 I want to say good morning. Welcome to the third meeting in 2015 of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee. I welcome all members and our witnesses who I'll come to in a second. I welcome visitors joining us in the gallery. I remind everyone please to turn off or at least turn to silent all mobile phones and other electronic devices so that they don't interfere with the sound equipment. On the agenda is in relation to witness expenses and I would ask if the committee are happy to delegate to the convener responsibility for arranging for the SPCB to pay under rule 12.4.3 any expenses of witnesses in the inquiry. I agreed. Thank you. I agree. Item 2 on the agenda, the committee is happy to take item 4 which is a review of evidence in private and whether to review the evidence that is heard at future meetings and draft reports in private. Is that agreed? That's great. Thank you very much. Item 3 on the agenda. We now move to continuation of our evidence-taking on our inquiry into the economic impact of the creative industries. I would like to welcome our panel today. We are joined starting on the left-hand side by Janet Archer and Natalie Usher, Janet, chief executive and Natalie, director of film and media at Creative Scotland. Welcome. David Smith, director of creative industries and Scottish Enterprise. Welcome. Charlotte Wright, director of business and sector development, Highlands and Islands Enterprise. Welcome to you all. We have about 90 minutes for this session and that time will disappear very quickly, I am sure. I remind members if they can to keep their questions as short and to the point and answers as short to the point would be very helpful in getting through the topics in the time available. I would ask members if they would, given that we have a panel of four people initially to direct questions to one member of the panel and then if other members of the panel wish to respond to a question addressed to someone else, if you just catch my eye I will do my best to bring you in as time allows. That way I hope we'll get through the topics in the time available to us. There are three broad areas that we want to cover, one is around computer games, one is around film and one is around TV, although of course there will be quite a lot of crossover between the three subject areas. I don't know if you've had an opportunity to review the evidence that we've heard previously as a committee. We had some written evidence and we've taken evidence for the last two weeks, first of all, from the game sector and then last week from film and TV. I think it's only fair to you to put to you some of the points that have been raised with us. I'm just going to read out a few quotes if I can. In terms of the written submissions, we heard from TRC media about the absence of a single leadership role in the public sector for the sector. Tiernan Kelly of Film City Glasgow said that the relationship between Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise needs immediate attention. Metaphorically, it is a failing marriage. David Griffiths, who is an independent feature film producer, said that Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland have not worked well together. Cameron Fraser of Colick Film talked about systemic neglect and the complete absence of vision from public funders. That was just the written evidence last week that we heard from Jane Muirhead from the Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television, who said that the independent television sector in Scotland feels we fall between Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise and that no one takes ownership of our sector. John Archer, who is from the independent producer Scotland, said that it's a great shame that Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland cannot work together. That's a fairly damning set of criticisms of the work that you are doing. Maybe I could start with David Smith from Scottish Enterprise. Why are you getting this so wrong? Well, we are aware of some of the views that are expressed, convener. However, based on our experience and based on the evidence that we have, we believe that there is a great deal of appreciation for the work that we and Creative Scotland and others do in the creative industries. Overall, creative industries are thriving and growing here in Scotland. I know that you've heard this before, particularly in the first panel session on games, but I think that it bears repeating to you the top global-selling games. Garnt Theft Auto 5 produced by Rockstar North and Minecraft produced by 4J Studios are both produced here in Scotland. Collectively, we see enormous growth potential across the creative industries and we are very clear on the respective contributions and roles that we play in supporting businesses and creative organisations to seize the opportunities. So all the people who are telling us that there is a lack of leadership will have to focus, they are just wrong? I think that we can point to the fact that we work in partnership across the organisations, particularly under the chair of Janet Archer here and the Scottish Creative Industries partnership. We work across all levels of our organisations. I work directly with Janet Archer and Natalie on a great deal of points around policy and strategy. We work together in the broadcast and TV working group and we all work collectively in support of the work of the industry body, the digital media industry leadership group. I think that it's really important that we get across, that we share a collective passion that creative industries have tremendous growth opportunities. We work, as I said earlier, on a great deal and we undertake complementary activity but we often collaborate, we have done, from the early stages of the formation of Creative Scotland. We work together to launch in partnership with Channel 4, the digital media IP fund. That was a £3 million co-investment fund that invested in companies like TAG Games and Dynamo Games. I think that really importantly we have worked together and we have worked with TRC Media in delivering the creative edge project, which is very much seeking to invest in and develop the next generation of business leaders and innovators across all parts of the creative industries. As I mentioned earlier, our experience and our evidence points to a great deal of effective partnership working between ourselves and Creative Scotland. It's clearly some problem, Mr Smith. If the story is as good as you say it is, you're not getting that message across to people in the sector who told us last week that they feel that there's a complete lack of leadership. Our experience is that there's a very wide appreciation across the creative industry sectors. We clearly have to continue to work as we have been doing with Creative Scotland in furthering our discussions with IPS and we'll continue to do that around the opportunities that we share and believe in, particularly with regard to the screen sectors, the TV and film sectors, but that's something that we'll commit to do and we'll continue to have conversations with IPS and the feelers in the industry. Okay, maybe I could bring Janet Archer in from Creative Scotland. In addition to the comments that I've already read out, we heard last week from Arabella Page Croft to the film producer in Scotland. I'm sure you know who was talking about her engagement with Creative Scotland. She told us that there had been 26 meetings between Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise. Nothing has happened for our sector, she told us. No intervention has been made to address the systemic market failure. We are pretty depressed and disillusioned. What's your response to that? Well, I'm going to be honest. I think Creative Scotland in its inception wasn't set up in the right way to be able to engage with other public bodies like Scottish Enterprise in an effective way. We've reorganised ourselves under my leadership in the last 18 months and we've now restructured our policy around arts screen creative industries. So a very specific focus in each area under a director. We're about to appoint a new director of creative industries. It's a joint appointment with the Scottish Funding Council that creates a bridge between education, innovation and industry and public provision and I think that will create a seed bed for a new way of working and we're very excited about that. We've fed that into Skip, which I chair, so that's the coordinating body for all the public bodies involved in the creative industries and Skip has refreshed its terms of reference over the last six months. It's entered into a new phase of working. We've been conducting some mapping across our agencies in terms of how we function and how our respective component parts of the jigsaw puzzle fit together and I'm confident that we're getting into a new way. In respect of film in relation to Creative Scotland's role, Natalie came into post less than six months ago in that time. She's produced a film strategy for us as an organisation and that's the foundation from which we're going to build in the future. Having said that, we have invested a significant amount of funding into film production in Scotland since we began so over the course of that time we've spent approximately 17 million pounds on film production for development production, talent development and tendence at international markets and festivals in respect of film. But 26 meetings with nothing happening, what on earth were you talking about? From our perspective things are happening. I'm going to pass over to my colleague Natalie Usher who can tell you a little bit more about that. Yes, so we with Scottish Enterprise have had a number of productive meetings over the recent months with members of the IPS and we are working with them to help support their specific sector needs particularly in respect of business support which is where producers in Scotland, independent producers in Scotland really face challenges. We recognise