Submissions
OFCOM REVIEW OF PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING: PHASE 3
PSB REVIEW PROPOSALS FOR THE NATIONS AND REGIONS
INTRODUCTION
1. Equity welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the further discussions surrounding public service television broadcasting (PSB) in the nations and regions. As the trade union representing 37,000 performers and creative personnel in the UK we remain a strong supporter of regionally diverse programming, with particular reference to drama, comedy and entertainment. We have already outlined our position on the future of PSB in a number of submissions to Ofcom and addressed specifically the implications for national and regional production.
2. In this response we will therefore repeat the general policy outlined previously, but only respond on issues relevant to our interest and experience, rather than the answer all of the individual questions outlined on page 103 of the PSB Review Phase 3 document.
3. In addressing these matters we have considered the context of Ofcom's review and reporting obligations under the Communications Act 2003 as outlined in Section 264(3). In particular that it has "an obligation, with a view to maintaining and strengthening the quality of public service television broadcasting in the United Kingdom".
4. We also note the positive impact that regulation has had on the quality of television in the UK . We therefore urge Ofcom to seek to continue to develop a framework of regulation that can encourage a full range and quality of programming by exercising its statutory duty to meet these objectives.
BACKGROUND
5. Equity has acknowledged the need for regional programming to adapt and change in this new era of broadcasting, but does not accept that the move towards digital switchover justifies the scale and scope of reductions in regional and national non-news production that are being proposed. While recognising the financial pressures that will particularly affect commercial broadcasters following the move to digital, it is our belief that the proliferation of channels that will accompany switchover actually strengthens the case for retaining unique local output. The increase in generic national or international output that will dominate digital broadcasting will put a premium on programmes which reflect national or regional identity.
6. For this reason Equity has welcomed the additional efforts that have been made to encourage regional and national production referred to elsewhere in Phase 3 of the PSB Review. The increase in ITV1's out-of-London quota to 50% of spend from 2005 is particularly welcome. We will be following the impact of these changes closely and note Ofcom's projection that this will lead to £17m of production moving out of London in 2005 and £40m in 2006. We will also be interested to see how effective the concept of a Production Partnership Fund will be in disbursing £9m to original regional production over the next three years.
PROPOSALS IN THE NATIONS
7. Equity shares Ofcom's view that the devolved nations have distinct cultural and political identities that need to be reflected in the PSB framework.
8. However, we recognise the scheduling pressures on national licensees and agree with Ofcom's proposal to reduce the cost of opting out of the network schedule to meet their regional programme licence requirements. A "no play, no pay" clause and a requirement for ITV's networking operation to take into account the higher level of regional programmes in the three nations are sensible proposals which Equity is happy to support. These proposals are a necessary practical consideration if the respective national identities are to be appropriately reflected by the broadcasting of original non-news production in future.
9. We are also pleased that Ofcom is proposing that news provision for the Nations on ITV1 be maintained, but this is not a specific area of interest or expertise that concerns Equity or its members. Therefore we will not be commenting further on the specific detail or impact of scheduling proposal being discussed with Scottish Media Group (SMG).
SCOTLAND
10. Stage 1 of the change to regional non-news programming in Scotland has been presented as a proposed standardisation of output at four hours a week and therefore "a substantial increase in on-screen licence requirements in Scotland " (para A.15).
11. While the flexibility in content sharing and networking will result in an increase in a net increase in non-news viewing across Scotland , we would question the assertion that the new arrangements will succeed in "helping to preserve the uniquely regional element of the service" (para A.11).
12. As part of this Stage 1 proposal Ofcom actually appears to be reducing the net amount of original production from the unique regional broadcasters, from the current levels of 6.5 hours and week (4 hours from Scottish TV, 1.5 hours from Grampian and around 1 hour from ITV Border) to a new level of 6 hours a week (1 hour from each broadcaster plus 3 hours of shared production).
13. However, this small reduction in original non-news production in Scotland is also followed by a further reduction when the first UK region achieves digital switchover. Ofcom has characterised this as a reduction from 4 hours a week in national non-news broadcasting to 3 hours a week.
