, you know the sector there less well. I am just wondering if you are able to go into a little bit more detail about what commissioning staff you have based in Scotland. As I mentioned, my team, the Nations and Regions team, is a strategic arm of Channel 4 commissioning, and we work in very close partnership with all genre to try to achieve as much as we can in terms of helping indies to deliver more for us from all the nations and regions. Speaking specifically about Scotland, I mentioned the strengths that have been built up in features and daytime. Both those departments are not based in Scotland, the commissioning editors are based in London, but I have quite a lot of confidence that if you were to speak to the Scottish indies working with those departments, they do not see that as a barrier to either pitching ideas or the on-going success of shows that they have on screen. It is notable for example that the BBC have a dedicated daytime commissioner based in Scotland, however our daytime commissioner David Sayer commissions a huge number of shows both in terms of volume and reach from Scottish suppliers. In addition to that, what my team also undertakes to deliver on an annual basis is a large number of UK-wide events where commissioning editors are out on the road and meeting with production companies in their place of work, as it were. Those are Pan-UK and several of which take place in Scotland, the next of which is actually in Glasgow on the 4th of May. That involves usually multiple commissioning editors taking focused meetings and doing what can sometimes either be a happy review or a postmortem of a recent show and trying to pass on some of their experience of shows that may or may not have worked and provide as much intelligence as possible to the sector. We hope that the dialogue continues and is helped from that, but it is crucial to say that, although we do not record it, multiple commissioning editors are out on the road at viewings, in edits, having focused creative meetings with Scottish suppliers already. That goes on in the background, but it is a very important part that most commissioning editors who are working with Scottish suppliers take very seriously and understand the importance of spending time with the companies in their place of work, as well as in London. Just to add to that, one of the benefits of the way in which Channel 4 as a whole operates but the commissioning part within it is that it is a relatively small organisation and it is a very integrated organisation. There is a benefit in all of the commissioning team working in a very close way where individual genre heads are all sighted together, talk together frequently, share ideas, share contacts. With that comes the benefit of everybody being in one place, rather than people operating in a one-step removed, slightly disconnected way. What Ian and his team do is act as brokers between producers all over the UK and work with the commissioning team to make sure that they are getting out, meeting people as well as people coming to London and able to do business with multiple potential customers. Is there more that we can do in that space to ensure that we are out and interacting, meeting new people as well as deepening relationships with existing people? Yes, and that is very much the focus of the work that Ian and the commissioning team are doing. The second question is about what is commissioned. Again, it has been raised with us in the past that a notable proportion of what is commissioned in Scotland tends to be short-term projects, many series, one-off factual content, etc. There are issues for growing the sector, it is harder to grow the sector when you are working from project to project or when there can be significant gaps in between. What can we do to attract more long-term projects to Scotland series with strong chance of renewal, etc? That is a really good question and it works at different levels. I mentioned the alpha fund that we utilised to support independent production companies. Where we have positioned that for Indeed, not just in Scotland but anywhere in the UK, we have said that the emphasis of us supporting you is that you have the ambition to provide to channel 4 at scale. That does not necessarily happen overnight but what it means is that we are asking the company coming in if we are backing them with some development funding that they focus that development in areas that can lead to series and ideally returning series. You cannot guarantee that but what we also do is that we work in close partnership with named commissioning editors on all of those deals so that those named commissioning editors are working in tandem with us and working regularly in meetings with those production companies effectively to try and maximise the opportunity for success. I mentioned features and daytime. We have long-running series such as 15 to 1 coming from Scotland. We have raised the roof, are bringing back, love it or list it this year. We have location, location, location. I know that I keep saying it but it is one of channel 4's most evergreen long-running fantastically high rating shows in terms of audience appreciation and ratings. I think that there is a very good job of portrayal of multiple communities and people's experiences across the UK. It is probably not fair for me to go into too much detail. At this stage, we will have a very exciting documentary access series coming from Mentor in Scotland this year. It is fair to say that that type of series takes a lot of careful negotiation of access and is not the sort of series