them, we identified them, acknowledged them in our film strategy published in October and we are working with them. Okay, I know that other members want to pursue some of these issues. I'm going to bring in Dennis Robertson first. Thank you convener. Really following on from the convener's point, if I can stay with Creative Scotland at the moment, part of your vision within your submission states clear and practical strategy in terms of working with the industry. It doesn't seem to be clear and the strategy doesn't seem to be working. I accept that six months into a post that it's still quite new however and I accept the fact that 18 months ago you're looking at changing direction because you accept that there were failures. However, we hear about this partnership and collaboration between Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland. If we look at creative industry partnership, where is this partnership and collaboration? It doesn't seem to be happening. If you've had 26 meetings, is it a question of, excuse me, Mr Smith, you're talking about the positivity and you've got evidence, but to me it sounds like there's an awful lot of navel gazing going on. So perhaps Creative Scotland, the partnership, collaboration, clear practical strategy, why is that not filtering down to the industry? We published our strategy in October. It was well received by the industry. It sets out clearly the areas of focus for us across the film industry, starting with film education, talent and skills development, development and production, inward investment, distribution, exhibition and audiences and under each of those heads we are focusing within the film team and working with our partners across where it's applicable in complementary terms with Scottish Enterprise or with other members of the sector. You're working with your partners. Who's taking the lead? One of the criticisms that was very, very eloquently articulated last week was nobody's taking the lead in this. You're having your meetings and you're talking about your strategy and you've set out a clear vision, but who's taking the lead? Who's actually engaging with the industry and saying, this is what we have, this is what we can do for you? It doesn't seem to be filtering down. That message is not clear. Creative Scotland is engaging with industry. We set out our vision, we set out our strategy and we're getting on with that job. The film team itself at Creative Scotland is working with producers, people in the distribution sector, we work with film education, in particular we're focusing on talent development, which alongside film production is an absolutely key part of the industry. Later today we're going to announce a key initiative, £450,000 invested through the Scottish Film Talent Network into a new short programme. That's the largest amount of money spent on new and emerging talent in the last six years. That's one of the first things that we can talk to in terms of investment and carrying out our strategy. The partnership, the collaborative aspect, you were basically, I think, within the submission from Scottish Enterprise suggesting that it's Creative Scotland that's taking the lead and you're there as a supporting role. Are you in the wings just waiting to see what you can do or are you being proactive? We're very much being proactive. We have contributed extensively to the film strategy for Scotland that Creative Scotland had produced. We're very supportive of their lead role with the screen industries here in Scotland and we're contributing in particular in relation to the opportunity to attract more investment into the production infrastructure here in Scotland and to work with the other enterprise agencies to support Creative Scotland's role in trying to secure more production investment for film in Scotland but also to build the capabilities of the companies that work in the film sector to tackle the various different opportunities, particularly international opportunities, that exist. How many more meetings is it going to take before the industry actually feel the benefit, Mr Smith? We'll continue to engage in the discussions with Creative Scotland and with IPS. We have a number of examples of the industry and companies with industry already getting the benefit of our support collective and individually. Scottish Enterprise has supported more than 100 companies in the screen sector, screen industries. We've undertaken a significant amount of internationalisation support for the TV and film sectors, helping them to tackle and access international markets. We did, in fact, work with IPS-3 co-operative development Scotland to help the producers to establish the consortium of the co-operative IPS 18 months ago, so I would point to that as a very specific outcome. How many more meetings is it going to take? We will continue to have regular meetings as we do as part of our business with IPS. We believe that we are making progress, as I pointed to some of the specific outcomes of the support that we provide through CDS, which led to the formal creation of the consortium of IPS co-operative. We are continuing to work with Creative Scotland to explore ways that we can help the industry, particularly the IPS organisation. If I can just move back to Creative Scotland for a second and maybe Jane, you could maybe answer this as being the chief executive. How many more meetings do you think that it's going to take before the industry feel that there's some benefit working towards what they're trying to and their aspirations? One more meeting. We've got a meeting in our schedule. So the magic number is 27. In the diary for myself to meet with Lena Wilson, I met with Lena Wilson before Christmas. We had a very positive discussion around film, and we both restated our commitments to film and between us making it work. We've now got a meeting scheduled for our new chair, Richard Finlay, who some of you will know has come from the television industry and the Scottish Enterprise's chair, so four-way meetings taking place very soon to discuss all of those issues. Actually, the industry is looking forward to it. Okay, thank you. I've got two more members who want to come in specifically on this point, start with Chick Brody and then Lewis, not Chick Brody, first of all. Yes, I wonder if I may ask—good morning, by the way—if I may ask Natalie, you said that you've just produced your October report. Why is it then that the Government is saying that the report is anticipated to be produced by February 2015 from Skip? The partners in Skip are currently working on and are mapping an impact strategy study that will inform the development of a creative industry strategy 2015-2017. That strategy will be published in February 2015. Which is it? October or February? They're different reports. We published Creative Scotland on screen, a strategy for film set within the screen sector. We published that in October. This is a separate report that Janet can talk about in terms of creative industries. It is. It's based on Creative Scotland's policy being framed around arts screen and creative industries as three interlocking elements of our work. We made a commitment to producing the film strategy as our first strategy under our 10-year plan because we believed that it was necessary because the really important needs within the film sector and its development. We are now looking at the creative industries in the broadest sense, so that's everything from design to architecture, music industry, gaming and film that sits within that, so three interlocking gears in terms of how we do things and see things that create the broader creative industries framework. In fact, we're calling it because we don't want it to be a glossy strategy that sits on a shelf. We want it to be a useful framework. We don't want to diminish some of the good things that have been happening when we talk about the gaming industry and also crafts. I just wonder, in terms of the creation of that strategy, I'll talk particularly about television for example, who have you consulted from within Indigenous independent TV or film production sectors? The film strategy came out of our film sector review. We consulted with everybody that we could across film in Scotland and beyond. I'm sorry, who did you consult in terms of experience within the Indigenous TV and film sector? We had a film sector review group, which had representatives from across the sector, so producers. We had a range of specialists across the film and broadcast within that mix. We have a relationship with SCOTUS, with STV and BBC, MG Alba, and we talk to them on a regular basis. We talk to the BBC both in Scotland and in London. Can I just ask to show that in the midst of that MG Alba has just been mentioned, how involved are HIE in all of the development of this strategy? Well, we will work with Creative Scotland in terms of the development of the strategy. Highlands and Islands Enterprise has also produced its own strategy for the creative industry in relief. Why are you producing an independent one, and yet we have a national strategy? Well, we have a strategy for what we want to do within the Highlands and Islands, that works within the overarching framework of national strategies. You mentioned MG Alba. We work closely in supporting the work of MG Alba and have developed the creative industry centre in Stonaway next to MG Alba, and that has created a cluster of small businesses that are benefiting very much from that synergy of being alongside MG Alba. I think you heard from the move on up about the Katie Morag story, which is a great story to exemplify how we have supported an individual business based on cromity and the filming of Katie Morag taking place in Stonaway, which has created significant jobs and also helped build the reputation of that part of the Scottish contribution towards TV. I will come back to another question. Thank you very much. I was struck by Janet Gartres' comments on the way in which Creative Scotland was initially set up and the way in which you have refocused that, because we heard last week from Ian Smith and also from Bob Last who were involved in the body that designed Creative Scotland and both of whom Ian Smith walked away, and Bob Last said that he had refused to sign up to the final report, because the word leadership had been removed from the final report. Is it your view that what was wrong with the initial setup of Creative Scotland was a lack of leadership, a lack of clear responsibility, a lack of ministerial engagement? What was it that needed to change from that initial flawed model in order to take forward the kind of strategy that you have described today? Part of the challenges—I think that I referenced this to Parliament in the past to a committee—was that, in the original setup of Creative Scotland, in the merging of two organisations, both of whom had very different systems and processes and cultures, not enough attention was paid to what I call housekeeping. The fundamentals of being able to make an organisation run effectively and smoothly in a proper way in terms of its duties as a public body. We have done a lot of work over the last year in sorting that, in terms of how we are visible in terms of our plan, how we are clear in terms of our funding and how we organise our people resource. Leadership plays into that, and what we have done is appointed a director of arts, a director of film, a director of creative industries. That gives us a much better locus in terms of being able to negotiate and generate the relationships that we need across the public and across the private sector to be able to create a strong foundation for development and growth. I think that we are now in a good, healthy, robust place to be able to achieve that. One of the things that was highlighted by some of our other witnesses last week was the sense that Scottish Screen, having come forward from a film perspective and now seeking to take forward a distinctive film strategy, was a bit of a sense from the television side that they were not at the top table in terms of your commitments as an agency. How would you respond to that? Do you feel that Creative Scotland recognises the distinct nature of television and the distinct opportunities that are there that are perhaps a little bit different from those around film? I think that we also feel quite strongly and know very strongly from our industry experience that the lines are shifting in terms of the distinctiveness of film broadcast and what happens in terms of digital platforms. I think industry is much more dexterous in terms of how it moves across different platforms and I think we need to understand that and take advantage of that. I think there's an opportunity for Scotland frankly in terms of taking a lead role in that because of the fact that we've got an agency that sits across arts, green creative industries, we're able to understand that multi-layered essence of where future opportunities might come through from in respect of digital innovation in a very powerful way and our creative industries framework centres on that. We've been talking about how we might apply ourselves to doing some really thorough research in that space and there's interest internationally in terms of the work that we're signaling we're going to do. It's a global discussion and it's one that we take very seriously indeed. That's very helpful. Can I ask David Smith and Charlotte Wright because this issue of leadership I think is one that's come up if you like across the board. Do you as enterprise agencies, you both have your distinct strategies for Scottish Enterprise, for hands around Enterprise, that's entirely appropriate. Do you regard Creative Scotland as the lead agency in this field and in other words when you're talking about company development, economic development, do you dovetail with what is being said about the creative opportunities by Creative Scotland or is there a lead agency in your view or is it a case of everyone mucking in together on the same basis? I'm happy to respond first. We believe very much that the overall lead role that Creative Scotland undertakes in co-ordinating the efforts of the public sector agencies and partners is very important and we're very supportive of the role that they undertake in that regard. I think that we would highlight the complementary strengths that we all bring to the party as it were. The focus that Creative Scotland currently has on supporting and driving forward cultural excellence across the creative industries, the work of the enterprise agencies in ensuring that we support businesses here in Scotland to take advantage of the many opportunities that Scotland has across the creative industries. Recognising the particular needs of the screen industries in particular, we're very supportive of Creative Scotland's lead role in the screen industries. We do not have a separate strategy to the point about strategy in relation to film because we feel the right approach here to contribute to and support the strategy that Creative Scotland has put in place. We're very clear on what our contribution is and what our role is in contributing to supporting the implementation of that strategy. I guess we're clear in terms of Highlands Islands Enterprise that our role is about supporting individual businesses through what we do in account management, about creating the right infrastructure to support the economy and the sectors, including creative industries, whether that's the creative industry centre in the stoneaway that I referenced or indeed our significant investment into the rollout of next generation broadband for the whole of the Highlands and Islands, which I think we would say is probably the game changer for the sector as a whole. In working with Creative Scotland, they are then able to help support and develop, for example, those venues through the things that they do in relation to the overall strategy, audience development, talent support and all of those other elements, which bring the complementarity into a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. That's helpful. Finally, we heard last week from John Archer in relation to ministerial engagement and he described, it felt like a major breakthrough to us, he said, when they were able to sit down and have a meeting jointly with the culture minister and the economy minister. Would any of the agencies like to comment on ministerial engagement and leadership in this area? Is it clear to you where ministerial leadership comes from and how is the case for film and television and the games industry? How is that case taken forward at the cabinet level? I hope that we have a very strong relationship with Ms Hyslop, who is very clear that she wants us to play a pivotal role in driving the agenda for film. Clearly, our remit spans, it's an interesting remit, because it spans the intrinsically valuable, the socially valuable and it also spans the commercial creative end of the spectrum. In that instance, that's where our relationship with the enterprise agents who sit and that's where our relationship with Mr Sweeney would sit too. From our perspective, it's important that we have a dialogue in both directions in respect of the work that we support. There are many examples of projects which start off in an arts space, perhaps might benefit from a wee bit of arts funding. J.K. Rowling is an example of that, which then goes on to become a multi-million pound entity in many different ways. So we have to understand the ecosystem collectively together. Creator Scotland has relationships with both ends of the spectrum and indeed with other government departments as well. Political leadership is really keen in respect of that. Again, we've got very good and strong relationships with Mr Sweeney and Ms Hyslop. We have excellent relationships with culture division officials, with officials in our sponsored division within the enterprise departments. We are very clear on the expectations that we have as an organisation, particularly to increase the support for internationalisation, to drive up innovation across the creative industries and across all areas of the economy and to support and increase the level of public and private sector investment that is going into supporting companies to grow in the creative industries and across the economy. To add to that, in terms of the breadth of activity that the enterprise agency carries out, the need to engage across portfolios is something that we do quite often, not only in relation to what we do in creative industries, for example, but looking at working with Mr Lockhead's portfolio across things like distilleries and agriculture and other sectors. So we see it very much as part of our role as driven by our engagement and strong relationship with Mr Sweeney and Mr Ewing, that there are parts of what we need to do to support the economy, which involves that wider engagement. John Lamont, do you have a follow-up question? When was the last time you met John Swinney and Fiona Hyslop together? Both of you. Independently, we met with... When did you jointly meet with the two ministers? I'm trying to recall the exact date. Have you got any plans to meet them in the near future, given what was said in committee last week, which was quite specific in expressing its concerns about the lack of joint leadership and joint working between Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland? Have you got anything in a diary to meet them? We don't have anything in a diary, but I think that given this discussion, it's almost certainly something that we've got. Maybe then, one of the things that was very strongly made last week was an argument for a task force, because this is not just a theoretical where our relationships are not very good. If you see the industry in Scotland dropping behind not second, possibly fourth, and I think one witness said possibly fifth, one example that gave was the delay on the film studio. In the Scottish Government's evidence, the Scottish Government in partnership with Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland is committed to taking whatever action is possible to provide support to Scotland's screen sector. That includes a rigorous and detailed approach to exploring any options that help to improve and enhance Scotland's offer in terms of studio facilities. The process involves assessing what private sector opportunities are available on a case-by-case basis and what, if any, public support might be required. Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise will make recommendations to the Scottish Minister and, of course, say that funding has to be in line with EU state rules. People see the issue of the film studio as a classic example of an indicator that you're getting an act together, that it's not just about theoretical partnership, but that there's something coming out. Can you tell me when that decision will be made? We've been working very hard together and regularly updating ministers, Ms Hyslop and Mr Swinney on progress. It's a complex and challenging project, as I'm sure you'll appreciate it, and we're taking it very careful and measured approach to ensure that we get the best possible outcome for Scotland in regard to the film studio project. It might be challenging and complex, but it's also urgent if one of the things that the sector is saying is that we need an indication of our ability to work together and practical outcomes to your collaboration that hasn't happened. You can't tell us even a shortlist or a date when you're going to be able to make a decision, and this is not for the committee. I think this is for the sector and for people who feel that decisions are now being made to create work in other parts of the United Kingdom and Scotland as losing out. I'm sure that we're putting every effort into progressing this opportunity. I think that we have received five proposals in response to the development brief that we issued last year. We're undertaking very careful analysis around those proposals, and we're currently in confidential negotiations with partners. You would accept that there's an urgency, not just in terms of creating a facility, but in signalling that you recognise the scale of the challenge that the industry has identified for you? There's absolutely every urgency and pace within our work, but we're also undertaking this project because of the complex and challenging needs of it. We're also adopting an approach here, which is to ensure that we do absolutely everything in the right approach, the right manner. We will take this forward with the level of scrutiny that's appropriate to this project, and we hope to secure a sustainable solution to the opportunity, one that offers the best return for the public person. I do regret that there's nothing more. Do you think that there should be a task force that might facilitate this? We already have a task force in place. We have a joint working group, which Janet, myself and representatives of the Scottish Government, the head of the Culture Division from the Scottish Government, participates in, and we regularly update Ms Hyslop and Mr Swinney on the progress that we're making. One last point with permission is that one of the arguments that were made last week was that this task force was to be broader than just a studio. It was to signal that there's a problem and that we want to really drive this. One point that was made repeatedly was that the remits of Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise are not complementary but contradictory. That is that the level of turnover that you have in order to access Scottish Enterprise support is not doable and it's in conflict. I can't remember the detail of what the Creative Scotland will probably read the evidence yourself. Do you have a view on that? Do you think that you're asking people to fulfil different criteria and therefore it's not possible for people to get the benefits from both organisations? My view is that it absolutely is possible when we are working in partnership to take a collective approach to addressing the opportunity. The film studio delivery group that has been set up and that we're working on is not only looking at the opportunity around the delivery of film, studio film, studio infrastructure but it's also looking very importantly at the need for us to continue to ensure that the incentives and the production finance support that we offer remains competitive and is going to ensure that if we can secure a studio solution that that studio solution will have every possible chance of succeeding and sustaining in the long term. I think that we would say that we're very comfortable with the way that we're working with Scottish Enterprise on the studio. It is a complex task. It's a project that has been on the table for many years, I think 20 to 30 years of the proposition. We ended the last discussion that we had, I think all agreeing that we were closer than we'd ever been before in respect to finding a solution. So we are determined to find a way through this. Creative Scotland has also been doing some detailed scrutiny in relation to the conditions that exist at present in relation of support to the film industry and looking at the data that has been coming in to the committee and the data that we're familiar with in terms of other nations and what they're able to offer. I think we feel that we are reasonably well, we stand reasonably well in comparison to other nations. Natalie can give you a bit more information on that but we do think there are gaps and we've identified some very specific gaps in terms of where we think additional support could be brought to bear in respect of resolving the problem. Questions on film specifically, which we'll just come to, but before I bring Joan in, can I just go back to one point? Mr Smith, you made about the task force. Who chairs this task force? The working group of the film studio is chaired by the Scottish Government. It was chaired by Aileen McLean initially and that's now been post on to Karen Watt. Thanks very much. There's obviously been quite a lot of talk about working groups and strategies and that sort of thing. The independent producer Scotland put a plan to you that would have allowed you to give them practical help in terms of your regular funding programme. They had put a plan together for shared services centre, which they had been working on with Mike Kelly, who is obviously a highly respected industry figure who works in London. That was rejected. Can you tell us why it was rejected? We're not in a position to go into the detail of specifically why any individual application to us was rejected because that would compromise the business interests of the applicant. It did not meet the criteria for our regular funded scheme and therefore we were not able to fund it through that route. What we've done since then is we've begun a conversation with IPS around how we might find an alternative solution to finding funding for elements of that proposition. We've had some discussion, we're in dialogue in respect of how we might achieve that. That's the specific business sector support that we're currently talking about. They've told me that you told them that there was too much money and that they had asked for a million, which is to cover three years for 40 companies. I don't think that that's very much money—a million for 40 companies over three years, given that you had 99 million to give out in that regular funding package. In the context of our very difficult decisions that we had to make in respect of regular funding, where we had more than twice the amount of ask for the available funding that we had, we were not able to fund that application. It didn't score as highly as other applications that we had at that point in time for that process, but we are looking at alternative ways in terms of what we might be able to do. This is what the industry is telling you. They need business support. When are you going to be able to respond to that practically, not with meetings and things like that, but actually with money? We want to get to a position where we agree that public resources should be best spent, because we want to be absolutely sure that the impact of any public investment is going to result in that game. That's an interesting point, because another point that the producers and developers have made is that you have spent some of your film budget on festivals and exhibitions. You encourage people to go and see films, but what is the point of that if we are not giving the filmmakers money to make films? We have done some scrutiny of data and looked at our investment in producers from Scotland comparatively to other nations. Natalie, I don't know whether you want to pull out the figure that you've been looking at in terms of how we stand in relation to particularly Ireland. Just picking up on your point, Joan. Our Film Intelligence Production Fund covers development, production, attendance at markets and festivals. That produces going to those markets and festivals for their own opportunities to create relationships, new partnerships, co-production relationships and also to promote their films, make contacts with sales agents and so on. That comes from the production fund. There is other wider support that we give for example to Glasgow Film Festival or Edinburgh International Film Festival that comes within our regular funding. They are slightly different areas of funding. Does it concern you that so many people in the industry do not have any confidence in you to deliver for them? We are talking about 40 members of the producers association going from small businesses to some of the most successful filmmakers, such as Black Camel. Are you not concerned that they feel that you are not listening to them and that you are not delivering for them? Certainly in the film strategy that was published in October, we acknowledge that there are challenges for producers and we are working with them, specifically as a result of the application