 If everybody is ready, we'll move on to the next item of business is a debate on motion 14400, in the name of Joan McAlpine, on making Scotland a screen leader of the report, examining the Scottish screen sector and inviting members who wish to speak in the debate to press the request-to-speak buttons now. According to Joan McAlpine, to speak and move the motion on behalf of the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Affairs Committee. Convener, 10 minutes please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to be able to open this afternoon's debate on the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Affairs Committee's report, Making Scotland a Screen Leader. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the committee clerks and our SPICE researcher, who worked so hard over the course of this extensive inquiry. I'd also like to thank the many individuals and organisations from across the film and television industry, who gave oral and written evidence to the committee and who hosted our visits, including Ward Park Studios Cumbernauld, Film City Glasgow, Northern Island Screen, BBC Scotland and, below the radar, TV production in Belfast. We're also very grateful to the Edinburgh International Film Festival, who hosted the launch of our report at the Traverse Theatre in June, where it received an extremely positive reception from the industry professionals who packed the theatre. The overwhelming support that our report has received from stakeholders has made a deep impression and indeed is humbling, not least because these people are experts and high achievers in their field. The Government, its agencies and important commissioners such as the BBC must recognise the significance of that overwhelming industry support for our recommendations, not just in this debate but in the months and years ahead. Since our report has been published, we have seen direct evidence of the economic impact of the screen sector, particularly in the last week with the Premier of the Outlaw King. This was a Scottish production, Scottish producer Gillian Berry and director David Mackenzie. Partnering with a global giant Netflix is an £85 million production, which more than justifies the investment that is made in it by Creative Scotland's production funds. It is the need to attract more productions such as that of international scale that was a key theme of our inquiry. It is certainly true that spending on film and television has increased exponentially in Scotland and an impressive 300 per cent in the last decade. As well as Outlaw King, we can point to other recent and forthcoming successes, Infinity Wars and Mary Queen of Scotland and perhaps most significant of all the investment by Sony in Outlander. With all that going on, you might ask why the need for this inquiry, this report and this debate, Scotland is surely already a screen leader, but we need to take a comparative approach. The worldwide demand for high-quality screen content is not to put too fine a point on it insatiable. Netflix alone is making 40 productions in the UK this year out of 700 around the world, a global investment of £8 billion. We need to attract more of this type of investment, but time and again our inquiry heard that Scotland was behind other parts of the UK in attracting it. While we are growing, we were concerned that we are not growing fast enough. Just this week we heard James Cosmo, one of the stars of Outlaw King, who won the failure to capitalise on Braveheart, in which he also starred more than two decades ago. In particular, he criticised the failure to deliver a dedicated film studio, a saga that sometimes seems as ancient as the battles of Bruce and Wallace. Returning to our report, we seek to address some of the barriers that we need to overcome, which were first identified in 2015 by the Parliament's Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee. As well as the need for studio capacity, the committee then recommended that we need to address the failure to set up a proper screen agency. We need more investment that we need to address the failure of the BBC and other commissioners to support sufficiently the indigenous independent production sector in Scotland. We also needed to address the misunderstanding within Scottish enterprise of how screen businesses operate. As a result of that 2015 report, the Screen Sector Leadership Group, a group of experts chaired by John McCormack, the former head of BBC Scotland and Scottish Screen, was tasked with making recommendations. It did so in January 2017, and it found that the public sector support for screen was fragmented, with a number of different bodies having some responsibility in specific areas. That meant that there was no agreed overarching screen strategy and there was a lack of leadership and accountability. It also made recommendations about investment from government and wanting the BBC to spend more of the licence fee that it raised in Scotland here in Scotland. My committee set itself the task of ensuring that the recommendations made by John McCormack's expert group were taken forward. It is fair to say that the Government preempted our inquiry in the leadership group's report by announcing significant new money for investment in production, and it also committed to setting up a screen unit within Creative Scotland, something that was seen as a significant step forward. The initial proposals for the new screen unit were published in December last year, and our committee began formal evidence in February this year. We heard from over 50 witnesses, from directors and producers, to regional screen officers and educators. The new screen unit within Creative Scotland is intended to bring strategic focus and leadership by promoting Scotland as a place to make films, attracting international investment, supporting the indigenous industry, including through training, working with television commissioners to ensure that more productions are made here and, crucially, to address the fragmentation among public agencies whose job it was to support the sector. It became clear earlier in our inquiry that the model that was set out in the proposals for the new screen unit did not command confidence among those working in the sector in Scotland, the people that it was supposed to support. The governance arrangements of the proposed new unit introduced additional bureaucratic complexity, with five different public agencies sitting on its management committee. There was a distinct lack of industry expertise at executive and board level, and the convoluted system of governance involved multiple levels of accountability with no clear lines of decision making. The unit was also behind schedule. The long-promised online portal for the industry, a place where anyone in the screen sector looking for support could go, had not materialised at that point, and key appointments had not been made. As we were wrestling with this evidence, the committee visited Northern Ireland's screen and Belfast. It had been instrumental in supporting the delivery of a film studio and attracting Game of Thrones. It was completely industry-focused and, of course, independent. The contrast with Scotland could not have been more stark, if you pardon my Game of Thrones pun. Therefore, in May this year, we published an interim report, which recommended that rather than pursuing an interagency model, Scotland should work towards an autonomous stand-alone agency, led by the industry with clear lines of accountability. Although I understand that our interim report named the bigger picture, it might have provoked some initial frustration in government. We believe that it was necessary and effective, as are the recommendations of our final report. It is clear from subsequent decisions that the evidence that we have gathered has, to some extent, been influential, although a stand-alone screen agency has not, of course, been set up. As Scotland has now launched, albeit later than planned, governance arrangements seem to have been streamlined and recent appointments have bolstered industry experience at board level. Indeed, they include some individuals such as David Strachan, the founding manager of Tern Television, who gave evidence to our committee inquiry and who played a really important part in influencing our report. The committee welcomed the appointment of Isabel Davis, formerly of the British Films Institute, as executive director responsible for the screen unit. In September, Creative Scotland also published the memorandum of understanding to formalise the partnerships between the agencies responsible for the delivery of Screen Scotland, something that our committee also called for. We still await the detailed business plan that will underpin the operation of Screen Scotland. In a recent letter to the committee, Creative Scotland indicated that the business plan and recruitment of business development staff would be completed by March 2019. However, the committee remains concerned that the MOU setting out the responsibilities of the partners sets out a role for Scottish Enterprise, which is broadly similar, as before, in that it provides business development support only for businesses identified as having high growth potential. Time and again, the committee heard persuasive evidence that the Scottish Enterprise support model is unsuited to most screen businesses. It bases investment on the number of full-time salaried employees. Of course, the industry model is based on freelance workers. Making a film or a TV production is, by its nature, a short-term undertaking. Companies expand and contract, and that does not fit the Scottish Enterprise model. We are pleased that business support professionals will work inside the screen unit, but we do not see that Creative Scotland should shoulder the entire financial burden of that, given that Scottish Enterprise is also funded by Government to support and grow our creative industries. The committee therefore recommended that part of the Scottish Enterprise budget be transferred to a standalone screen agency for business development. Another significant part of our report addressed the wrong running sore, as I have already mentioned, of the need for a film studio and more adequate infrastructure in Scotland. Since our report was published, Netflix has spoken about what it calls the overcrowded UK studio market. There is a demand, so why can't Scotland rise to other areas of the UK that have done so, most recently Birmingham? A present ward park studio in Cumbernauld, where Outlander is filmed, is Scotland's only dedicated large-scale facility. A member saw firsthand how beneficial a production and facility of this scale can be. Much of the success of ward park can be attributed to the passion and drive of producer David Brown, who was able to bring a world-class production like Outlander to Scotland, with minimal support from the agencies. The Scottish Government established a film studio delivery group back in 2013, which brought together multiple agencies with the purpose of delivering studio capacity. It is not delivered in a recent letter to the committee that Creative Scotland announced that a studio business case received the approval and principle from the Cabinet Secretary in July. While the committee welcomes that announcement, we await to be convinced, given many decades of unfulfilled promises. Although enhanced studio infrastructure plays a pivotal role in supporting growth, particularly when it comes to attracting large-scale productions, it is important that we do not lose sight of the role that indigenous productions play in the industry. Scottish producers told us that public sector broadcasters do not commission enough content from Scottish companies. The committee says quite clearly in our report that it expects to see more work commissioned from Scotland by those public sector broadcasters. We want off-com to tighten up the definition of what constitutes a Scottish programme under the nation's quota, and we want more robust reporting in this area. We also recommended that ITVs, such as