Hansard

I will not just comment on that, because the idea is part of our proposals, as the member will know if he has read our document. Only yesterday, I raised directly with the BBC the issue of ensuring an extra 10 hours of original content for MG Alba. That is part of on-going discussions.

In its policy paper, the Royal Society of Edinburgh pointed out that the ability of a publicly funded BBC to continue making high-quality content that is relevant to audiences and maintaining universality of access and provision in a way that is transparent and accountable to Scotland and the Scottish Parliament is core to the issue. Such accountability will allow the BBC to catch up with significant changes that we have seen in the political structure of the UK. That becomes more critical as we approach the referendum on membership of the European Union and, for example, when striking junior doctors fill the news in Scotland while our own junior doctors are not on strike.

I am pleased that the BBC shares that view. That was outlined in Lord Hall’s recent appearance before the Education and Culture Committee, when he said:

“We all recognise the pace of change in devolution, and that it is changing asymmetrically across the United Kingdom ... That is why I stress hugely my wanting an open BBC: not an arrogant BBC, but a BBC that works as a partner with people, that supports the creative industries and which is also an open platform, where that is right, to help others to get visibility not only in Scotland or the UK, but globally.”—[Official Report, Education and Culture Committee, 12 January 2016; c 8-9.]

I think that we can all share Lord Hall’s vision, which is of a BBC that represents the people it serves, which provides a platform for their views and creativity to be reflected not just in Scotland but across the UK and beyond, and which underpins all our policy thinking on the charter process.

I fundamentally agree with the importance of the editorial and management independence of the BBC from the Government and politicians, and I will therefore accept the Conservatives’ amendment.

Just last week, I was pleased to publish a comprehensive vision of what the Scottish Government sees as priorities for the BBC during the charter review period and to set out the strategic and wider issues that could be addressed at any time outside charter renewal. Our vision has been well received by the sector in Scotland and has gained a cautious welcome from the BBC, which demonstrates how far relations have progressed since last year. I welcome its appetite for collaboration to achieve the best possible outcome from the process for the people of Scotland.

I have taken the vision to the UK Government and I discussed the policy positively with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport at Westminster yesterday. I have also had a separate meeting with senior members of BBC staff. I will sit down with the director general next week for a detailed discussion about how we can realise the ambition that we share for the BBC in Scotland.

Scotland can add real value to the debate about the BBC across the UK by raising issues for discussion. Decentralisation of budget decision making would empower Scotland and other areas of the UK that feel that they are not being well represented by the current model. A BBC in Scotland that could develop high-quality content that represents its audiences but is also valuable to the UK network would enhance the BBC’s reputation nationally and internationally. That is critical to keeping the BBC at the heart of our cultural and social life and would deliver economic benefits that helped to drive forward our creative industries. It is a win-win that would involve better content for our audiences, more support for our creative industries and a stronger and more diverse BBC.

The high level of content output from Scotland would support the BBC’s development of additional platforms, perhaps initially online, through which the content could be promoted to viewers in Scotland and to wider national and international audiences. In that context, the observations of the Education and Culture Committee on the pace and opportunity of rapid technological change are welcome and bring to the debate another aspect of the future proofing of the BBC that needs to be achieved through the charter.

Let me be specific about what I mean by a decentralised model. At a practical level, it amounts to a restructuring that would bring the BBC’s governance, editorial and commissioning decision-making and budget responsibilities into line with the devolved nature of the UK and would give Scotland greater autonomy while maintaining an appropriate and strategic link to the wider BBC. The BBC’s activities are not developed and delivered in a vacuum and we believe that a long-term strategic vision for the nations and regions is required if we are to improve audience satisfaction levels in Scotland. That vision needs to be held to account in Scotland by audiences and the Parliament through a unitary board structure.

Much of the debate so far has focused on the future governance of the BBC and the prospect of a service licence for Scotland. Such a licence would be a welcome development and would not necessarily require a new charter. A service level agreement would need careful implementation to ensure that it delivered for Scotland.

I welcomed Anne Bulford’s statement in her evidence to the Education and Culture Committee that there is an opportunity to use a service licence to set out aims and objectives for the BBC in Scotland and for that to form a framework for monitoring. It is critical that that is supplemented by an appropriate up-front allocation of funds to allow BBC Scotland to make strategic decisions about how those funds are invested.

A BBC Scotland board would have oversight of the editorial and commissioning control that was vested in the executive team. As a consequence, BBC Scotland would have direct control over a level of funding that approximated to the revenue that is generated from the licence fee in Scotland, less a proportionate contribution for centrally developed content from services that would ensure continued access to UK network content such as “War and Peace”. That is not dissimilar to the current position, except that budgets would be allocated in advance.