to regular funding. As Janet said, looking at working on a plan, how we can fund it in order to help with the specific business support needs for the production sector. Separately, we work across, as I said before, film education, talent and skills development, which is incredibly important in order to develop the talent that are going to be the ones making the next films. We invest £4 million a year in development, production and talent development and attendance and markets and festivals. We also work on distribution, exhibition and audiences, and that does not fall within the production fund itself. One of our roles is about selling Scotland to the world. It is about bringing productions to Scotland. Our location service, which is a fantastic service, receives huge numbers of inquiries from large-scale, high-profile productions. There was a peak in 2012, which was when the high-end TV tax credit was brought in. That means that the whole of the UK has got the tax credit. We, as a nation, have got what everybody else has got. We have got the fantastic locations and we have also got a really fantastic pool of crew. What we do not necessarily have is what Northern Ireland and Wales have got—this is what people talk about—because we cannot offer an additional award of funding to productions to encourage them to come here to spend their money here. Northern Ireland has got £3.2 million a year for large-scale productions. The calculations that they do on that spend—for every pound of that £3.2 million that they work for, that is for about two projects a year, they reckon on getting £10 back into their economy. That is the sort of thing that Scotland needs in addition to what we have already got. In spite of not having a studio and that additional fund, we have had some successes. We have had Skyfall filming part of their production here. We have had Fast and Furious 6. We have had Dark Knight Rises. We have had some really, really great successes for Scotland, but what we need to be able to do is to offer some funding, which is going to mean that we can compete with others. That is great. My line of questioning is really more about the lack of support for producers who are based here in Scotland. When we had Scottish Screen, most of the countries that do better than Scotland to have their own screen agency, there is a strong feeling in the industry that we have lost out by not having Scottish Screen. One example that was given to me when I was chatting to the film producers was that in the big festivals that you talk about, the money that you spend going to festivals, when we had Scottish Screen, they were very practical in linking up our developers with the people who could help them, who could co-produce. You do not do that. You have a party in Cannes. They said that it is absolutely hopeless. You do not do that linkage because you do not have the expertise to do it, which I found quite shocking. It is just because you do not have what Scottish Screen has. I wonder if you could counter that criticism. At the major festivals, Toronto, Cannes and Berlin, Scotland comes under the umbrella of the UK Film Centre. What that offers is a place for producers to go, IT facilities, places to have their meetings. That is a focus for them. We also make sure that what we are doing is encouraging producers to meet their networking sessions. There are all sorts of other things that are offered at those opportunities for producers. Equally, we also run the market leaders programme. It is about £100,000 that we invest in that each year, specifically to take producers to markets and festivals, to introduce them to sales agents for exactly what you have described. We run those programmes. The feedback that we are getting is not working for them. It is not your decision to make, but would you not agree that Scotland needs its own screen agency? It would be more effective if Scotland has its own screen agency, like these other countries. Cotys Scotland has got a team of 11 people, including me, working in the film team. They are a fantastic, knowledgeable and extremely experienced group of people. I have every confidence in them. I am very happy to be working with them and working with the sector with them. One criticism was made, which was acknowledged in the film strategies, that there was a lack of visibility of the film team. That is something that I am addressing. I am working on it and we are going to ensure that that is less of a case in the future. Equally, across Creative Scotland, we also have communications, media and PR. We have funding operations, finance teams and business affairs. It is not just a team of 11 people, it is a broader team than that. Scottish Green has 35 people working for it. It is important to remember that Creative Scotland was established in the context of public sector reform, in the context of making back-office savings in order to put as much money into industry as is possible. We have done that. Overall, we saved about a third of our costs in terms of admin costs. We function very well. The amount of funding that goes directly into film is broadly the same at Creative Scotland as it was when we had Scottish Scream. We are assertive in respect of saying that we want to grow that, but we are also very cognisant of the fact that our budgets are such that the only funding that we have to spend on film, or the majority of the funding that we have to spend on film, our infrastructure support is supported through Granternade, is lottery funding, and that comes with lots of calls in terms of its spending. Back up the producer's point, though, because if the funding is the same and the number of films being made has gone down, then clearly something is not working? I would question the rationale of setting up a separate agency, which would undoubtedly cost more to the public purse than providing a little bit more public funding to ensure that more production funding is available to producers in Scotland. I have one quick question for Scottish Enterprise. It was interesting when Charlotte raised the issue of Katie Morag that you supported. I am quite interested in the help that Scottish Enterprise cannot give to my smaller businesses that Highlands and Islands Enterprise does, and not just in creative industries. I represent the south of Scotland, and one of our big problems is that many of our best companies do not qualify for account management. That is also an issue that has been raised by the film industry with relation to the fact that there are no film companies that are account managed, because the way that they operate is that they will go from very small operations and then they have to expand very rapidly when they are making a film. Your set-up is not set up to respond to that, and I wondered if you would care to comment on that and whether perhaps with Highlands and Islands, with the threshold being lower, you are better able to respond to it, and that is why you were able to support Katie Morag. I am very happy to comment. We say that just because we do not lead the overall engagement with the screening industries does not mean to say that TV and film are not very important for us as sectors. We have supported more than 100 companies in the screening industries across the TV and film sectors in the past few years. We support a variety of different ways. We have supported, for example, the producers alliance in cinema and television to undertake more internationalisation efforts with trade missions to places like China and India. At the micro level, which is a great point that you have picked up on, we are very much working in partnership with Business Gateway in particular, but we have, through Co-operative Development Scotland and the work that we do there, work to support a lot of the very small, independently-minded creative industries companies, including across the screen sector, to help them to take a consortia approach where they can come together and perhaps get the benefit of more of a collaborative approach to negotiate or to go after business. About 20 consortia companies in the creative industry sector have been formed in the last few years as a result of the support that the SE offers through Co-operative Development Scotland, so a couple of examples there of the work and support that we are giving. I will just amplify. Highlands and Islands Enterprise, obviously, applies the criteria in making those choices about account management, which reflect both the need and opportunity for businesses in our area. It is fair to say that the scale of businesses across the Highlands and Islands is very much at the micro scale. In the particular case, with Move On Up and Katie Morag, that offered the additional opportunity both of supporting a company on the east of our region in Cromarty, but ensured that they were going to deliver those economic benefits in one of our areas that perhaps has more challenges, which is around the western Isles and Stonaway, and has created lasting benefit through developing skills in those aspects that are important to us in being able to deliver both account management but making those decisions that reflect, in the case of creative industries, very much the micro nature of the industry and the fact that they work through collaboration and networks that tend to form and reform and change, so we have to be flexible in how we go about that support. Several mentors have questioned you this morning on film and TV. Can I question you on video games? You made a comment in regards to some of the excellent games that are being produced in Scotland and sold abroad. In the Scottish Enterprise submission, you said that you have a considerable level of engagement, achieved success, investment, innovation and internationalism, but we move on to Creative Scotland. We have been told that Creative Scotland has no legacy of working with the game sector industry, no in-house experience with the games industry. What are you doing to resolve that? Who does that come under? Does that come under Natalie also or does that come under someone else? Are you both promoting the games industry within Scotland? We are promoting the games industry within Scotland and it will come under our new director of creative industries. We also have a portfolio manager, so a head of digital, who holds the direct hands-on responsibility for games. We have supported games development through our innovation fund, which has been running year on year since the start of Creative Scotland. We supported video games development and experimentation in the region of £1 million a year since that time. As the innovation fund was £1 million a year and games was part of that, companies that have benefited include Ludometrics, some of the visitor interface 3, Hippotrix, Zapcoda, Secret Experiment. We have worked with Nesta and AHRC on the digital R&D programme and we have recently launched Time to Shine Digital, which is a programme for young people looking to generate ideas from young people in respect of what they might want to do on digital platforms. That has just gone up for applications. We have worked with BAFTA to celebrate and raise the profile of the games industry through providing support for their awards, workshops, masterclasses and sharing good practice. We have worked with Abbottay universities there to be digital, which encourages young and emerging talents. Through that, new finance for games like Blazing Griffin, Quartet Llama, Storm Cloud and Future Fossil Studios has come through. Games can also apply to our new open project funding for early development. We are comfortable that we have evidence in place that demonstrates that we have done a lot for games, but we recognise that more can be done. We need to understand the games industry in Scotland better. We need to work with the games industry to make routes to market clearer and easier to navigate for developers. Our new creative industry strategy framework recommends the development of a specific policy around games. We are looking at that very seriously. We will be discussing that with our partners. The point of that would be to work with the sector to develop a cohesive voice and secure routes both to a domestic market but also to an international market through that work. It has got to be sector-led. From our point, it has got to be industry-led. We need to work with the game sector very closely to work through how we do that. You have round off. Sorry, David. You were going to say something. If you could just add to that, we have worked with industry through supporting the formation and supporting the work of the digital media industry leadership group, which also has heavy representation from the game sector. We have undertaken that work, the industry-led approach, since 2009. Three of the witnesses that you had here a couple of weeks ago are either current or former members of that industry leadership group. Our overall approach has been very much steered and informed by the views of industry, particularly members of the games industry. That strategy, the digital inspiration strategy, gave us a very strong steering direction for our work and the work of our partners. It was to put more attention, put more focus on helping companies to move up their value chain, to move from just the creation of content up towards the development of platforms. An excellent example of that being the success that Fanjul is currently experiencing and the support that we have given them through the Scottish Investment Bank funding them through various different rounds to the current recent round of £70 million worth of funding that they have managed to secure in VC markets, enabling them to fund the development of their platform further and fund the expansion of their operations here in Scotland and to help them to try for business development in the US. I highlight that example in particular because it speaks to the advice and the direction of the strategy that was laid out in 2009. It is very much steered and guided our work. We also put in place, as a direct result of our work with the digital media group, the Interactive Scotland. We have provided support to around 850 companies across the digital media sectors in Scotland. That is very much about trying to encourage companies to innovate and collaborate around the various opportunities that we have in digital and digital media. Those are just some examples of the work. The key point there, as Janice just touched on, is that it is vitally important that our work is informed by the views and needs of industry. I think that it was one of the industries that was actually complimentary about you guys rather than the film and TV mob who were damming in some ways. Sadly, one of my constituents said that Creative Scotland was a shambles, but we will take that aside. Can I stay on the games? Janet Archer just told me all the great things you are doing, but why have you not published a sector review of the video games industry? Why is that, and when do you intend to do it, since you have rhymed off all the fantastic things that you are doing now? Did sector reviews that we have been publishing were initiated before I joined the organisation and they focused on the arts and they focused on screen. Plans were not put in place to think about the vast range of industries that sit under our creative industries banner at that stage. Our approach to that has been to rethink how we function and refocus our policy around our screen creative industries. We cannot do everything at once. We are completing the current commissioned suite of sector reviews, which means that we are completing literature and publishing, which sits under the creative industries remit, and the arts. We are completing our visual arts sector review, which is about the arts, but it is also the commercial creative end of the visual arts too. We are then moving on to think very hard in terms of what we do about the creative industries. The strategy framework is the first step in respect of doing that. Within the strategy framework, there are some recommendations to look in detail at specific elements of the creative industries, and our next step will be to move into that and games as part of that next. If you allow me to continue just one last question, the greatest respect to you. When I worked in an industry, we had like 17 balls in the air at one time. You have Natalie, you have maybe other people within your organisation, so why can't you? When you started off, I wouldn't say it was a shamble, but you admitted that things have been done wrong and you were now correcting it. Why can't you drive everything forward now and get what is being criticised by other sectors in Scotland? Get it right. We are driving it forward. I was firmly of the view that we needed to get it right. My first 18 months have been very focused on funding and getting that right, which has been a big job in respect of Creative Scotland's operation on our systems and processes and on our people resource. We are now moving into developing strategies for screen, which we have done, creative industries, which we are about to publish in draft form and arts, which will be the next step. I think it's really important to get those absolutely right. We can't afford to get it wrong. If we do it too fast, we just simply won't get it right. But the commitment is clear. Once we publish the creative industries framework, industry will be able to see what our commitment is over the next three years and we will move through those tasks in a way in which we use our resource to best effect and we will do it well. On games, we had a fantastic event at the Parliament that the committee organised for the game sector when we were able to see what they did and speak to the developers face-to-face. One thing that struck me from speaking to them, one thing that they all said, was that their biggest need was support for marketing, because particularly now, when there is such competition globally, how does your app get up there? How do you even get noticed? That was what they all said independently. I know that you help them with international events and so on, but in terms of individual companies, what more can you do to help them with that marketing and selling their product? I also enjoyed that evening. I enjoyed meeting many of you that evening and the meeting with the companies and seeing some of the great examples of the companies that were present at Fanjol, Team Rock, all companies and organisations that we are very familiar with and have worked a great deal with. What we are doing in addition to the extra support that we have been putting into internationalisation and support for taking companies' games to international events, like the Game Developer Conference in San Francisco, where around 30 companies participated last year and generated, they fed back to us about £45 million worth of opportunities at that event. What we are doing in addition to the work of Interactive Scotland and the work that we are undertaking in partnership with the Scottish Government around the Scottish Edge competition is providing more opportunities and support for excellent early-stage companies to be able to develop their ideas, sharpen up their marketing approach and compete for and get additional funding to help them to develop their marketing plans and help them to take their products to market. Just briefly from Hyland's Vines perspective, although the game sector is not a significant one in our region, we have an approach that is supported through our trade industry networks, which supports showcasing and event attendances, and we cover games through the Screen and Broadcast Trade Network. We have heard this morning an awful lot about screen industries, the film sector, etc. I want to bring the focus back into independent television production. It would be helpful if any answers referred to independent television production rather than the wider sector. Last week, BBC and Channel 4 increased production in Scotland, or intend to increase production in Scotland. I am keen to understand the benefit that Scotland derives from that. We have heard from the evidence, and the written evidence is from Titanic Gap. Rick Hill, who was the chairman of the Northern Ireland Screen Commission, said that his politicians have been superb at working to ensure the BBC and the UK public service broadcasters invested in Scotland. We have done the work of getting the work to Scotland, and I am keen to understand who benefits from that work. A question that I asked last week, and I would like to ask the panel this week, is specifically to Scottish Enterprise. In 2009, Scottish Enterprise sent its report growing the television broadcast in production centre that one of its main objectives was increasing the scale of independent production companies, increasing the number of independent production companies with a turnover of £10 million, with a substantive base in Scotland from 1 to 6 by 2013. What support was put in place to achieve this, and how successful was it? The support that we have been in place has been consist of our overall account management support, the support that we undertake through our work in engaging with the TV companies around supply chain development. We have provided support through our innovation products and services for people like the comedy unit, for example, to help them to develop. An independent body company set up and we have helped them to develop their IP and to take forward opportunities in markets outside of Scotland by using the IP that they have generated around some of their comedy and comedy productions and take that to other markets. Those are some examples of the work and the support that we have undertaken. Just to be clear, did we actually achieve the six companies that are getting turnover of £10 million, and how many independent production companies were under account management? I will need to come back to you on the first point. I believe that we did, but I want to come back to you with specific figures on that. On the second point, the number of television companies under account management is 14. We have account managed a lot more previously because you will appreciate that account management is not a permanent process. It is appropriate to companies at various stages of their development and growth. On that development growth, and this is widening the question out to both Scottish Enterprise and Highland and Islands Enterprise, we have available regional selective assistance available for investment projects that will create a safeguard jobs in Scotland. We know that you provide RSA to branch offices of incoming London companies, but often, as we witnessed, we shed as soon as the lifting shift that we heard an awful lot about last week happens, and these companies close. Given that the indigenous independent TV sector is worth roughly about £30 million, how do you engage with them and what level of support do you provide to them of that RSA as a percentage of what you give to the incomeers? How much support, how much regional selective assistance do both organisations give of their total package to independent indigenous production companies? I am happy to take the question because Scottish Enterprise operates the RSA programme on behalf of the whole of Scotland. The answer is that more than 90 per cent, certainly within the creative industries of support both in terms of number of companies and the value of the support that we provide, including RSA support, goes to indigenous companies here in Scotland. I do not have off the top my head or available right now the precise figure for indigenous TV companies, but I can get that for you and come back to you with that information. I think that the 90 per cent figure is broadly representative. It is certainly true of the creative industries, but I need to come back to you on the specific figure around the TV. If I could just add from Highlands and Islands perspective, I do not think that I can think of a case where we have used RSA to support a Highlands and Islands indigenous company, but we do use our grant and aid to support our account managed companies. Additionally, the screen and broadcast trade network, which I mentioned, gives support to them in terms of industry collaboration, networking, training and support for marketing. Okay. Moving on to Creative Scotland, in your submission you have highlighted that you allocate funding of £9 million for screen and £7 million for creative industries, so of that £16 million, how much of that is applied directly to independent television production companies for research and development work or how much advocacy do you provide for the television sector? A relatively small amount of that goes into the television sector, so we've put in some funding, so for example 170k over three years into development finance for STV. We've put some funding into Bannon with MG Alibar, so we are selective. We have prioritised film because of the limitations on the resource that we've got available to us. We do think that there's room for a discussion around other kinds of solutions in terms of investment in productions. We think that there's a discussion to be had in terms of recognising that investment in television is often about investing in the production, not in the company. We know that some production companies don't turn over £10 million and therefore fall through the gap at the moment. We also know that you have to move very quickly if you're going to generate business for Scotland if a company comes to us with match finance in place and we can't respond quickly in relation to that often that will be lost and go elsewhere. I think that there is a discussion to be had in terms of how overall team Scotland applies itself to the television industry. The two examples that you gave was STV and MG Alibar, both of which are broadcasters, so would that say that the 170,000 you basically don't give anything to an independent television sector? Of our £4 million film and TV broadcast fund, we have decided to focus on film. However, we have invested in independent film production alongside broadcasters. For example, the Katie Morag production, we put money into Stonemouth, we put money into Ban and the Gallup drama, we have invested in a number of other first series. What we feel that we can do with our limited resources is to help the producer into the first series and then hope that they will then be commissioned for a second and that they can move on at that point and commercialise that production. However, we are limited with our resources available and we have focused on TV drama. Just a final question and this is for the panel. The TV working group has repeatedly asked for support to expand the research and development capacity for indigenous production companies. What steps have the panel taken to augment the R&D capacity and promote engagement with commissioners within the BBC and Channel 4? We have certainly been active in working with the TV working group to work with broadcasters and particularly to focus on the opportunities to support the particularly indigenous sector but the supply chain to undertake more innovation and to help support them to address more of the opportunities and needs coming out of the requirements of the major broadcasters. We have participated in those working groups and put them on through our account management efforts and our support to individual companies but also the working relationship that we have and the work that we are doing with High Anchorage of Scotland to support the things like the Gaelic media broadcasting supply chain is the kind of work that we are engaged in to grow and support the supply chain and help them to innovate. We did a specific piece of detailed work in relation to Gaelic as an asset across industry but particularly focusing on what the opportunities are for Gaelic production and TV and film and a following up with that with Creative Scotland and SDI particularly. That is a specific piece of research that demonstrated the value both culturally, heritagely and economically of Gaelic. All right, thank you. I am conscious of the time we have got about 10 minutes left. Patrick Harvie is very patient and I have three other members who want to ask supplementaries who I will bring in if we have time at the end. Good morning. It struck me that a couple of paragraphs from the Creative Scotland written submission echo very strongly a lot of what we have heard from other organisations who are raising concerns and criticisms. On the section on film and TV, you talk at one point about the potential and the fact that the industry has shown what it is capable of achieving but you acknowledge that the industry, Scotland's screen industry, is currently falling behind the other UK nations. There was some debate, I think, about whether we are in third place or fourth place or fifth place or where we sit in that ranking order. You then say that the industry is not operating to its full potential because it does not have access to resources that are comparable to other nations and regions. Barriers include the lack of a large-scale permanent studio facility and appropriate levels of production, funding, infrastructure and money. We heard, I think you talked about £4 million budget, some of the revenue suggests three and a half. Even if it is four, that compares with £10 million in Northern Ireland, Yorkshire £15 million, Wales £30 million, further a feel looking at Finland with €25 million, Sweden £43 million, Norway £60 million, Denmark £65 million. We have had the long discussion as well about infrastructure and the studio issue and yet, in your three-year plan that I have got here, the most relevant commitments that I can find are on funding, we will work to find the right balance between films' cultural and economic impact in the allocation of funding and then a few paragraphs later, as part of our work with Scottish Government, Scottish Enterprise to establish a film studio, this is your commitment over the next 12 months, we will focus on the requirement for the studio to operate in a way that supports and serves Scotland's own productions as well as international mobile productions. It is a little bit nonspecific, is it not? The film studio has to primarily attract the large-scale productions, that is where the bulk primarily exists. Clearly, but we have stated that that is a priority, it is absolutely a priority. Scotland needs a film studio, we are working extremely hard as we have heard to do that. But what we want it also to be able to do is to support the indigenous film production sector. Now, in terms of business models, that can be quite a balancing act, but that is what I am not going to suggest that this is an important thing to focus on. I am just trying to suggest that whether in the 12 months actions or the three-year actions in the same document, there isn't anything that says, here's when we intend to be open for business. Scotland is already open for business. We accept and it is certainly set out in the strategy that we need to do more and we have highlighted ways in which we can do more across all areas of the film industry, not just production but in order to work on film education, in order to develop the filmmakers of tomorrow, the new producers of tomorrow as well as the audiences of tomorrow. We expect that to be a studio, if that's what's going to happen, when do we expect that to be open? So we've talked about the studio already, but just to talk about Scotland being open to the business. I was talking about the infrastructure, not the kind of concept of Scotland being open. Of course, but what I would like to say is that Scottish production spend figures for 2013 were 33.6 million. Those are the highest figures ever for Scotland. That year included part of the first season of Outlander, which was a production that Scotland attracted. It's been here, it's been spending money, it's been engaging crew, it's been incredibly significant for Scotland. 2014 figures, our projections suggest that they will be dramatically higher than 2013. That is an incredibly good news story for us, and what we need to do is also to capitalise on that, to build on it by, in my view, having an inward investment fund in the same way that Northern Ireland does. They've got 3.2 million, we should have something like it. Northern Ireland spends 1.2 million on independent productions a year. We spend just a bit more. A decision that you can make, is that a decision that Scottish Enterprise have to make, or is that a decision that the Scottish Government have to make? I think we have to make the case and we have to discuss it with our partners, but to me it seems like a relatively... Whose decision is it to do that? It's certainly not my decision, but I know what I want to advocate for Scotland. Would it be a Scottish Government decision? Is that something we need to ask the Ministers about? I think it is something that we need to ask the Ministers about. Finally, we talked about another publication that's due, did you call it the Strategy Framework next month? Creative Industries Framework. Would it be a good idea? I'm assuming that hasn't gone to the printers yet. No, it's going... Would it be a good idea if that document set out a clear timescale of when you expect not only a decision on approving the film studio, but how long you expect Scotland to have to wait before it's open. I know it can be problematic to set these dates when you're building stuff. Trams, parliaments, sometimes the date slips. Everybody understands that sometimes the date slips, but a deadline focuses the mind. Wouldn't that be a helpful thing to put in that document? We want to secure a successful outcome in relation to film studio infrastructure as much as any. We know from experience that it's time well spent at this stage if we make sure that we undertake the third analysis and evaluation of the proposals that we have. We do want to make sure that we learn from and we apply the learning from experiences of others. For example, the experience in Spain on the Theodad de Olyth complex that was developed in Valencia and was then found at a later stage not to be a state aid compliant. Also, the experience in Wales, where a major investment was made in Dragon Studios, which then proved to be commercially unsustainable in the long term. What we are doing is moving at pace. We want to make sure that we undertake all the necessary evaluation work, but we will reach an outcome as soon as we possibly can. We are working at pace to do that. Once we are in a position to make a decision, we will be in a position to make a recommendation to our board and to work with partners to build to deliver that. I would hope to build to do that in the relatively new future. I think that it is important to say that I wanted to illustrate Natalie's account of some of the successes that we have been able to achieve. It is our understanding looking at the figures that we think that the first year of Outlander has actually been more successful than the first year of Game of Thrones. That is a big step up in terms of what we are achieving as a nation. We do have some, not enough, but some studio provision in Scotland already. Otherwise, we would not have Outlander in place. We know that Vanan is operating from Skye. We know that on Stornoway there is almost a hidden studio, which I visited, but which is open for business. There is some provision in Scotland as it stands at the moment. What we are missing is something significant in the central belt area, which we know needs to be built on. Those are important points. In terms of the solution, it is a three-legged stool. It has to be about funding, talent development and the studio as three knitted-together entities. If we can get those right, we will be able to get Scotland into that next stage of where it outputs strongly across the film and screen. I will finish with the word, please. We are almost out of time. I have three members who want to come in. If they are all extremely brief, we will try to get them all in and extremely brief answers if possible. Natalie is about to make a good announcement this afternoon. I will be very careful. My business experience tells me that people look at these messages when they get good news and tomorrow they will get some bad news. I do not know where the buck stops. I am confused. Particularly if I look at your strategy, your business plan and your plan, particularly in terms of internationalisation, I am totally confused. Can each of you tell me, very briefly, what is your prime outcome internationally for film and television? I am happy to start. Our prime outcome for the creative industries is to support as many companies as possible to grow. For television and film, that is a contentious point. We understand some good work elsewhere. I am very clear that the lead responsibility for the promotion of television and film and for the tracks of inward investment lies with my colleagues in Creative Scotland. Where does the buck stop? Who makes the decision on these international issues? I am not sure that I can be any clearer because that is what we understand in a geese. Television in Scotland is for us to be able to compete with other nations in the UK and beyond that. We have set out the strategy. Janet has highlighted the three elements that make up the stools that will give us the opportunity to step up and achieve that. It is the studio, it is funding, it is talent and skills development. We have set out the strategy. I take responsibility for it. What is important to say is that the resourcing of our ambition is a shared responsibility because the way that budgets are applied in Scotland means that we have to join up our collective resources in order to be able to deliver our shared objectives. We have not even got to skills development in Scotland in their role, which seems to me as a half dozen organisation talking about that as well. Can you please confirm that you recognise that you do not have to sort everything in order to make progress and do you understand the significance of the decision on the film studio? The other request that I would make is a number of requests made in the evidence from organisations to Greater Scotland and the Scottish Enterprise. We have not been able to reach today. I wonder if it would be possible for you to look at those, for example, directing resources into Greater Scotland and the Scottish Enterprise and see if you think that those are things that you could do. The biggest ask of all was an energy round task force overall. I wonder if you could respond in writing to specific evidence that we were given, which we cannot reach today. Directly to Greater Scotland, my colleague Gordon MacDonald mentioned it just in the passing in his questioning, lift and shift. How much of a role can you play to try and resolve the problems that the industry is talking to us about lift and shift? If you are developing indigenous companies and workforces, lift and shift is a huge problem. Do you mean specifically in television? Yes, specifically in television. Are you engaging in that discussion? Do you have a role to play? We have a role to play. We are part of the film and the TV working group. We have a good working relationship with the broadcasters and the work of that group is to focus on that specifically. We recognise it and we are trying to address it. I was at a meeting with a BBC Trust last week where that various issue came up. We are now in dialogue in terms of what we can do in our role as the lead agency for film and screen in respect of that issue. Right. We are out of time. I thank the panel for answering all our questions. There has been quite a long session and we have covered a lot of ground that has been very helpful to the committee. Next week, we are meeting the minister and we will think about our report that will come out in due course. I thank him on behalf of the committee. We will now move into private session and have a short suspension.