the BBC and Channel 4, should have a nation's quota as part of its existing— I am afraid that you will need to stop just a second convene if you sit down a moment. You have already had an extra minute. I can only give you another minute more. I will finish up now. The Creative Scotland's recent letter to the committee sets out a progress report in regard to research work and the gathering of data, which was one of our other recommendations. As I said in my opening remarks, there are many reasons to be optimistic about the future of the Scottish screen sector, and we are convinced about its potential benefits, but we want to make sure that we reach our potential. We want Scotland to be a screen leader, and I move the motion in my name. The cabinet secretary for the Government, eight minutes, please. I welcome the opportunity to focus on our screen sector and highlight the visible progress that we have made in supporting our screen businesses. I thank the convener of the culture committee and all the committee members for playing their part in that. The decisive steps that we have taken to strengthen and streamline support for the sector mean that we are now seeing real momentum for success. What unites us in this chamber is a genuine goodwill and a shared ambition for our screen sector. We agree that Scotland has the talent and the skills, the settings and the stories. We agree that there are opportunities with avid global demand for content and escalating broadcasting spend in the nations, along with the prospect of a new BBC channel for Scotland and Glasgow's bid for channel for creative hub. Now, with the right support in place, Scotland's film and television businesses are showing just what we can do together, and I firmly believe that this is just the start. Let me begin with some highlights, because it is important to record how far we have come. On Friday in Edinburgh, we celebrated the Scottish Premier of Outlaw King, a feature film shot in Scotland about Robert the Bruce. The film was conceived and driven by top Scottish creative talent, by its writer, director David McKenzie and producer Gillian Berry. The film will soon be screened by Netflix in more than 190 countries around the world. It is also important to note that when Outlaw King was chosen to open the Toronto International Film Festival, it was only one of the four features backed by funding from Scotland. Wild Rose, a country music drama, Tell It to the Bees, set in rural Scotland and the documentary Freedom Fields also premiered there, illustrating the wide range of work now being produced. As for television, we have seen the gripping primetime BBC drama The Cry, produced by a Scottish company and filmed in Scotland in Australia. It is great to see network drama from Scotland back on our screens and to see it getting such high audience ratings. Those are just a handful of productions breaking through. Overall, production spend in Scotland has risen to record levels, hitting £95 million in 2017, up £26 million on the previous year. Filmmakers have seen Scotland as a great place to film, with Avengers of Infinity War, The Wife and Mary Queen of Scots recently here, plus Outlander in its fourth season firing imaginations and drawing tourists to stunning locations across Scotland. The recent committee report has anchored in the thoughtful recommendations of the screen sector leadership group. We welcomed that report and commend the sector for making the evidence sessions at committees stimulating, informative and valuable. We listened to the committee's debate carefully and I am pleased to report on the progress that it has made prior to the committee publishing its report and since then. The steps that have been taken already largely address what the sector was asking for and says it needs. The sector asked for increased funding. We made an extra £10 million available for screen development, production and growth this year, doubling the budget for screen. That is in addition to the £12.8 million that we already provide for BBC Alpa and one-off funding such as the £475,000 that we spent to support the national film and television school to set up a base in Scotland. The sector asked for public sector support to be focused, visible and joined up with clear leadership. We backed the creation of a dedicated screen unit, Screen Scotland. We believe that there is now a coherent partnership between Creative Scotland and our enterprise and skills agencies. In August, that came together publicly when Screen Scotland launched its website, offering clear pathways to support in film and television. We were asked for expert leadership and Isabel Davis, formerly of BFI, is now heading up Screen Scotland, with three new board members with extensive screen experience joining the Creative Scotland board. The advisory committee also has industry members, and Screen Scotland is now planning to constitute the screen sector leadership group into an industry advisory group. That will give the sector a voice in advising its executive on the direction and delivery of Screen Scotland. We were also asked for a broader range of funding. Screen Scotland has launched expanded production and growth funding of £2 million and a new broadcast content fund of £3 million. The creation of Screen Scotland may have been slower than I have liked, but I am greatly encouraged with recent progress. MOUs have been agreed among partners. Partners are developing a new approach to general business development support, along with Business Gateway. Two programmes of specialist business support are under way with screen companies and selected senior executives expanding their expertise, their networks and their knowledge. Screen Scotland partners have carried out an in-depth skills review of staff and freelancers to enable targeted investment in building talent and skilled crews. Work on increasing studio facilities is well advanced. Creative Scotland is finalising a business case for a new permanent studio, and it plans to launch a tender for studio operator shortly. With regard to studio, Screen Scotland currently markets 136,000 sqft of full-time converted space and 335,000 sqft of build space. We understand the frustration that can result from delays to studio projects, but we continue to work with the private sector to find constructive and appropriate ways to help to increase facilities. Having seen the effect that funding can have, with the first £3.7 million allocated by the production growth fund, resulting in anestimated £60 million spend in the Scottish economy, by expectations of the outcomes that we can expect from increased support are high. The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Economy and Fair Work is doing relatively badly in comparison with other places in the United Kingdom. You painted a very rosy picture, but I wonder if you will get any analysis of why we seem to be going backwards or not forward. I do not think that we are doing badly, and I do not think that we are behind in terms of some of the spend, particularly around London and Pinewood and the traditional studios. However, if you look at the amount of spend that we have compared with other countries, currently that spend is very comparative and very competitive. In terms of production and production spend, we are also very advanced. I do not think that we should be talking down our screen industry in Scotland. I think that we should be talking our screen industry up. I know that the committee has proposed creating a standalone agency, but I am not persuaded that current circumstances justify diverting funds that could go to screen to setting up a new body. As it is now established, Screen Scotland has the necessary capabilities and resource to achieve the outcomes that we and the committee both desire, and it should be given the opportunity to show what it can do. There are big strides and opportunities in broadcasting, too. I do not have time to set all of those out now, but extra funding has been pledged by the BBC with £20 million promised a year for network funding and £19 million for the new Scottish channel. We welcome it and encourage it to be delivered quickly, along with commitments by other broadcasters such as Channel 4 to increase spend in the nations. The Scottish Government has already helped to improve delivery for Scottish audiences and industries with its work to strengthen the royal charter to ensure that the BBC must support the nation's creative industries. We continue to work to support that, insisting to broadcasters and to regulator Ofcom that a tougher test must be set for what constitutes a Scottish production. Meanwhile, Screen Scotland will also work with new strategic partnerships with content producers to build a sustainable system to further enhance the quality of our productions and bring on talent. We welcome the committee's work to seek greater transparency and rightly increase opportunity for the Scottish sector. All too often, as Johann Lamont has done, we have focused on what is missing in Scotland. Today, I have highlighted all that we have helped to create and all the support that we have put in place to go on making more of the opportunities ahead. The story of our screen sector is one of mounting success, and I look forward to working with everybody in this chamber to generate even more concrete results and a long list of productions to be proud of that are made in Scotland. I thank the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Affairs Committee for the publication of Making Scotland, a screen leader report. I thank all those who submitted evidence and the valuable insight that the committee got. I was lucky enough to visit BBC Pacific Key, film city in Glasgow, wall park studios and the Northern Ireland screen in Belfast and gave us a specific insight into those organisations. It is great that the ball is finally rolling according to the cabinet secretary with regards to a new screen unit. We welcome the increase in funding from the Scottish Government, but it has taken a long time to get here. Scotland's film industry, we know, generates £95 million a year, but it currently lags behind compatible nations when it comes to film studios. Wales has multiple studios, including the new 250,000 square foot bad wolf studio in Cardiff. Northern Ireland already has a fantastic 110,000 square foot studio, and Titanic studios, which has attracted productions from HBO, Universal and Playtone. It is now developing the 120,000 square foot harbour studios. We heard recently that Game of Thrones, the successful TV fantasy drama that Joan McAlpine talked about, was eager to film in Scotland but was lured to Belfast by Titanic studios. That is now one of the largest film studios in Europe. In my introductory remarks, I must stress that although this is not part of the committee report, the vital role that the UK Government plays in attracting the business environment for film production with a package of measures, namely the significant tax breaks that set the foundations for investment in the fantastic industry. We have to consider the time that it has taken to get to this stage. Although we all on these benches welcome the establishment of a new screen unit in Scotland, I am glad that the committee has also recognised the lengthy delays. The screen unit was, as we know, promised back in the 2016 budget. The SNP has failed to deliver since that point, and the 2017 and 2018 draft budget also promised a dedicated screen unit that will be set up within Creative Scotland in the next year. However, the 2018-19 draft budget also promised the creation of a dedicated screen unit to support the screen sector. We have just seen nothing less than broken promises. The question remains, can a public sector collaborative approach deliver this studio, and will the Scottish Government accept the standalone approach that is suggested by the committee? However, it does not sound like the cabinet secretary is likely to take that on board. I think that the member is confusing the establishment of screen Scotland, which is the dedicated screen agency. That is up and running, and it is staffed at the highest level with the opportunity for a film studio. I have already, in my opening remarks, given you an update of the tender that is going out for a studio operator for a film studio. Those are two distinct related but separate issues. Rachel Hamilton. Thank the cabinet secretary for that intervention. If you look back to the film studio delivery group that was set up by the Scottish Government in 2013, it demonstrates that that multi-agency approach has a weakness, and that is why the committee ultimately expressed its wishes for a standalone unit. However, it is not just us, it is not just the other benches and us that have expressed frustration. It is industry figures and bodies as well. We are all disappointed at the timescale of setting up the studio facilities, and the Association of Film and Television Practitioners in Scotland said, and I quote, for decades, Scottish filmmakers have had a nomadic existence using buildings that have been discarded by other industries. 10 years ago, Scotland had the largest screen industry outside the home counties. It is now far behind Northern Ireland, Wales and the English regions. Scotland's film potential is currently not being realised. I'm sorry, I'm not going to have enough time. We must see action. Talent and investment has been driven elsewhere because of the lack of movement on this matter. Moreover, James Cosmo, who was quoted earlier, who starred in Braveheart, lamented at the lack of progress. He said, I'm making his dark materials just now a long-running series for HBO and BBC Worldwide. It's being filmed in Wales, where they have full studios. He even acknowledges that it does not look good for Scotland when that production could have taken place right here where it was shot. Although there are challenges presented by state-aid rules, I understand that, and I'm glad that the committee considered that it is unacceptable that, although other areas of the UK have developed enhanced studio infrastructure in line with state-aid rules, Scotland has continued to fall behind. I just want to make a couple of other points that the report highlighted. The Scottish Locations Network said that retaining and nurturing domestic talent is really important. The development of this film studio would allow for a more sustainable pipeline of production in Scotland, meaning that crew can consider working in Scotland as a career instead of a short-term stop-gap. They also pointed out that higher and further education is not set up for production training. They gave us examples in Atlanta. They have created a film production training campus, and there is a commitment by NFTS to open a focus training centre in Scotland specifically for those production skills. Outlander has been a huge success in Scottish trainees. When we visited the Ward Park Studios in Cumbernauld, where the blockbuster is filmed, we met some of those trainees, including costume designers, set designers, plasterers and joiners, and you name it. Furthermore, the E-cost skills survey is now complete, and we look forward to a skills plan for the industry. Joan McAlpine touched a little bit on the public sector commissioning, and that will also help with building skills and capacity in the sector. It is essential to track work from other sources. We have a wonderful opportunity in front of us. I am glad that the announcement has been made in the past few days to construct a new studio. It is very much welcomed from industry leaders to those benches, but we look forward to further progress on the matter. Thank you very much. Three years on, and a committee of this Parliament is once again calling for action to turn the potential for a world-leading Scottish green industry into reality. I was a member of the culture committee when this inquiry began this time last year, and I was also a member of the economy, energy and tourism committee, which reported on the economic potential of the Scottish film and television industry more than three years ago. A glance at their report shows that what that committee felt was important is often still what the current committee report highlights today. A look at today's report shows what has changed and what has not in that time. The first three recommendations in 2015 were focused on the need for a world-class film and television studio in Scotland. The committee then called for government decision on existing proposals, as soon as possible, for government evaluation of what more could be done as a matter of urgency, and for government direction of public agencies, because their failure to work together was acting as a barrier to effective support for the economic and cultural needs of the film industry. Three years on, yes, there have been changes in those key areas, but there have not been changes enough. Scotland lacked a world-class film studio then, and we lack it still. We were told then that the Government had to be cautious about its approach, that it was up to others to make things happen, that the private sector would come up with the solution. Well, it has not happened yet, and simply saying that action will come is no substitute for action on the ground. The Government said in 2015 that Creator Scotland and the Enterprise Agency and Skills Development Scotland really could work together to improve support for the screen industry, despite all the industry concerns to the contrary of which we have heard. Three years later, and there are still multiple agencies involved, despite the very welcome establishment of Screen Scotland and the cautious improvements in its focus, which Joan McAlpine mentioned. It is all the more important then that Screen Scotland is empowered to make the big decisions without constantly having to seek approval from other public agencies. The minister is nodding, and I hope that she can give some assurances on that matter. Cabinet Secretary, clearly any major investment, for example, over half a million, we need to go to a board decision as per any other agency. It has now got three screen experts that are part of that. You have got the industry advisory group, and it is less than 500,000 that Screen Scotland can move on. I will give you that reassurance. Lewis Macdonald Assurance is welcome, but, of course, as the minister has said, for the big decisions, they have to go to the board of Creator Scotland. That is the fundamental difference between what the Government is taking forward and what the culture committee has recommended in this report and what the economy committee was calling for three years ago. That is a standalone agency and an agency that is able to do and make the big decisions itself. One of the recommendations from three years ago, which has been implemented, which has led us to today's debate, was the creation of the screen sector leadership group in direct response to recommendations in that economy committee report, which will continue, as the cabinet secretary has said, as the industry advisory group in the new arrangements. It was the report of the SSLG in January, which informed the views of the culture committee leading to this debate. I hope that the leaders of the sector will agree that the report, which has been debated today, matches the boldness of their vision. It calls for urgent and significant progress on a purpose-built studio in Scotland, saying that we need delivery not debate. It says that ministers should not hang back because one particular project has fallen. They should redouble their efforts to make sure that projects come forward and can be delivered. The committee has also warned that Screen Scotland must not be burdened by cumbersome and overly bureaucratic governance arrangements, as the convener emphasised today. However, it was the production of an interim report in May, emphasising the case for a strong, autonomous Scottish screen agency, which was unusual and which marks the difference in this debate today. The committee report that we are debating today builds on that interim recommendation and makes the case. It is the logical culmination of the process that began in 2015 to have that separate autonomous screen agency in the future. As we have heard, the Scottish screen industry was second only to London 20 years ago, even 10 years ago. It has now fallen behind other nations and regions in the United Kingdom. When we see the business plan for Screen Scotland coming forward, I hope that ministers will devise that in a way as a step towards the creation of an autonomous agency on the model of Northern Irish screen, as the committee recommends. I hope that ministers will also take a proactive and imaginative approach to providing public support for the establishment of a world-class studio in Scotland again, as the committee recommends. If they take both steps in those two areas, the relevant committee in the next session of the Scottish Parliament will be able to publish a report that is about achievement and not only about potential. Thank you very much, Mr MacDonald and Andy Wightman. Over the greens for minutes, please, Mr Wightman. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Thank you to the committee for their welcome report. Like any good movie to paraphrase the French Swiss filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard, a story has to have a beginning, a middle and an end, but not necessarily in that order. Over the past few years, we have seen quite a range of plot twists, drama and suspense in the story of the screen sector. When I look back at the history of film in Scotland and watching films like Whiskey Glow or Local Hero, you have been trumped, more recently transporting two, indeed filmed in this building. It is clear that we have huge potential for film and TV production. It is a growing creative industry that is attracting talent and investment, including the Outlander series and recent Avengers movies. For all the showcasing that has been done by a few high-value productions, we continue to have failed to capitalise fully on the many opportunities, and I think that the committee's report makes that quite clear. We had a Scottish screen, an independent screen agency that ran successfully of its own accord until Creative Scotland subsumed it in 2010. As long as a new body screen Scotland is contained within Creative Scotland, it is hard to see how it will be able to properly drive the screen sector as effectively as many other countries, indeed other parts of the UK do. We need to think about how to facilitate and support that thriving sector. It is clear, as many people have made clear in the film sector, and indeed the committee report does as well, that we need at least one national film studio to provide the space that is necessary to support large-scale productions. It is also clear to us that the Scottish Government must take the lead in making that happen. The First Minister, in response to a question that I asked earlier this month, indicated that Creative Scotland will be launching a tender for investors to operate a public sector-backed film studio. That is a welcome development, but there are very few actual details. I was disappointed to learn more from reading the Sunday papers this weekend about that than from the Cabinet Secretary this afternoon. That is about much more than attracting investors. I do not think that the Scottish Government can no longer hide behind state aid rules to justify its lack of action. Back in March this year, when I substituted for my colleague Ross Greer on the culture committee, I noted that there was a lot of confusion about state aid's role in that matter. In part, it was evident that if the public sector was to lead the development of the industry in Scotland, it must either operate as a municipal enterprise, like Manchester, under the market economy operator principle, just in fact as Lothian councils operate a highly successful bus company in this city with no state aid issues, or it must be a wholly private enterprise. That leads us to the final scene. Where should this film studio be? Of course, that has been