14. It is unclear at from the consultation document how and where these 3 hours will be produced. Therefore we believe that Ofcom should clarify if this is to be a further combination of unique productions from individual licensees with some additional shared content - or whether all Scottish broadcasters will be encouraged to share and network the whole 3 hours in future. If Ofcom is suggesting the latter then the distinct regional element will be lost completely and original production of non-news programming in Scotland could be as low a 3 hours between the existing networks, down from the current level of 6.5 hours. Equity would strongly oppose such a development.
15. We also note the importance of the Gaelic language to a small but significant community of people in Scotland . We support the efforts of SMG, the Gaelic Media Service and Ofcom to develop a Gaelic digital channel. The subsequent removal of SMG's Gaelic obligations should also deliver further cost savings, which could be added to the other measures being proposed to enable the continuation of a more reasonable level of regional non-news production than is currently being proposed.
WALES
16. Equity remains opposed to the reduction in non-news programming being proposed for ITV Wales. The initial reduction from 4.5 hours a week to 4 hours a week is not desirable, but the further reduction to only 3 hours a week (probably by 2008) will seriously undermine the level of representation and unique output coming from Wales, for Wales.
17. This 33% cut in regional non-news programming and production in three years is an unacceptably large reduction which we do not believe is justified at this stage. While the matter should sensibly be kept under review, we believe that a combination of the measures that are being proposed (a reduction in ITV's licence fee, the no-pay, no-play arrangement and networking requirements must take into account the higher level of regional programming in the Nations) are sufficient to sustain non-news programming at a higher level that Ofcom is proposing
18. However we understand that ITV Wales is still unhappy, even with this much reduced level of obligation. This was clear from the written evidence it provided to the recent joint session of the National Assembly for Wales Culture, Welsh Language and Sport Committee and the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee (dated 17 March 2005). In this submission it makes a thinly-veiled attack on Ofcom's proposals by stating that it does not consider that its focus on regional programming should be on "sheer quantity of hours required". It goes on to say that "Ofcom's proposals could mean the majority of ITV Wales programming scheduled in daytime or late night when the audience available to view programmes is small".
19. Therefore Equity believes that Ofcom should make it a priority to ensure that its requirements are properly implemented by the broadcasters once final decisions have been made. In particular, ITV Wales should be required to demonstrate its commitment by investing in a high quality and range of programme types with proper scheduling of the product. It should not be allowed to let its apparent reluctance to produce this programming to detract from its quality and then claim that there is no demand.
20. We agree with Ofcom's view of the importance of indigenous language broadcasting and agree that "in Wales , S4C has made a huge contribution to embedding the Welsh language and culture" (para A.22).
21. We recognise the need to address the future of S4C due to the constraints on funding and declining advertising revenue, but we are concerned that the impact of digital switchover and possible solutions in this case are treated almost as a footnote when compared with other channels. This is in stark contrast to the analysis and proposals explored in respect of Channel 4 and even the digital dividend that is identified for Five.
22. There is clearly a need for a systematic review of the funding of S4C, including its relationship with the BBC. We note the Government's commitment to Welsh language broadcasting in its Green Paper on the future of the BBC (Review of the BBC Charter) and that it considers "S4C's relationship with the BBC will be important in stabilising and strengthening its position over the coming years" (p.42).
23. However we agree that it is not an attractive or sensible option to incorporate it entirely into the BBC. Neither do we believe that the time is right to transfer a dedicated share of the licence fee to S4C to fund Welsh output directly, or subsequently contract out this element of PSB. Such an approach may offer some practical advantages for S4C in the short-term, but is reminiscent of "top-slicing" or otherwise diverting portions of the licence fee, which was subject to long and detailed consideration through the BBC's Charter Review process (and largely rejected).
24. Therefore, Equity believes that an enhanced version of the "status quo" option may be a future option for S4C. This should also incorporate the recommendations of the Laughton Report, which offer a good starting point and highlight the need to agree a new formula for the supply of programmes and other services by the BBC to S4C. It is also felt that S4C will require a clearer public service protocol that must be driven by more dynamic management with a clear view of its future role.
