House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee

S4C

Fifth Report of Session 2010–12

Volume II Additional written evidence

Ordered by the House of Commons to be published 23 and 30 November and 14 December 2010

Published on 11 May 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited

The Welsh Affairs Committee

The Welsh Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Office of the Secretary of State for Wales (including relations with the National Assembly for Wales).

Current membership David T.C. Davies MP (Conservative, Monmouth) (Chair) Stuart Andrew MP (Conservative, Pudsey) Guto Bebb MP (Conservative, Aberconwy) Alun Cairns MP (Conservative, Vale of Glamorgan), Geraint Davies MP (Labour, Swansea West) Jonathan Edwards MP (Plaid Cymru, Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) Mrs Siân C. James MP (Labour, Swansea East) Susan Elan Jones MP (Labour, Clwyd South) Karen Lumley MP (Conservative, Redditch) Jessica Morden MP (Labour, Newport East) Owen Smith MP (Labour, Pontypridd) Mr Mark Williams MP (Liberal Democrat, Ceredigion)

The following Members were members of the committee during the Parliament:

Glyn Davies MP (Conservative, Montgomeryshire) Nia Griffith MP (Labour, Llanelli)

Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk

Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/welshcom

The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in printed volumes.

Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only.

Committee staff The current staff of the Committee is Adrian Jenner (Clerk), Anwen Rees (Inquiry Manager), Jenny Nelson (Senior Committee Assistant), Dabinder Rai (Committee Assistant), and Jessica Bridges-Palmer (Media Officer).

Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Welsh Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3264; and the Committee’s email address is [email protected]

List of additional written evidence

(published in Volume II on the Committee’s website www.parliament.uk/welshcom)

Page 1 Urdd Gobaith Cymru Ev w1 2 Hugh Evans Ev w2 3 Dr Simon Brooks, School of Welsh, Cardiff University Ev w2 4 Writers Guild of Great Britain Ev w4 5 Mabon ap Gwynfor Ev w7 6 Professor Thomas P O’Malley, Aberystwyth University Ev w9 7 Angharad Mair, Tinopolis Wales Ev w11 8 Institute of Welsh Affairs Ev w14 9 Plaid Cymru Ev w18 10 PACT Ev w22 11 Mercator Institute for Media, Languages and Culture, Department of Theatre, Film and Television Studies, Aberystwyth University Ev w26 12 Mr S G Jones Ev w29 13 Celebrating Our Welsh Language Ev w29 14 Peter Edwards and Huw Walters Ev w30

cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [SO] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w1

Written evidence

Written evidence submitted by Urdd Gobaith Cymru In the opinion of Urdd Gobaith Cymru, Wales’ largest children and young people’s organisation with 50,000 members under the age of 25: — The provision of good-quality Welsh language programmes is fundamental to establishing a linguistic context for those who speak Welsh and who wish to learn it. — It is vital that this is funded to the necessary level. — A good partnership already exists between S4C and the Urdd, but the Urdd would be happy to co- operate and work with S4C to identify further opportunities for collaboration to offer opportunities for children and young people, thus developing new audiences. — We believe that decisions about the development of S4C should be made in Wales. 1. The Urdd is an organisation for children and young people which has 50,000 members under the age of 25 throughout Wales. We hold cultural, social and sporting activities at a local and national level. We organise eisteddfodau, sports competitions and maintain three residential centres, where over 40,000 children and young people come to stay annually. 2. Our aim is to offer the children and young people of Wales an opportunity to live their lives through the medium of Welsh, developing confidence and respect for each other. 3. We would have serious concerns if the new arrangements were to be detrimental to the Welsh language— the language of many young people in Wales. Whatever the arrangements, we call upon S4C to develop programming for children and young people and we wish to co-operate further with S4C to develop the provision by broadcasting programmes which reflect the Urdd’s activities. 4. Adequate funding is vitally important to ensure that the quality is of good standard. It must be accepted that creating programmes incurs costs, more costly than, for example, organising social activity on a local level. 5. S4C is an important part of the linguistic context in Wales and an integral part of the effort to ensure language use and that the language is heard and used. S4C is not simply a television service but part of a language strategy. Language experts across the globe emphasise the importance of broadcasting in lesser-used languages in order to reach the audience and show that the language is contemporary, technologically modern and thus relevant to the age. Only since the advent of Radio Cymru in the 70s and S4C in the 80s have Welsh speakers heard the varied language that exists across the country and this has been vitally important, as was the case with the English language and the BBC in the 1920’s. 6. The contribution of S4C can be compared to the translation of the Bible into Welsh which elevated the language to a very privileged status. It was a new use of the language and a new medium—it was a crucial development in that age and a “modern” development. No comparable thing happened with other languages across Britain or Europe with the result that the Welsh language survived whilst others have died out. Therefore the existence of a Welsh channel and radio services and all other technological media are vitally important to the language. 7. Artistically S4C has provided opportunities for the talents of children and young people over the years— talents that would not have seen the light of day without the existence of S4C. 8. The partnership between S4C and the Urdd has meant we as an organisation have been able to develop young talents and have provided more opportunities for children and young people. 9. The fact that television is available in Welsh ensures that the Welsh language is a “normal” language, in the same way as Microsoft in Welsh normalises the language, as do international companies that advertise in Welsh; mobile phones, websites. 10. The fact that there is so much discussion about the quality of S4C programmes proves that the people of Wales demonstrate ownership of the channel. 11. The economic contribution made by S4C is significant especially in Cardiff and particularly in the north west where the percentage of people who have been employed through S4C has been a major boost to the local economy. 12. There is co-operation between S4C and the Urdd on several levels. There exists a partnership with the Urdd’s magazines which have a monthly readership of 30,000 and we are partners in the Wales Children’s Laureate Project. 13. The independence of the channel is vitally important and the model of deterring political interference has enabled the development of services that reflect the opinions of the Welsh audience. As an organisation we receive much praise for programmes from our Eisteddfod and the Bryn Terfel Urdd Gobaith Cymru cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w2 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

Scholarship. The loss of this independence, and the funding to maintain it, will be a signiﬁcant loss to the development of the language in modern Wales. November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Hugh Evans1 1. I can speak English, but my first language is Welsh. When writing about the Welsh language or Welsh language organisations, I can express my views and feelings far more precisely through the medium of Welsh than I can in English. For that reason, I have written my Submission (below), which is in the form of Bullet Points, in Welsh. 2. Submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on its inquiry into the broadcaster S4C, by a person who lives in London. (i) It’s not only viewers in Wales that benefit from the service provided by S4C. (ii) More and more people outside Wales can access S4C through Sky or watch S4C programmes on S4C’s website. From the figures given by S4C on their programme “Noson y Gwylwyr” (25/10/10), there is a growth of 82,000 viewers in England alone this year. (iii) So when the Committee is considering the value of this channel, you must please remember the advantages of S4C for those Welsh who are away from home—namely culture, knowledge, language development, pure enjoyment and more. Also for Welsh speaking children who live outside Wales, to have children programming in their first language, when perhaps they hear little Welsh outside the home and their family, is priceless. (iv) It is difficult to put a price on these advantages. Personally, to watch a programme in my first language—when around us in London we hear English and other languages—is a deeper and more emotional experience on the whole than I feel watching programmes in English. Also, some programmes such as “Gwyl Cerdd Dant” [a music festival] and “Y Talwrn” [a poetry programme] are completely unique to the culture and language of the Welsh—it would be impossible for programmes like this to be produced on an English channel. (v) There are many non-Welsh people outside Wales who love to watch S4C. For example, I am a member of an English choir here in London and many of my fellow choristers who are English often watch the musical programmes on S4C (on Sky or on the computer) especially choral programmes likes “Mil o Leisiau” [A thousand voices]. They say that there are no equivalent programmes on an English channel. (vi) I do not feel too qualified to comment on Mr Jeremy Hunt's intent to transfer financial responsibility for the funding of S4C to the BBC. But, as Mr. Hunt has severely criticised the BBC on several occasions for wasting money and being ineffective in its current responsibilities, the question arises: What makes Mr Jeremy Hunt think that the BBC will be effective in the added responsibility of dealing with the budget for S4C? November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Dr Simon Brooks, School of Welsh, Cardiff University Summary — This submission looks at S4C from the point of view of language planning (ie attempts to maintain and preserve the Welsh language). — S4C is an important player in terms of language planning for the Welsh language. — There has been a crisis in Welsh-language media over the past decade, and this has increased the relative importance of S4C. — The emphasis by S4C on broadcasting for children shows a corporate awareness of the importance of language planning—this age group is key to Welsh language maintenance and preservation. — The Welsh language service provided by S4C for young children is held in high esteem and is a good use of public money. — The BBC may not place a similar emphasis on Welsh-language broadcasting for children, and the loss of S4C’s independence represents a strategic risk to the future of Welsh-language broadcasting for children. — A reduction in this service would damage the future prospects of the Welsh language; and it would hit children from non-Welsh-speaking homes hardest. — S4C should have access to a deﬁned, sustainable, long-term source of ﬁnance. — S4C should be independent. 1 Translation from Welsh to English. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w3

— S4C has brought more economic beneﬁt to deprived communities in Wales than the BBC. — S4C should be devolved. — The current members of the S4C Authority should be removed.

Main Body of Submission 1. I am an academic at the School of Welsh, Cardiff University where I lecture in Welsh. My main research interest is multiculturalism and minority language communities. I am a member of Cardiff University’s Language, Policy and Planning Research Unit which “undertakes research on language policy and planning issues”. I was previously Editor of the Welsh language current affairs magazine, Barn. 2. My interest in S4C derives from its importance in minority language maintenance for the Welsh-language community in Wales and the United Kingdom. 3. Welsh has declined considerably as a community language in Wales during the past 50 years. As the language declines at a community level, it will require increasing support from dedicated Welsh-language institutions. These institutions enable the Welsh language to be socially reproduced although it is no longer the language of the whole community. 4. Mass media in minority languages has a crucial role to play in order to secure the cohesion of minority language communities (such as the Welsh-language community) which are geographically dispersed. 5. The committee should not treat S4C as a “broadcasting issue” alone. Of course, S4C is a broadcaster and the committee should take evidence from broadcasters about the effectiveness of its broadcasting strategy. However, S4C was set up in response to public pressure regarding the maintenance of the Welsh language. The success (or not) of S4C from a language planning point of view is of the greatest importance. 6. There has been a crisis within Welsh-language mass media since 2000. There has been a shift within radio stations in north and west Wales from bilingual to mainly English-language output. The Welsh-language weekly newspaper for Gwynedd, Yr Herald Cymraeg, has closed, and attempts to establish a Welsh-language daily newspaper, Y Byd, have failed. The presence of Welsh on the world wide web and on various multimedia platforms is severely restricted. All these failures put an increased importance on S4C as a Welsh-language public broadcaster. 7. The BBC in London has very little interest in the use of Welsh on multimedia platforms (apart from some video material on the web). S4C has developed Welsh-language Apps and interactive websites: the BBC has no Welsh-language material on any of its Apps. There is an argument for asking S4C to invest further in the development of multimedia platforms for the Welsh language: transferring responsibility for S4C to the BBC threatens this. The creative use of technology is important for minority language maintenance strategies among young people. 8. Despite the banner headlines that S4C is failing and that many programmes, to quote some parts of the tabloid press, have “no viewers”, S4C has fulfilled its remit from a language maintenance viewpoint reasonably well. On weekdays, the channel broadcasts some six hours a day of programmes (branded as Cyw) aimed at pre-school age children. As BARB does not record viewing figures among the under four age group, these programmes often have technical viewing figures of zero. In reality however, the programmes are extensively viewed. The channel also broadcasts on weekdays two hours a day of programmes aimed at the pre-teen age group (branded as Stwnsh). Both services also broadcast at weekends. On weekdays, S4C thus broadcasts some eight hours a day of Welsh-language programmes for children. 9. The decision to concentrate on the pre-teen age group is important and correct. This is when it is easiest to acquire language skills. Together with the Welsh-medium education system, S4C represents the main way in Wales of socialising children through the medium of the Welsh language. The service is vitally important for children from non-Welsh speaking homes as it often provides their main, and perhaps only, opportunity to have exposure to the Welsh language outside the school system. S4C children’s programmes are relevant to both English and Welsh speakers in Wales, as both English and Welsh speakers may wish their children to learn the Welsh language. 10. The inability of the BBC to commit to a dedicated level of expenditure on S4C after 2014–15 is a matter of great concern. There is a fear in Wales that S4C will be bled dry by the BBC after this date. There is also concern regarding the loss of S4C’s independence: recent statements by the BBC that licence fee money is ultimately the responsibility of BBC governors have deepened these fears. 11. There is no guarantee that the BBC will prioritise eight hours a day of Welsh-language television for children after 2014–15. There will be contesting calls on BBC finance, and Welsh-language broadcasting for small children may lose out. The effect on the Welsh language of withdrawing or reducing the Welsh-medium television provision for children will be highly damaging. It will hit hardest non-Welsh-speaking families who wish their children to learn Welsh. It is the settled will of the people of Wales that those who wish their children to learn Welsh should have this opportunity, and that this should happen regardless of the language of the home. Threatening current levels of provision of Welsh-language television programming for children will make it less likely that children in Wales grow up bilingually. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w4 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

12. S4C appears to understand that broadcasting has a role to play in community regeneration. Community sustainability is crucial for the long term future of the Welsh language. The emphasis of the channel on broadcasting from various community events in north and west Wales is to be welcomed. The long term sustainability of the Welsh language is not a strategic priority for the BBC. 13. With important production companies based in towns like Llanelli and Caernarfon, commissioning from S4C has had an important role in boosting the economy in areas of relative economic and social deprivation where Welsh maintains a role as a community language. Although Caernarfon has lost some of its television production capacity during the past few years, the presence of S4C means that television production is more devolved and dispersed (within Wales itself) than it otherwise would be. The BBC on the other hand is a centralised beast which produces most of its Welsh programming in Cardiff. A gradual takeover of S4C by the BBC will suck yet more money, talent and facilities out of relatively deprived parts of Wales into an already wealthy capital city. This will weaken Welsh as a community language. 14. Language planners agree that it is best if institutions which are provided for a minority language community are as accountable as possible to members of that community, or its stakeholders. The loss of S4C’s independence to the BBC in London would mean that the line of accountability would be very stretched indeed. 15. I accept that the S4C Authority has lost the conﬁdence of the Welsh establishment and many of the S4C audience. However this is no reason for S4C to be subsumed by the BBC. When the Hutton Report showed that the BBC had failed, the Corporation was not taken over by another public broadcaster. Rather there were resignations, and a change of policy. This is what should happen at S4C: S4C should remain as an independent body, but the current membership and Chair of the S4C Authority should be replaced. 16. As minority language institutions should be accountable to those who are stakeholders in the minority language (not necessarily ﬂuent Welsh-speakers alone), I believe that S4C should be devolved. 11 November 2010

Written evidence submitted by the Writers Guild of Great Britain The Writers’ Guild of Great Britain is a trade union afﬁliated to the TUC. It represents more than 2,000 professional writers in the UK and negotiates minimum terms agreements with broadcasters, theatres and independent producers. It has an active Wales branch made up largely of writers writing in the Welsh language.

Headlines: — S4C is an extremely important cultural institution vital to the survival and growth of the Welsh language — S4C should decrease its output to concentrate resources on fewer programmes of quality — S4C is extremely good value for money making programmes far more economically than other broadcasters — S4C’s subsidy is responsible for a vibrant broadcasting industry in Wales in BOTH languages — S4C’s failure to reach audiences is a myth when considered in the context of other UK Digital platform channels — Further collaboration between S4C and the BBC is a danger to plurality — S4C should be accountable to the National Assembly for Wales

1. The Extent to which S4C is Fulfilling its Remit The Writers’ Guild of Great Britain strongly believes that S4C is an extremely important cultural institution vital to the surivial and growth of the Welsh language. It provides programming for all ages and audiences with a wide range of interests. A number of its programmes are of a very high standard, especially in the fields of drama and documentary. The television landscape has changed dramatically since S4C’s inception and the channel has striven to keep up with this rate of change. It is our belief that many of the problems S4C has encountered during the past 18 months are a result of this digital evolution. S4C is a public service broadcaster making programmes in a minority language. The odds were stacked against it in an age where hundreds of diverse channels—often catering for specific demographics and interest groups—were introduced into people’s homes for the very first time following digital switchover. It would have been incredible if S4C HADN’T struggled as viewers discovered the other channels on offer. Vastly increased choice has led to a drop in viewing figures. (This is the experience of ALL ex-terrestrial channels, not just S4C.) An increase in broadcast hours has led to a drop in budgets and an increase in the number of repeated programmes. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w5