that will easily come back. I think that the mix is important as well. We need an emphasis on scale but reputational highly authored documentary pieces, even if they are only three or four parts, are hugely valuable to the creative reputation of the people working in the sector. Just to go back to last year, we also had two series of Britain's benefit tenants coming from IWC media. That was another great example of a show where we helped develop talent as well through a talent shadowing scheme that we ran and a must actually give credit. That was something that we partnered with Creative Scotland on at the time. We were able to support a young female director on that who went on to series produce on later series. We think that there are actually the beginnings of quite a lot of scale coming out of Scotland, but of course we are keen for more. That is why our investment at multiple levels is weighted towards how we can find more series that can have the potential to return. Just to add to that as well, a couple of years ago we launched an indie growth fund, as we call it, where we set up a fund of £20 million to invest stakes in independent production companies, the most recent of which was in FireCrest based in Glasgow in the last few weeks. The intention behind that fund is to provide investment that would not otherwise necessarily flow from the market through enabling those companies to go through the next stage of growth. We recently made our first exit from one of our first investments in True North based in Leeds, and what True North has said as a result of our investment and what they were able to do over the last few years is to grow that company and to put themselves onto a secure and long-term footing now as one of the biggest factual producers working out of that part of the country. That is a very positive story in the case of True North, and we hope with FireCrest and the other investors that that investment and the expertise and advice that we are able to bring to those companies will also provide an extra level of sustainability and long-term growth for them. Ross, I would just like to add one company that I should mention. Back in 2015, we supported Tern television, which Lewis May will be aware, has an Aberdeen base but also a Glasgow base. It is fair to say that Tern, two to three years ago, were predominantly either a BBC Sky or a non-Channel 4 supplier. Fast forward to 2017, it will deliver five different series for Channel 4 this year. It has been a remarkable turnaround by then, but I think that it is evidence of our support through the Alpha Fund connecting those companies to the right commissioning editors and then those companies doubling down on their efforts to secure commissions. We are starting to see the results of that strategy, so we are encouraged by that. Thank you and welcome Alan's thoughts on this as well. What would you like to see on a policy level? What would you like to see from here, from the Scottish Government, from Creative Scotland, et cetera, that would attract more of the long-term projects? Yeah, just picking up on where you started your question, which is the proximity of the commissioners, I think that I would slightly diverge from Ian and Sophie here. I think that it is incredibly useful that we have that on-going dialogue. For example, Joe Street at BBC Scotland is a pan UK commissioner based in Glasgow and has worked alongside Channel 4's fantastic efforts, has really helped to build the sector here. Craig Hunter, though he is a commission editor for science across the UK, also looks at factual programming from Scotland for the network. Again, he can be a real shortcut if you say, just drop on me, I'll go, are you developing something in this area? It saves you a lot of time and effort just because he's very close and close to the sector. If there was a pan factual Channel 4 commissioner based in Glasgow out of this review, I don't think that for us that wouldn't be a tragedy or a poor outcome, not for me to preempt to review, but I think that there is an argument both ways in that. In terms of what we want again to Jackson's point about clarity, about the level of investment and the speed of decision making would be great. Obviously, the BBC has been here to give you evidence. I listened very carefully to it to keep true to their investment in Scotland and to have it within indigenous companies who intend to stay here. When the commission goes, they don't leave, they intend to stay here and develop here and make their companies here. I think that would be a great thing for the whole sector. Channel 4 would echo most of what Alan has said about the need for strong leadership and anything that will allow us to leverage our investment at multiple levels. When I say investment, that's often as simple as development investment and allowing companies to either bolster their existing team or simply bolster their ideas generation. It's a costly business that a lot of people who work in development would refer to the fact that they work in the rejections business, because most of what the great work that you do, sadly, is given a no at the end of the day. Any way that we can bolster that activity, we'd welcome, and that is best done through partnership in our experience. May I give you just one example? Sky Vision, who is obviously a wholly owned subsidiary of Sky Television and they invest in and distribute materials all across the world, has a deal with the Welsh Government where they co-invest in ideas that, as long as they're made in Wales, they can travel anywhere in the world. I was delighted to introduce them to the Scottish Government as a marriage broker and those conversations are on-going, but I was delighted to do it, but that really shouldn't be my role. I just happened to know the individuals involved, and that's what I mean to go back to your point, Jackson, about leadership. Somebody in the Scottish Government should have seen that happening in Wales a year ago and gone, well, why are we not doing that? I guess that that kind of illustrates the point that we're now, we're hopefully on the path, it's for them to make a deal or not, but I think that that gives a good example of this sort of leadership that you raise too. Rachel Hamilton. Karen Bradley, the culture secretary, talked about exploring creative, strong, creative culture clusters throughout the UK. I wonder if you could expand on that and if that includes Scotland, and if you could also develop the work that you have been currently doing with Creative Scotland, particularly to Ian that question, as nations and regions manager? Well, it's important to say that the only example that I have of a partnership with Creative Scotland is from two years ago, but it was a valuable one and one that we then unilaterally repeated in allowing a junior executive. The individual that I refer to, Deborah Dunnit, has now joined the Channel 4 nations and regions team, but crucially she shadowed an experienced executive producer on a razor-roof production and then went on to executive produce on both, I believe, both BBC series and Channel 4 series, but the crucial thing for us was her developing her skills to work on Channel 4 series at the time. So we don't have recent examples of partnership, we very much welcome the opportunity to do more. In terms of the creative clusters around the UK, our work effectively is to sit down with independent production companies off the back of the, if you like, the baseline offering that we make in all the briefings that we do, but sit down with the indies and say what does success look like for you over the coming 18 to 24 months? How can we support you getting there? That comes in different forms. It may be an early stage, to Sophie's point earlier, but as acting as brokers to the commissioning system, we are, if you want to call us, we're genre agnostic, so we work across all the major commissioning genre in television and connect these companies if they are not already connected to the correct commissioning editors. And crucially, having brought somebody into the fold who has worked at the sharp end of both production and development in a very successful Scottish Indie and raised the roof productions, I think her role is instrumental in helping indies in this space. She can sit across the table from them and look them in the eyes and have been in a similar position. What she spends a lot of her time doing is downloading as much intelligence as possible from the commissioning teams and passing that on to those indies. That comes in many forms, that's development brainstorms, that's downloading recent briefs that have come from various departments to Alan's point about tip-offs about is there anything else in development or production in this space, which timing is quite a crucial thing in terms of when companies pitch their ideas. There are lots of good ideas out there that sadly don't see the light of day because something else similar either has been greenlit or is coming to screens soon. I mentioned television, I mentioned red sky productions. We've worked with a number of indies in Scotland over the years and Sophie mentioned firecrust. Firecrust is a fantastic example of our investment at multiple levels. If you go back to firecrust in the early days, they were delivering longer-form items for Channel 4 news. They graduated to delivering half-hour Channel 4 dispatches. News and current affairs strand for Channel 4 had great success with that, doing some of our highest-rating dispatches programmes ever, things like Secrets of Poundland and Secrets of the Discount Stores. When we sat down with them in 2013-2014, we were saying, okay, that's fantastic, but they themselves were the first to admit that it's not a particularly sustainable business model. These sorts of investigative journalism programmes are labour intensive and not hugely well funded. The best way to think about this is how can you broaden that out and make it a more accessible subject matter area that speaks to a broader audience and can work at scale. We supported them to help them to bolster their development efforts on their team. Fast forward a couple of years, our commission to do a series called Super Shoppers, which is returning to the channel. I suppose that it's a little bit of a hybrid. It works between both news and current affairs and features. It's very much about informing the consumer in an entertaining way. We also happen to think that it's a great example of strong Scottish portrayal. It's two female diverse lead presenters. It's all shot in and around Glasgow. It's all post-produced in Glasgow by a Glasgow production company, so it's very strong on all counts. On an on-going basis, supporting companies on that trajectory may not always end with them being invested in, for example, by the channel for growth fund, but it is likely to garner further interest from other broadcasters. The more that we can strengthen them and that they can supply to others, the more that they can retain and develop their own talent. The second question is for the general panel, but the screen set to leadership group had made some recommendations. It seemed during the evidence that Scottish enterprise hadn't been particularly supportive to the screen sector. I wondered if, in your experience, with all the stakeholders that you gather together to create those productions, if you found that Scottish enterprise hadn't been very supportive? I've dealt with them on and off both in my previous two companies and obviously on TV, and they're always up for a conversation, but, as Tavish alluded to earlier, they're not really that interested in the screen sector. It's not really been a top priority for them, in my overall sense. I think that the screen sector is perhaps atypical to some other sectors that Scottish Enterprise works with. There's a big freelance workforce in television, so that can sometimes be quite difficult to quantify if you're an agency looking at it. That freelance workforce can be quite fluid in moving from company to company, but there are a lot of people employed, nonetheless, in the sector. What companies can do if they're backed to a greater degree by multiple parties, broadcasters and agencies is that they can retain staff for longer, potentially secure them in a staff position and therefore solidify their supply relationships with more broadcasters. I just wanted to say that I'm still bereaved about the Channel 4 racing, and it's gone to ITV obviously. You had it for 32 years. You like your long-standing programmes like location, location, location. I just wondered why you'd let go of the racing. I wouldn't be able to comment very specifically. It certainly wasn't a decision that I played any part. It was also something that was produced regionally for Channel 4, so straight away, given my role in Channel 4, it created a huge challenge for us. That's a drop in regional spend. How do we address that? I don't know if there's anything else that we can add about that. Sports rights are a competitive game. We were proud home of racing for many years, but we are proud broadcasters of the Paralympic Sports of Formula One now. Women's football this summer, which I'm sure will be a wonderful spectacle in its own right. National and STV. I think that Rachel essentially covered the question that was thinking of asking there, because it was going to take off a bit on Scottish Enterprise and ask about your relationship, but you've effectively answered that. You touched on some of the working relationship that you've had with Creative Scotland, as well as the talent shadowing scheme that you've done with it. I was just wondering, from Alan's point of view, how the working relationship is with Creative Scotland and, to all of you, do you have any other relationships with other public bodies in Scotland and how do those relationships operate? Again, with Creative Scotland and very friendly relationships, there's been nothing strategic probably in the last three years, but we are sitting down next week with the head of Sky Arts and the chief executive of Creative Scotland to talk about how we do more about the arts in Scotland. Again, I'm brokering that and I'm hoping that there may be an opportunity for it, but it's really about how to replicate in Scotland what Sky Arts does with the arts bodies in England and Wales. I think that if we could do that, it could be great for the sector, but we've not yet seen the emergence of the screen unit. Obviously, that would be the key factor in this going forward. From a channel 4 perspective, I was disappointed that we did approach Creative Scotland to effectively suggest what if we could roll out a talent shadowing scheme across the sector and aim to work with a number of individuals across the year. That wasn't something they felt they could do at that point in time, which was back in 2015. In terms of other partnerships, I suppose that I'd referred to them as creative stakeholder partnerships. The reason we feel that those are valuable is that they allow you to deepen and broaden your horizons as a pan-UK broadcaster. We support the likes of BAFTA Scotland and RTS Scotland, which are both bodies that recognise excellence in the screen industries. BAFTA also has an exciting new talent strand, which we think is important in how that feeds into areas such as our all-four commissioning area, which is a big opportunity for new and emergent and smaller production companies. It's a origination for online. It's shorter pieces but potentially quite long running in terms of supply. Although I probably can't go into too much detail just yet, we have plans to, in partnership with the film 4 team, support on both a sponsorship and editorial basis, an exciting new venture that Chris Young, the producer of the Inbetweeners series and the film, who is now, I think, based back on Sky. He certainly hails from the Isle of Sky, is another new talent initiative that he will be running where Channel 4 will provide editorial input and support, and in doing so we hope will help him to promote that. I think that that's a crucial thing to allow us to reach beyond the central belt in Scotland in terms of talent development. I was just going to say that that's a vitally important point as well that it does expand beyond the central belt and takes in all the other areas of Scotland that we are able to encourage that talent and build that. I thank our witnesses very much for the evidence that we've heard this morning. It's very useful indeed. Clearly, there are important things coming up in both Channel 4 and STVs worlds in the next few weeks, and we will watch those with great interest. Thank you very much and we'll now move into private session.