25. The proposal for a Welsh language PSP is a bold and innovative idea to meet PSB requirements for the future, particularly in meeting the challenge of distribution through new platforms and technology. However, it suffers from the same shortcomings as the original PSP concept, in that the practical application and funding requirements will be extremely difficult to reconcile.
NORTHERN IRELAND
26. For similar reasons to those stated above, we also believe that it is undesirable and unnecessary to propose a staged reduction in non-news output in Northern Ireland from 2.5 hours and 1.5 hours unspecified output to 2 hours non-news and 1 hour unspecified output respectively.
27. Equity believes that this proposal will be particularly damaging given that there is already a particularly low level of original production taking place in Northern Ireland across a number genres, but particularly with reference to drama. This is especially the case when considering production which is generated directly or commissioned by Ulster TV (UTV). It is an unfortunate fact that UTV provides no real drama output for viewers (and consequently no opportunities for Equity members) due to its already dismal record and total absence drama production.
28. BBC Northern Ireland does at least have a track record in producing high quality and original drama (including recent programmes such as Messiah) and current affairs programming against the background of the Troubles and political and social conflict. However, even a number of its programmes are made outside of Northern Ireland (e.g. Murphy's Law).
29. Nevertheless, even this low level of output is well in excess of the derisory efforts of UTV. As a result we are concerned that Ofcom's proposals send precisely the wrong message to a broadcaster that should be encouraged more than any to do more to meet the challenge laid down throughout Phase 3 of the PSB Review and address "competition for quality".
30. We note the particular importance of Irish language programmes to the Irish-speaking community of Northern Ireland and support Ofcom's efforts to look for innovative solutions to meet these needs. However we broadly accept the assertion that "the long-term future for indigenous language broadcasting lies in the delivery of dedicated services" (para A.30).
ENGLISH REGIONS
31. Equity opposed the reduction in ITV's regional non-news programming in England (from 3 hours to 1.5 hours a week) that was proposed as part of the Phase 2 of the PSB Review. At that time we stated that we believed that one of the key features of ITV is its regional dimension and that this differentiation is a crucial element in retaining audience share.
32. While recognising the need for a new approach in a post digital age, Equity believes that it is a lack of investment and poor scheduling of regional production which has undermined ITV's proud tradition of popular programming reflecting regional identity.
33. Unfortunately, the further proposal to reduce regional non-news programming in England to a token presence of only 30 minutes a week when the first UK region switches off its analogue signal (probably in 2008) appears to be another example of Ofcom accepting ITV's special pleading, which claims that such programming can only be provided at a disproportionate cost.
CONCLUSION
34. Ofcom appears to have accepted the assumptions and arguments put forward by ITV in its lobbying on this matter, which claims that such programming will be uneconomic and unnecessary in future. As a result of the proposals we now understand that some of the conservative estimates provided by independent analysts claim that the changes will save £15m by 2006, rising to £25m with the further change in 2008 (according to UBS Warburg).
35. This only succeeds in highlighting the possible benefit of these changes to ITV and its shareholders at a time when it is reporting a 57% rise in profit for 2004-5 up to £340m. Equity has instead argued that these regional commitments should be maintained, with a reduction in ITV1's broadcast licence fee of £204m as the actual impact of digital switchover becomes clearer.
36. These additional freedoms must be accompanied by a commitment from ITV to provide high quality original production of non-news output, which includes a range of popular genres, specifically including drama and comedy. Equity believes that this combination of reduced burdens on ITV through its licence fee payment and networking arrangements, as well as a renewed commitment from ITV, could sustain the distinctive nature of regional non-news programming at a more suitable level than is being proposed by Ofcom.
15 April 2005
For further information contact:
Matthew Payton
Research and Parliamentary Officer
Equity
Guild House
Upper St Martin's Lane
London WC2H 9EG
020 7670 0260
Site Navigation: