Hansard

I issue the apologies of my colleague Mary Scanlon, who had hoped to take part in the debate but, unfortunately, is not well.

This is an important debate, which is reflected in the tone of the Scottish Government’s motion, which the Conservatives have no hesitation in supporting. That tone is also in the other amendments, which we also support, and in the Education and Culture Committee’s report. We particularly welcome the positive engagement from the BBC and the recognition that the current governance arrangements are not fit for purpose in the age of maturing devolution and in a competitive, technologically changing and diverse media environment that puts many challenges in the way of any broadcaster, whether the BBC or anyone else.

Whatever happens in the charter renewal process, the cabinet secretary is right to say that the BBC must emerge able to maintain the high quality of production and the marketable programmes that have given it its great distinction as an institution. It also must serve all parts of the UK, as well as the international community, and be able to keep pace with—indeed, to lead—technological advances so that it is not left behind its commercial rivals.

The BBC knows that it must continue to strive for excellence across all its services. It must do that by taking into account the increasingly diverse range of audiences throughout the United Kingdom, Scotland included. On that note, it has been encouraging to hear about the positive relationship that has developed on the future of BBC Alba, especially when measured against its counterparts in Wales. I say to the cabinet secretary that that commitment is good news.

Above all, there must be greater transparency when it comes to the spending of public money. In that context, it is right that the Scottish Parliament has an enhanced ability to hold BBC Scotland to account.

It was good to hear the BBC acknowledge that in some respects it had failed Scotland. In education committee meetings some years back, we saw that senior figures in the BBC clearly did not have sufficient respect for the role that the Scottish Parliament could play, nor did they appreciate the detrimental effect of London-centric bias. It was encouraging to hear the cabinet secretary describe Lord Hall speaking of “excellence without arrogance”. That is good news. Lord Hall also said:

“As director general of the BBC, I want to achieve a strong and vibrant BBC that reflects the nation that it serves, is full of confidence in its output and is properly fearless in its journalism.”—[Official Report, Education and Culture Committee, 12 January 2016; c 8.]

It was good to hear that from the BBC. Lord Hall has fully recognised the pace of devolution, and that it is “changing asymmetrically”, as he described it. I will come back to that comment.

Several members in the chamber will recall previous controversies at education committee meetings, when some unseemly party politics prevented the focus from being purely on the running of the BBC and what was best for Scotland. For that reason, I am pleased that the cabinet secretary accepts the Conservative amendment, because at the heart of the debate is that the BBC must be wholly independent of Government and politicians.

I come to some of the details. There is general agreement that a more robust news service is required for Scotland. There is an important debate to be had about how to achieve that without diminishing the scope of UK BBC broadcasting in Scotland, some of which produces the Scottish audience’s best-loved programmes.

The Royal Society of Edinburgh’s submission rightly says:

“Advances in technology, increased competition and changes in the methods through which the public consume content mean the BBC faces more challenges than ever before in fulfilling its remit to inform, educate and entertain.”

Discussions on those issues in the devolution context are interesting. How we take them further within the charter renewal process is a particularly interesting debate.

The BBC faces particular challenges around how different resources are deployed. Both the cabinet secretary and Claire Baker outlined that the issue is not necessarily about having more resources but about redeploying them, which necessarily must reflect different structures. That is a particularly interesting point.

Audience demands are clearly changing, and the BBC will have to compete with other broadcasters to ensure that it is fit for purpose in the decades ahead. I will say more in my summing-up speech about how that relates to funding.

There is a debate to be had about how Scottish we want the BBC to be in Scotland and what the percentage share should be against traditional UK input. That debate must be had in the context of considering the best way in which to maintain the quality of an independent broadcaster. Claire Baker is quite right: we must have evidence to show what audiences actually want in Scotland. There is an interesting debate to be had, and I will come back to some of these points in my summing-up speech.

I move amendment S4M-15695.1, to insert at end:

“in a way that does not undermine the BBC’s independence from governments and politicians”.