a drama worthy of a BAFTA in itself. Jim O'Donnell from PSL Land Ltd told the committee in the 29 March that a site at Damhead in Midlothian was the best site for a film studio in Scotland, and the Scottish Government granted planning consent to that site. Earlier this month, as members will know, after a long legal battle, the small holder who occupies most of the site, Jim Telfer, a constituent of mine whose family have farmed the land for a century successfully defeated an application to resume his two holdings. A welcome decision for a family that suffered considerable stress and anxiety over the past few years but begs huge questions about the process by which we have been attempting to identify the site for a national film studio. To conclude, the Scottish Government must reach out and work with the industry to develop a national film studio that benefits films in Scotland, but it should be minded that it can only happen in a location that is lawful and adaptable to the needs of a growing screen sector. Deputy Presiding Officer, like Andy Wightman, I will try to have a beginning, a middle and an end as well. The beginning is a Swedish couple who I met walking down the road to the shop in Bressay where I live, who said to me, where did the murder take place? I looked at the couple, somewhat aghast and thought about phoning the local constabulary, and then realised that they were looking for one of the murder scenes in Shetland, which would give the impression that there is a murder there every five minutes. I can assure you, Deputy Presiding Officer, that is not the case, but the Swedish couple are part of 28 per cent of visitors to Shetland now who come to visit the islands because they have seen Shetland on the TV. The point there, in the wider sense, is that Netflix has syndicated that particular production. It is shown here, of course, in the BBC. It is actually made by an ITN TV production company, but it is now going around the world, hence Swedes, Australians and New Zealanders, indeed anyone you find in Shetland these days who has seen it somewhere. Not only that, but it is so good that it has been nominated for the scripted TV award at the forthcoming Scottish BAFTAs and Dougie Henshaw himself for TV actor and David Cain for film and TV writer. We at home are a bit puzzled as to what they will do next with the plot. I am led to understand what is in next year's production, but where they will go from it, they are after who knows. Therefore, to the middle of this debate, Andy Wightman mentioned whisky galore and Lewis MacDonald and various other movies. I feel there is a sense of back to the future about this one today for the very reasons that the convener gave in her opening remarks. Why did we, as a Government and as a Parliament, subsume the separate and independent Scottish film company organisation into a body that is for all the arts? The answer as to how that has not worked was the very answer that the cabinet secretary gave to Lewis MacDonald in the earlier exchange, when she said that any big decision will be taken not by an independent body but by the board of Creative Scotland. In fairness to Creative Scotland, it has many decisions to make over many areas of the arts with conflicting and tough financial decisions to make. That is at the nub of why the Government's approach on this is wrong. The convener was fairly pointed out the strength of the arguments around a single agency, a single organisation and a Scottish screen simply taking forward. What yes is, as the cabinet secretary rightly said, one of the most exciting areas of activity in Scotland, both in economic terms and in cultural and artistic terms, as well. For the love of me, I am not quite sure that I have yet heard an argument for the Government as to why that is not the right thing to do, why that is not the right approach for Scotland. When it is demonstrably across many other parts of the world—a number of members, Rachel Hamilton and others have mentioned, Northern Ireland, the committee went there at some stage earlier in its proceedings—the evidence was pretty overpowering and overwhelming. If the arguments can work for other small countries where we often have this record played at us, then it certainly would appear to me to be appropriate for Scotland. The only other point that I want to make is the convener's point about the separate Government agencies involved in the labyrinth that was the original proposal. I take the point that it has, to some extent, now been streamlined. The most compelling evidence that we heard, which, in that sense, I do not think that the cabinet secretary has fully addressed yet and I hope that she will in her remarks later on this afternoon, was about the range of organisations involved, the different agendas that some of our different quangos bring to that. What more could be achieved if that was so much less fragmented, so much more streamlined and so much more clear-sighted about what it is trying to do? The only logical conclusion that one can come to and this is the end, is that that should be a separate Scottish screen. Thank you very much. Now the open debate speeches at 4 minutes, George Adam, to be followed by Gordon Lindhurst. Mr Adam, please. I believe that the committee's report shows the exciting opportunities available to Scotland in film and TV. I think that some of the debates that we are having here is that I almost feel like I am in a television show at some kind of alternative universe where I am the only one that can see the positive side of what is happening in the industry at the moment, because the timing of this debate, Presiding Officer, could not be any better, because last week I saw the premiere of The Outlaw King, and it is probably one of the biggest movies to be filmed in its entirety in Scotland and in our screen history. The interesting thing about this and this movie in particular is how it is going to be distributed. There will be no going down to the local multiplex for this movie, because it will be distributed through a streaming service. Netflix is now in the business of producing big budget movies, but I believe that the Scottish Government has been aware and seen this when you look at the investment that they have made in Scottish television and film industry. 95 million pounds invested in Scotland last year, up to from 2014's 45 million, and in 2007 it was 23 million, but it is content that is king in this new multi-platform world of television and film. In the not too distant future, BBC Scotland will embark on a new and exciting adventure as it launches its new channel. Once again, content and the use of the BBC iPlayer or at the very least easy access on the BBC iPlayer will be key to this channel's potential success. However, it is interesting when you look at people's viewing habits. In 2017, viewers in Scotland spent a daily average of three hours and 46 minutes watching television in the traditional manner. That declined from the previous years in this multi-channel, multi-platform world. Traditional viewing declined even more so among younger viewers. In 2017, 40 to 15-year-olds watched one hour and 27 minutes of broadcast television per day, down 41 per cent from 2010. 16 to 34-year-olds watched two hours and 16 minutes of broadcast TV, down 34 per cent from 2010. However, streaming content consumed by the same age group increases, Netflix, Amazon Prime, YouTube and subscription on demand servers were all watched by age groups regularly. In order to have a successful TV shows, movies and documentaries, we have to follow the trends. More important, we have to follow the audience. That is why we come back to Netflix spending in excess of $100 million on a Scottish historical drama. Recently, we have, and other colleagues have mentioned this as well. Yes, no problem. Johann Lamont I am sure that you are planning to get to this in your own contribution, but I would be interested to know whether you agree with the committee that there should be a standalone Screen Scotland in order to facilitate the work that is done. George Adam I believe that what I am trying to prove is that some of the work that Screen Scotland has already embarked on and done recently with the fact that we have had movies like Avengers Infinity War, T2, Trainspot and an Outland are still on-going productions here in Scotland, shows that we are actually moving forward in a positive manner. All the Scottish Government's support of our film and TV industry shows that this is the way forward. However, as I have said, distribution of that content is the key to the on-going success in the industry. Next year's BBC Scotland channel is a testing point for me, and I hope that it is successful. However, as I have already said, content is king. In the multi-platform, multi-channel world that we live in now, access to that content will help to aid any future success of that channel. It will also make sure that we have the productions and everything else in Scotland. We live in a world in which families no longer sit around watching TV in their living rooms. They have other ways of accessing it, and we have to make sure that we are aware of that and everything that we do in the industry. Thank you very much. I call Gordon Lindhurst, to follow by Sandra White. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Let me begin by thanking the committee members, clerks and witnesses who have produced a very important piece of work on that subject. I am not going to be able to rival George Adam with his comments about YouTube, Netflix and all of these variety of media, but I certainly enjoyed listening to his speech on that. Andy Wightman's comment that a film should have a beginning, a middle and an end, but not necessarily in that order may explain some of the things that have happened in this Parliament over the course of its history. I was not a member of the previous economy committee, which looked at the screen and its economic impact, but what seems to be the two things, two issues that consistently arise in this matter, are first of all the potential economic value of the screen sector and the significant potential for growth for Scotland. I say the economic value because I readily accept that it is not just money that matters, and I will come to the second matter shortly. When it comes to Scotland aspiring to be a leader in the world and to be a welcoming place for business, including filmmakers, we would like to see that happen. The second aspect is the frustration that the potential is not being met due to shortcomings that have been highlighted in 2015 or indeed long before then, which have not yet been resolved. I think that it was Ian Smith, who was chair of the British Film Commission, who said that, and I quote, on the larger issue of Scotland's image, how Scotland is seen in the world is directly linked to our participation in the media world, and that will affect how Scotland performs in all sorts of ways. The world knows that Scotland has the natural assets to be an attractive location for film producers, from the glorious beauty of the Scottish Highlands to the borders to the rolling hills of Ayrshire and many other places, and here in Edinburgh alone we have our magnificent built heritage, including Coburn Street, The Royal Mile, St Jarl's Cathedral and Waverly Station. And yet the dearth of strategy or infrastructure prevents Scotland often from capitalising on these natural opportunities. Just as an example, a recent blockbuster shooting of Avengers Infinity War, one of the most expensive films apparently ever made with a budget of between three and four hundred million dollars. This included a seven-week shoot in Edinburgh, estimated at the time to have brought £10 million in economic benefit to this city. But without a permanent studio space with infrastructure to help to continue making the film, the producers finished the scenes here, packed up and went home to Atlanta, Georgia to finish the film. Rosie Ellison, head of film at Film Edinburgh, has reportedly said that Scotland loses films or only gains parts of them because of the lack of a large permanent film studio for indoor shoots. Now, while acknowledging that some progress has been made in recent times, the report was highly critical of past lack of progress. Part of that may be due to organisational structures such as Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise not being suitable and being inflexible to the needs of the Scottish screen sector. An online portal for screen, which is yet to be created despite the report anticipating that this would be done before September 2018, and probably already mentioned most significantly of all, a film studio delivery group that was established in 2013 that has talked about providing the necessary infrastructure of a film studio, but which to date has not delivered. Scotland was one second only to London in the screen sector, and there is no reason that Scotland should not once again become a home to many good and quality productions. Sandra White will be followed by Johann Lamont. Thank you very much. I am not a member of the committee, but as my constituency, particularly the citizen of Glasgow, is at the heart of a number of TV productions and film productions. I really enjoyed speaking in this debate and I hope that others will enjoy the contribution. I would like to thank the committee and the clerks as well, all those who provided evidence. It has been a very robust report on our film industry, and I think that it is both timely and welcome. I fully support the committee's ambition for Scotland to become a global screen leader and to understand its recommendation for a stand-alone unit, which was certainly the preferred option for the majority of the witnesses to the committee. The Scottish Government has outlined its reasons, although that will not be the direction that it will take at present. I posit that word at present, and I know that it has injected us with a substantial chunk of funding to the unit along with its partners. I welcome that, but I respect the committee's earlier recommendations. With respect to the current situation in Glasgow, our local economy has benefited from £15.1 million boost in the last year alone due to the screen sector. Those at the Glasgow Film Office are eternally grateful to them and must take some of the credit for their contributions and efforts in securing large and small productions to the city. Viewers across the country were gripped by the most recent BBC drama, The Cry, part filming the city. Filming starts today, actually, on the spin-off to the Fast and Furious 6. Also filmed in Glasgow a couple of years ago, Hobbs and Shaw. The wife, again, filmed across the city, has just opened across cinemas with lead actors Glenn Close, Tiffra and Oscar, for her performance. As I said before, I really welcome the positive benefits for both Glasgow and the rest of Scotland through a vibrant, healthy screen sector. That is where I come on to not being negative, and I hope that people do not take it as being this, but as the constituency MSP for the city of Glasgow, I represent a number of constituents who live in the heart of the city. They had a meeting last night. I just want to say that when producers are filming, I really do think that any disruption caused by filming, which will and has happened, must be handled appropriately. Residence in the city centre of Glasgow, we only received notification from producers of Hobbs and Shaw for the filming that's a letter there. We only received it yesterday, and an urgent meeting was last night to go over some of the issues, such as not being able to get into your own house, not being able to use your car, gunshots being heard, and low-flying helicopters still don't know what times are happening. All I say is that I don't want to be negative. I'm doing what my constituents have asked. I'm raising the issue that when something like that happens, please speak to the local people there as well, because it does affect them also. Scotland, as has been mentioned before, has lost out in many large-scale productions, such as Game of Thrones, Game of few, Northern Ireland. The evidence has been said before that Northern Ireland was chosen because it has the capabilities. It made the investment in the sector, so instead of being as producer Ian Smith said in his contribution to the committee, content with the crumbs from the table, we should be aiming to provide all the means required for full production. The screen industry provides not just financial benefits but a platform to show our fantastic talent. I will mention Glasgow, our fantastic city and the great architecture and heritage around there, and it provides so many opportunities. I fully support a purpose-built film studio, and I look forward to seeing it being realised. In summing up—I've only got a couple of minutes anyway—we have incredible potential, but we need to provide the opportunity to realise the potential and not be happy with just the crumbs from the table, but be happy with the whole cake. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I congratulate the committee on its report, and indeed on its interim report, which I believed was proactive and was actively seeking to engage in what is a very important debate. Those reports follow on from the series work of the Economy, Energy and Skills Committee, which was reported in March 2015. At that time, I was a privileged part of that committee. It was then dominated by the issue of the film studio and the importance of infrastructure for the sector. I welcome the recommendations that have been put forward in the committee's report. I do not say that lightly, but I feel that the saga is something of an embarrassment for us as a Parliament. I think that we need to rise to the challenge, and I think that the committee itself has done so, but I think that the Scottish Government must do so now, too. The work of both committees was defined by a seriousness of intent, thoughtfulness of those providing evidence, a rigor of the recommendations drawn up by committee members, but more than anything it was work underpinned by the very substantial and carefully argued evidence by those who work in the sector, who are fleet of foot, who are passionate, but whose feud frustration at the lack of progress was evident then and remains evident now. I think that we need to take their concerns seriously. The cabinet secretary said that I was talking down the sector. If the sector itself is speaking out, we have a responsibility to listen to them. When we celebrate the sector, we are celebrating what they are able to do despite the barriers that are put in their place rather than anything else. They deserve better than the current sense of apparent paralysis in tackling the problems that are faced by the sector and captured by the lack of a film studio. In the inquiry that I was involved, there were a number of themes that are as relevant today as they were then. The screen sector matters not just because we celebrate creativity, but it also matters economically and should be taken seriously in terms of its economic impact. The role of the public sector, not as a facilitator but as a break on the work of the sector, has to be confronted. It does not understand properly the challenge of those who are working in a global industry. We are in a circumstance in which people are saying that they are blocked by what the public sector is doing rather than supported by it. If I am disappointed by the lack of progress, how much more is the sector that took seriously both inquiries must feel? In 2015, Fiona Hyslop, in response to the question in the committee that I sat on, said that a studio being evident by 2016 was a perfectly reasonable request. We are now at the end of 2018, and I am struck with the lack of progress. Someone who has not been paying close attention in the very recent months looked at the reporting of this over the weekend and was struck by the recycling of explanations that we heard two years ago before the lack of explanation—in particular, our old friend, state aid. That terrible problem, which seems to be unique to Scotland, is that somehow we cannot do anything because of the inhibitions of state aid, inhibitions that do not seem to affect studio development in other parts of the United Kingdom. Critically, we need to understand that recycling old explanations is ensuring that the sector is not developing but falling behind the rest of the United Kingdom, and that matters in terms of our creativity, but it also matters in terms of our economy. There is now a reasonable view that it is time that the cabinet secretary's recognition of a reasonable request needs to be answered. The committee report is thoughtful in its analysis and in its solutions. It is essential that those solutions are embraced rather than explained away. There are lots of things being done, but the fundamental issues that the sector asked to be sorted out two years ago and more and persistently and compellingly are still there. I believe that, if it were taken seriously in terms of its role in the economy, there would be far greater progress that there is now. Please support the recommendations of the committee and ensure that those who gave evidence to all of the inquiries that the Parliament has had can see the progress that they demand. All of us with an interest in Scottish history look forward to seeing outlaw king, which has been mentioned already a few times today. It is already, as we have heard, getting impressive early reviews for its portrayal of Scotland's wars of independence. Needless to say, having our stunning locations featured in screen productions like that increases our economic impact of those events and has an impact on tourism. Some of the locations featured in Outlander have seen visitor numbers increase significantly. Doon Castle, for instance, recorded an increase of 91 per cent since being featured in the series and Roslyn Chapel, which featured a similar effect after the wilder claims made about it in the Da Vinci Code. Total production spend on film and TV in Scotland has increased by more than 200 per cent since 2007. Outlaw king is the largest feature film to have been made in Scotland, with locations including Llyithgo Palace, Glasgow Cathedral, Glencoe and the Isle of Skye. The committee has welcomed all of this and the additional support from the Scottish Government. Another theme emerging from the committee report is the evidence provided that public sector broadcasters still do not commission enough content from Scottish companies. There is an emerging consensus that we need tougher off-com definitions of what qualifies as a Scottish programme and better monitoring to ensure compliance and a significantly greater proportion of the BBC licence fee raised in Scotland being spent here. On that theme, I more positively welcome the BBC's new Scotland TV channel. We must keep seeking assurances about its funding and its structure, particularly regarding the channel's commitment to drama, but it is undeniably a very positive step. The production growth fund, funded by the Scottish Government and the National Lottery, with an allocation of £3.25 million for the period to March 2018, has also made a contribution to the wider industry. The PGF provides a financial incentive to major international productions, based themselves in Scotland, as well as increasing funding available for Scottish-based producers to anchor more of their production work here. The fund is helping to create significant employment opportunities for Scottish-based crew and delivers a direct and significant economic benefit to the country. It would be remiss of me briefly not to mention the spectacular claim, which my constituency has as a film location. Some of the Hebrides' landscapes would not look out of place in Game of Thrones. We have, as is often overlooked, a feel that many of the state-of-the-art studio and sound stage facilities go with them. The development of BBC Alipa has also proved something interesting, which is that independent production companies can flourish in our island communities. Although perhaps allocation made more use of by television than by the big screen, the Hebrides probably did first come to the attention of feature film producers in 1949, with the much-loved whisky galore that was filmed in Barra and Erisgy, which introduced the culture and landscape of the islands to a wider world. It would be remiss of me not to mention at this point, in concluding fairly soon, that, although Brexit presently looms on the horizon as a figurative hazard to shipping, it is, however, hardly likely to excite the salvers in quite the way that the wreck of SS politician was able to do in the film. Fear over loss of funding from EU sources, hindrances to free movement of artists, performers and companies, rising costs and a damaging inward focus are the key concerns of the screen sector. However, putting all those questions to that side for the moment, the report that we are debating today demonstrates the huge contribution that the screen industry makes to Scotland's cultural and economic life, and I am sure that it will do even more so in the future. Decade Scotland has provided a spectacular backdrop for the screen sector, which is the reach that spans the globe. We have punched above our weight internationally, although films and television have grown to form a major part of our domestic culture. The screen sector has also supported other parts of our wider cultural offering. Scottish literature has often reached further and to wider audiences through film. Our history has been translated across borders, and the benefits to our heritage sector are clear. Across the UK, we have seen a resurgence in our film and television industries. Earlier this month, the British Film Institute's report showed the importance of tax release introduced in 2013 in powering the growth of the UK film sector. It has created thousands of jobs and contributed to our economic growth. Here in Scotland, we can consider the successes. Only last night, World War Z was on television with Glasgow playing a part as an American city. A number of productions are now set and filmed in my region, the Highlands and Islands, including, of course, as Tavish Scott mentioned, the extremely popular Shetland series on the BBC. Tavish Scott asked what will happen next. In Shetland, I imagine that probably a spin-off with Orkney would be a good one. Opportunities are still being missed. Productions that are set in Scotland or written here in Scotland are being filmed elsewhere. We have one of the biggest and best screen sets anywhere in the world, our country, but we also have for far too long spoken about studio capacity in Scotland. We know that it is a problem and now it is time for action. The report describes it as urgent, and if we are to invest in the infrastructure for our screen sector, that is not an understatement. Another area that the report touched on is the development of the skills relevant to this sector of our creative industry. It is disappointing, however, that the recent statistics from the Scottish Government showed only nine starts in creative and cultural apprenticeships in the first quarter of this year. That is compared with 62 in the same quarter last year. The apprenticeship route into the cultural sector must not be underestimated or overlooked. If we want to see growth that brings benefits to Scotland, we must build the skills required and have a workforce ready to meet the demand. This is a sector that should be dynamic and inspiring, one that young people want to get involved with, yet we are struggling to bring a new entrance via this route. Why is that? The committee heard that the sector is difficult to access, that there is little awareness amongst young people of the career routes that are available into it, and that there are a number of other hurdles, such as the lack of distinctive Scottish qualification structures, available. As the committee recommends, there needs to be a clear skills plan for the future, one built by the industry, but with the support of the Government. That will be a vital step and one that should be first championed, second implemented and third supported. Scotland has an uncommonly strong cultural base on which to build its green sector. We have a resource that is, if not untapped, certainly underutilised. We have a number of annual film festivals here in Scotland. We have one of the world's largest cultural festivals on our doorstep. We have access to world-leading cultural organisations and the ability to communicate our ambition to the world. I cannot do justice to the report in my allotted time, and I appreciate that there are a number of areas that I have not spoken about. The interaction of public bodies is certainly important, as well as considering how they work collaboratively alongside the priorities of the industry. The report also acknowledged our domestic audience and the importance of streaming services and superfast broadband access, particularly in regions such as mine. There is also a balance to be found between promoting inward investment and building up a truly domestic presence for the green sector and ensuring that the support is in place for aspiring enterprises to grow and expand. However, I will conclude simply by welcoming the contribution and the work of the committee and by commending its recommendations. Thank you. Can I call Stuart McMillan to be followed by Gillian Martin. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Presiding Officer, I am delighted to be speaking in this committee debate as one of the members of the committee. It certainly was both a pleasure but also informative to actually take part in this inquiry. I am pleased with the report and the work that I actually went into it, and I believe that the report can help to shape a growing sector in the years to come. At the outset of the inquiry, we heard from Tommy Gormley on 8 February. Mr Gormley is from the west of Scotland and he is also a first assistant director. He provided hugely beneficial evidence, and for me it was actually some of the most powerful evidence that I have heard in my time in Parliament. I may not necessarily have agreed with everything that he said on the record, but he stated that, furthermore, on the larger issue of Scotland's image, how Scotland is seen in the world is directly linked to our participation in the media world, and that will affect how Scotland performs in all sorts of ways. After I asked him a question about training and future opportunities, he answered it by saying that there was no structure for training when I started. I am thankful that there is a structure. Now, it is vital. Things are much better than they used to be with genuine skills training programmes in place with various agencies. That sounds a bit like common sense. It also sounds as if progress has been made, and thankfully, progress has been made in the sector over the years. It has been slow progress in the past. Our graphic on page 10 of the committee report provides that justification in the frustration that many people in the sector and industry have felt about it. It also highlights Rachel Hamilton's comments on trying to blame the Scottish Government for everything, but much of that predates the SNP Government and the establishment of the Parliament. Clearly, there has been a wide variety of activity since 2010. There remains the outstanding issue of the film studio, which others have touched on already today. I have raised the issue in Parliament before, but I also have a genuine belief that my constituency would be a perfect location for any type of studio. If the Lothians do not want it, Mr Wightman, then certainly Inverclyde does. Whether it is the former IBM site, at Spangol Valley or the former power station site at Invercip, both would lead to the creation of an awful and adaptable film studio or scale that could deliver the gap in the key infrastructure that is so necessary to be delivered. The location is perfect with Glasgow International Airport merely 35 minutes away. The transport links to Glasgow are excellent, and we are also at the gateway to Argyll and Burns Country just south of us. Inverclyde has a history of programmes and filming. Recently, we had the adaptation of Agatha Christie's audio-benicence that was filmed at the Argyll i Ni Stade in Invercip. Parts of Inverclyde are regularly portrayed as being part of Shetland, which Mr Scott and I have discussed in the past. Mr Gormley told me something that day. He put it in a very frank manner. He said that he thinks of the film industry just as a shipbuilding industry. Instead of launching a ship, he will launch a film, as well as the actors and camera crew who need to join us, the painters, the electricians, the accountants and many other skills. I know that Inverclyde can launch both ships but also films. I believe that, with the growing film sector and the opportunities in the country, Inverclyde can offer part of the infrastructure gap by being the location for a much-needed studio. I call Gillian Martin before we move to closing speeches. In addition to my roles in MSP, the hat that I'm wearing is of a further and higher education former, further and higher education lecturer of 13 years in the creative industries. My colleagues know that I taught television and film production, as well as running my own production company. Previously, that will be a long time ago, I was a film and television studies undergraduate. As a result of that background, I have a few niggles about our screen sector reaching its potential. Chief among them is the lack of opportunities for students and graduates in Scotland in the creative industries disciplines to access financially supported experience opportunities in their own country. I appreciate that the committee's report had a much broader focus on that, but given it's the year of young people, I thought that I would hone in on this aspect of the benefit to Scotland in terms of the young people. It's but long been my plea that we should always consider opportunities for young talent, particularly whenever support decisions are made and funding is given. Of course, we'd like all production companies to start valuing young people regardless of whether they access public funding or not. I call in the screening industry as a whole to rid their sector of opportunities that only wealthy individuals can access. Given the levers that are available to this place, I would like to see a commitment made to give financially supported work experience and internships to college or university film and television students whenever support is given from the Government-funded agencies. You will note that I say financially supported. The creative industries are, quite frankly, one of the worst sectors in terms of expecting young people to give their labour and time for free and often at their own expense. I would say that at very least travel and subsistence overheads should always be met by the company. Yes, working for a production company will look good in your CV, and yes, it may lead to other opportunities, but I am tired of both those phrases being used as a justification for not offering financial support of any kind to young people. Those well-worn phrases, which anyone working in the creative industries will have heard many times, automatically exclude students from lower-income families from accessing the types of opportunities that could take them out of poverty. I note that some intern opportunities are given in lieu of credits for coursework and that many further education institutions assist with overheads incurred by students, but still there are many production companies who routinely contact colleges, offering work experience that is often just free labour, with little in the way of training, mentorship and certainly without financial assistance. If any of my former colleagues are listening to me, they will be rolling their eyes because I was banging on about that for 13 years. In the same way that Creative Scotland is required to commit to a percentage of Scottish spend, I would like to see a commitment to ending unpaid internships in the sector and, more importantly, a commitment made to include at least one paid internship with production companies accessing funding, preferably from the local area in which the filming is taking place to allow a geographical spread opportunity across Scotland. The benefits of doing that are multiple to this country. Most importantly, we give access to opportunities to all our talented young people, regardless of income, geographical location and social background, but we also underpin youth opportunity as a condition of all our endeavours in promoting and cultivating a Scottish screen sector. Imagine the impact of a Scottish student if visiting foreign productions were obliged to take on a local student during production as part of any deal. The local knowledge of the student could enhance the visiting production teams visit and the connections made could be life changing for the young person. Most importantly, that is an investment in our homegrown industry and our talent base. I hugely welcome the recent announcement of a tighter collaboration between the enterprise agencies in Creative Scotland and the national film school location announcement and, of course, the amount of funding that we put into our homegrown industry. However, my hope is that young people across Scotland from all backgrounds will benefit from that funding, not just in the year of young people, but for years to come. Let us be a leader in that respect. There has been a significant theme of consensus across today's debate around the opportunity that the screen sector and creative industries offer to Scotland. Everyone has made it very clear that we have always believed that Scotland has the talent and the locations to take those opportunities. A number of speakers have explained quite well why those opportunities are particularly important just at the moment. George Adam with his refrain content is king, where he took us on a run round of new platforms in which he and others consume that content. The committee has, of course, Ian Smith from the British Film Council, who says that Netflix is just the beginning. Beyond it, there are big companies coming in. Fast, Amazon, Apple, Google, Hulu and beyond all of those is Disney. We are agreed that there is a real opportunity. The cabinet secretary talked about the shared ambition for our screen sector, and I think that that has been the major theme of today's debate. Perhaps not across the whole chamber, but across most of the chamber, there is a consensus that we have failed. We have failed to grasp the opportunities in recent years that the sector has allowed. Mr MacDonald was clear that we and he have been here many times before, but we have not progressed. We have seen the opportunity, talked about what we have to do to seize it, but failed to seize it. We have missed many boats. We have heard mention of Braveheart, made in Ireland rather than Scotland. Outlander, filmed here but completed elsewhere. Infinity War is exactly the same. Indeed, Tommy Gormley, the director, told the committee, we have not just missed the boat in this country, we have missed an entire fleet. There has been a cataclysmic failure at every level to deliver, he calls it a disgrace. Others have moved forward, and this has been mentioned in the debate. Northern Ireland with several studios, Wales more than one, Bristol, Birmingham coming forward now as well. Joanne Lamont called this an embarrassment. Ian Smith told the committee that if I look at a map of the United Kingdom to my huge frustration, I have to say that Scotland is underperforming compared with other nations such as Northern Ireland and Wales. Scotland used to be the second production cluster in the UK, now it is fourth or fifth after Wales, Cardiff and Bristol. If we ask ourselves why that has happened, perhaps the fact that the cabinet secretary simply refused to accept that we have fallen behind other parts of the United Kingdom is part of the problem, complacency and a lack of leadership in recent years, which brings us, of course, to one of the other themes of today's debate. That is the need for an independent agency fully empowered to seize those opportunities. The committee was certainly convinced of that, and I do not think that the cabinet secretary today explained why the Government believed that that view is wrong. The other symbol of failure, which many speakers have referred to, is the lack of a studio facility. Andy Wightman talked about the Pentland proposal and the problems into which that has now run. I thought that Stuart McMillan made an important point. The studio does not have to be in Pentland. There are lots of places in Scotland that could provide the kind of facilities that we are looking for. He made the cases that he would for Inverclyde. I have to tell you that immediately on the news of the court decision around Pentland, some of my constituents in East Lothian have formed a campaign to bring the film studio to Cackenzie and the local councillor looking at other sites within East Lothian or across East and Mid Lothian, which would be suitable. It is very difficult to see why we have failed to move forward on that. I have to be honest and say that there is rather cryptic promise from the cabinet secretary today. It does not really give us much hope of moving forward. The final thing that I want to refer to very briefly was the theme of Gillian Martin's speech. That is the importance of providing opportunity for talent and ensuring that opportunity is open not only to those who already know people or have family who are already in the business or have the capacity to work for free as an intern. We need to create a skill strategy that is for the many rather than simply for the few. The report is an important one. What we need to see is delivery this time rather than simply acknowledgement of the opportunity. Jamie Greene went up for the Conservative Party. I am always tempted to say that we need a screen sector that works for everyone, but I will not resist. I was asked for 15 years what he did for a living. I used to say that I work in TV. The first thing that people say to me is that he is old, he works for the BBC. I would face that question about eight times a week. My career in the screen sector is an interesting one. I started off as a runner, as Gillian Martin alluded to. Unpaid for the majority of the first couple of years is trying to make your way in an expensive city as making tea for annoyed producers and angry directors. I worked my way through the production sector. Before I joined the Parliament, just two and a bit years ago, I was head of sales for a technology company delivering on-demand content technology to telcos and triple and quad play operators. I am glad that Stuart Stevenson is not here today to tell us all about that. My journey has been an interesting one. My interest in this, although I am new to the committee, is very personal, very vested and absolutely unambiguous. However, my career in television was only possible by heading to the bright lights of the city such as London, Manchester and Birmingham. Unfortunately, when I was 21, there were no opportunities in Scotland and the opportunities that were here were quite limited in terms of the scale and range of domestic production that existed. I had really no choice, like many others, as we saw opportunities where it existed. The question is, is 15 years on, has the situation got any better? Technology has changed so much beyond recognition in that short period of time. The screen sector is now so diverse from those days. It is so digital compared to how it was. Although I have only been on the committee a few months, I found it eye-watering whilst producing the report. The screen sector in Scotland faces significant challenges, I think, as the convener outlined in her opening statement. There is potential. It is not doom and gloom. There is great work going on. Anyone who is commuting through Glasgow today will know that much of the city centre is closed for the Fast and Furious franchise, which is shooting in the city centre. We know about the successes of Outlander, we know about the new channel that the BBC is launching and we know about Channel 4's bid potential for a new headquarters here. Goodness, we may even have a Scottish James Bond at some point, who knows. There is a lot to be positive about, but the report is unequivocally contained with problems in the sector that have been addressed and alluded to so many times in previous parliaments. It saddens me in a way that, in this very short debate, we are having, we are going over so much old ground. The studio space issue is the eternal thorn in our side. My colleague Rachael Hamilton and I were sitting throughout this debate, hoping that the cabinet secretary is going to stand up and make a grand announcement about studio space and our closing statement. If it does not occur today, it needs to happen soon. We cannot read about vague comments in the news that there might have been an announcement by the new agency at some point before Christmas. This was talked about years ago, way before my time in this Parliament. In 2015, there was a proposition and a tender went out for a public-private proposition. If there is space and it can be found and there is buy-in—genuine buy-in, financial buy-in from the private sector, I really do hope that we will see some results quickly. I am glad that Stuart McMillan mentioned some of the evidence that we took from Tommy Gormley. As the witness said, there was a cataclysmic failure at every level to deliver. He is not the only one. We have heard other evidence. A producer Ian Smith, who is another Hollywood producer, said, I have been on two of these Parliament committees with MSPs. They all seem positive at the time, but nothing transpires, and I do not quite know why. I was in the screen sector for a decade longer than I have been in politics, so I share the frustration as to why yet another damning report has come out of yet another Hollywood committee. It would be a complete failure of Government and this Parliament if we are sitting here in another couple of years' time lamenting the same lack of progress. That is not talking the screen sector down. That is because we are listening to the screen sector and what it has to say, so we really need to see some progress. Unfortunately, we have not got a huge amount of time today to go through some of the recommendations, but I would like to recap in a minute the main ones that I think we need to be looking at. The new agency really must have true autonomy. It really must be able to deliver on its budget effectively and not be held back by some of the complicated processes and agencies that it works with. It really must be able to deliver to productions, not just to big-ticket items but to small-scale productions as well. Individual producers, people with ideas and concepts need to be able to come to this agency and get genuine help and assistance where it is needed. The executive director must focus on screening and not be distracted by other forms of the creative arts, and we really need to see this as a journey towards a stand-alone agency. The committee was really clear on this. The industry itself was really clear on this. I, for one, cannot understand why the cabinet secretary does not agree. If she can explain otherwise, I would be happy to hear it. We really need to get on with this. The Scottish screen sector is exciting, and it is important, but I do not want to have this conversation in another couple of years as to why we have let the Scottish screen sector down. It is not good enough, and we must do better. Thank you very much. I called the cabinet secretary to wind up for the Government. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I began my contribution to this debate, setting out the successes of our screen sector and reporting on the demonstrable progress that we have made to provide effective public sector sport. The points raised in my opening remarks and the MOUs have been agreed amongst partners. They have got a new approach to general business development, two programmes of specialist business support, Screen Scotland partners, and the in-depth skills review called upon. Work on increasing studio facilities are well under way. That is demonstrable progress, and, indeed, we should reflect on the progress that we have made. The debate has underlined just how great the opportunity is. It has shown enthusiasm, but, of course, it has shown frustration as well. The effect that funding for screen can have on economic spend, but also in our confidence, our reputation as a creative country and our international reach in attracting tourism cannot be underestimated. However, we are achieving, and our sector is achieving, and we must underline that. Gillian Martin made an important point about traineeships. The funding for outlaw king includes support for 30 trainees, and I met some of them on set by Craig Milokasol. I think that Jamie Halcro Johnston also mentioned issues around screen. Yes, I share ambitions. I want us to move faster, and I understand the frustrations around some of those issues, particularly about the studio issue. It is still important to recognise how far we have come. To give you some perspective, I remind you that, 10 years ago, the equivalent public spending for screen unit was just £3 million for Scottish screen, and that is about a sixth of what we have committed this year. Our total investment is more than other nations, such as Denmark, Ireland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is almost like a comparator with England. I am also encouraged by the progress that has been made by Screen Scotland and how the pace is picking up under the new executive director, with a clear commitment to strong working partnerships now in place and support on business development, skills and forging the strategic partnerships with broadcasters moving ahead at pace. Many of you, and I think that this is quarter, the report itself, have called for the immediate establishment of a stand-alone agency. I am not persuaded that that is the imperative action and parent priority at this time. Screen Scotland today has all the tools and resources that it requires to lead, support and promote our film and television sector. No, I have already taken intervention from you. I am very limited in time. There is no doubt that we can draw on the new expertise that we have added to Creative Scotland, with David Strachan, Elizabeth Perticka and Ewan Angus as new board members, bringing their records and their strength in guiding the Screen Scotland, and new arrangements for the Screen and the sector leadership group to have a strong voice with the executive. That collaboration of industry and agency will bring renewed vigor to public sector support. The new website, the portal, the visible focal point for seeking support that was recommended in the report has already been delivered. A suite of funding opportunities are there to be accessed. It will be premature to do renal the effort that has been established over recent months by focusing on a stand-alone agency at this time. Equally, the time and effort involved in creating a new agency will divert us from the most important task that is nurturing and growing our screen sector. The last Labour-Lib Dem Scottish Executive bears significant responsibility for the original merger of the Scottish Arts Council and Scottish Screening. A lot of the debate has focused on representations for a new purpose-built studio in Scotland. We support the wish for more infrastructure and work is clearly under way to provide that. Creative Scotland has developed a business case for additional studio facilities and plans to launch a tender shortly for a studio operator with public sector backing. There are success stories undoubtedly with private sector-led consortium and initiatives in other countries and other parts of the United Kingdom and also by-city organisations, but there are also instances in which projects have gone less well, including where they have received public sector backing, and there can be the potential for legal challenge on state aid if the Government itself leads it. Northern Ireland and Wales have used available vacant publicly owned property for some of their studio space—not least, of course, the shipyards in the Titanic—and other public sector investors have brought together consortium to enable purchase of private property for development. We must not forget that, in Ward Park, we have a permanent, successful working studio—the highly popular outlander, which is obviously filmed for series. In addition, Screen Scotland currently markets 136,000 square feet of stage space and 335,000 square feet of built space. I visited Pathgate Pyramids, where Trainspotting 2 was filmed, and Livingston Studio, where Churchill was based. We continue to welcome private sector initiatives for studios. I cannot say much about the Peltons case, but it is a potential legal appeal. Obviously, we also understand that the guardhouse interests remain alive. That has been a fantastic year for Screen. We have started to see in our screens and our homes just what our industry can produce when the right support and right circumstances come together. With that dedicated expertise of the recently and newly established Screen Scotland, now in place, with generous funding, planning for increased skills and business development support, I am excited and optimistic about the future of our film and television industry. That has been an interesting brief debate with many insightful contributions. Our committee's report is the second major report from the Parliament. It is frustrating that MSPs who worked on the 2015 report find themselves commenting on the same issues that the sector is holding them back. The sector has grown in recent years and Scotland is increasingly chosen as a fantastic location, and members have highlighted our successes. However, we are in danger of missing a huge opportunity. It is clear that if the sector is to meet its full potential and brings Scotland the cultural, the economic and social benefits that will come with that, the Government, Creative Scotland and the new screen unit and all its partners need to provide greater focus and ambition. We welcome the establishment of Screen Scotland and wish it every success, but in our report we have made clear that we believe that it needs to be empowered to do so. Our witnesses expressed a degree of frustration around engagement with public agencies, with too much bureaucracy and too slow decision making being a feature. As other members have highlighted, we continue to have concerns over fragmented approach and over the bureaucratic governance arrangements. Having seen the success of the model in Northern Ireland and recognising the increasing global demand for content, the landscape has changed since the establishment of Creative Scotland, and we believe that Scotland should have an agency independent of any master. It is concerning that there is no commitment that the Executive Director for Screen Scotland will continue to have a sole focus on screen, the business plan is still not finalised and we continue to have concerns that partner agencies do not fully understand the needs and diversity of the sector, principally Scottish Enterprise. We do not wish to hamper the work of the screen sector, but we will closely monitor their progress and expect to see a strong, empowered and ambitious agency, but we remain to be convinced that the current arrangements will facilitate that to the extent that it needs to be. Members have emphasised the importance of a purpose-built film and TV studio. Notwithstanding the development award park, which is exclusive to Outlander, Scotland needs a flexible, fully-equipped space that is able to attract international business, as well as offer facilities for indigenous productions and support the sector to grow. The importance of a fully-equipped studio facilities cannot be emphasised enough by witnesses. There was frustration at the lack of progress in Scotland. This is not a new issue, but the Scottish Government in May 2013 said that active discussions were underway with an announcement expected soon. In 2015, statements were made about further discussions and in 2016 an announcement was imminent, but so far nothing has come to fruition. Then, at the weekend, there was an exclusive news story that an announcement was any day now. It is perhaps a surprise that this has been greeted with a degree of scepticism. The committee supports the efforts of Screen Scotland and the Scottish Government in reaching a positive decision. We did however find it frustrating that the barriers identified by the Scottish Government in evidence—stated rules, the lack of suitable and available buildings, the lack of private sector investment—did not seem to have hampered Manchester, Belfast, Cardiff and the recently announced Birmingham complex and making studios a reality. MSPs have also made good points around public sector broadcasting and the need for robust off-com guidance. There is much expectations for the new screen unit. For Scotland to have a vibrant, growing and ambitious sector, the screen unit has an important role in supporting providing the building blocks, supporting the development of new ideas and intellectual property, supporting clear pathways and skills and training into the industry, maximising the wider benefits for the sector that international investment can bring through frair criteria in return for public sector investment. We all want to see the sector doing well. That is a tall order for any organisation, but we need to get serious about delivery. Part of Screen Scotland's remit is overseeing skills development. In closing, I want to highlight recent figures from BAFTA. As the nominations were announced for the Scottish BAFTA a couple of weeks ago, Jude McLafferty, director of BAFTA, drew attention to the lack of women shortlisted in major categories, including directing and writing. That is not uncommon at award ceremonies. Who is calling the shots? A report on gender inequality from directors UK focuses on women directors in UK television and shows that the gender gap is widening. Gillian Martin made good points on opportunity and exploitation in the sector. During the summer, I visited Screen Education Edinburgh after being impressed by the reverence to the inquiry. Working with disadvantaged communities, they work to nurture talent and creativity and raise attainment and aspirations among young people, as well as adult learners. They provide a pathway into the sector for people who might otherwise be excluded. Screen Scotland has a role to play here, along with Skills Development Scotland. The new Screen sector skills strategy for Scotland needs to have increasing diversity in the workforce as part of its outcomes. To achieve that, we need targeted pro-active provision, which opens up opportunities in the sector and employees so that all of Scotland's talent can grow and contribute to the huge benefits that an active Screen sector can build to Scotland's economy and its creative and social cultural life. Thank you very much. That concludes our debate on behalf of the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Affairs Committee. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 1-4421, in the name of Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a revised business programme. Any member wishes to speak against the motion? No one does. I could ask Graeme Dey to move the motion. I move, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much. The question is that motion 1-4421 be agreed. Are we agreed? We are agreed. I will turn to decision time, and there is only one question today. The question is that motion 1-4400, in the name of Joan McAlpine, on making Scotland a screen leader, a report examining the Scottish screen sector, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed, and that concludes decision time. We will move on to members' business, in the name of Jenny Gilruth. We will just take a few moments for members and ministers to change seats.