The challenge for S4C is now to reconnect with its audience. It is our belief that a reduction in the number of hours it broadcasts—a return to a ﬁgure closer to the minimum hours it is required to broadcast by statue— would be sensible. This would allow budgets to be concentrated on fewer projects and scrutiny on quality to be more rigorous. The channel could reinvent itself as a service—like BBC 3 or BBC 4—which broadcasts a limited service between certain hours. S4C’s children’s services could be broadcast within their brands “Cyw” and “Stwnsh” during the day and the core service could then begin at 6 pm or 7 pm and end at 11 pm. S4C needs to address more aggressively the changes in the way viewers are watching television and look again at its on-line catch-up “Clic” service. This service needs to be at the forefront of developments as viewing on-line increases dramatically and platforms such as “You View” and “See-Saw” ﬁnd their feet.

2. The Impact Recent and Potential Spending Cuts will have on S4C and what Level of Public Subsidy for S4C is Appropriate Over the Longer Term The cuts will undoubtedly lead to a cut in the number of hours of television S4C can make which reinforces our view that the channel should contract its activities as described in Paragraph 1. It is our concern however that the scale of the cuts—25%—are so large they will damage the quality of S4C’s programming. The channel already makes programmes far cheaper than other UK broadcasters. An hour of quality drama costs around £210,000. This compares to the average BBC spend of more than £500,000 an hour. It might make the production of important drama series such as “Pen Talar”—which was already difﬁcult on the budget it received—impossible. Cuts will reduce development funding for projects as more money is directed towards plugging production gaps and will therefore stiﬂe creativity. We are concerned bilingual writers will start to look for opportunities in English language television where fees will be comparatively higher as a result of cost-cutting and that drama output will suffer its very own brain drain. It is our position that S4C—as a unique broadcaster with an important cultural and linguistic role—should not receive any cuts to its budget. We believe a special case should be made of the channel and it should continue to receive the level of funding as set out in statue.

3. The Cultural and Economic Benefit to Wales from the Investment of Over £100 Million per Annum of Public Funds into S4C Widely publicised figures from the University of Wales, Cardiff, have recently put a price of £90-million on S4C’s worth to the Welsh economy. The sustained investment has been largely responsible for the growth of the television industry in Wales. This growth—and the skills base that grew with it—has also made possible the boom in English language production in Wales. Our union believes the BBC wouldn’t have been able to move productions such as “Doctor Who”, “Torchwood” and “Casualty” to Cardiff without the skills and talent base that has been nurtured by S4C—with public subsidy—over 28 years. The majority of our members in Wales make their living from the Welsh language media—whether it be through S4C or the BBC. The development of this sector would not have been possible without subsidy and continued subsidy is essential if these employment opportunities are to be maintained. Writers, actors and directors who have been nurtured by S4C have gone on to work successfully for other broadcasters and film companies. These careers and projects that have brought money back to Wales are in large part due therefore to the original employment opportunities given to these individuals by S4C.

4. Is S4C Maximising the Use of its Financial and Other Resources to Achieve Value for Money, to Optimise the Quality of its Output, and to Reach as Wide an Audience as Possible Value for money

S4C makes its programmes at a much lower price than other UK broadcasters. As stated in Paragraph 1, budgets are lower and it is the experience of our members that there is very little waste compared to observations made after working with other broadcasters. It is our belief therefore that S4C is a prudent broadcaster when investing its resources in production. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w6 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

Quality

We believe the quality of programming in areas such as drama and documentary are extremely high. Recent dramas such as “Pen Talar”, “Con Passionate” and “Caerdydd” are excellent. The latter have won awards and are considered by many to be better than some of the drama produced in English.

Documentary strands are also excellent and display a unique relevance to the social and historical context of Wales unfound on any other broadcaster.

The number of award nominations the channel’s children output has garnered this year speaks to the quality of this output.

We question however the amount of lifestyle and entertainment programming which apes programmes in English and ﬁnd these hard to defend in terms of a public service broadcasting remit.

Audience reach

S4C’s figures are unfairly compared to the figures of major national broadcasters such as BBC1. 75,000 viewers for an episode of “Pen Talar” therefore may not seem high, but when put into the context of an audience of 500,000+ Welsh speakers, those who are learning Welsh and non-speakers choosing to watch using subtitles, we believe this figure to be a respectable one.

Much capital has been made of the channel’s viewing ﬁgures by the channel’s detractors and we believe many of the headlines to be misleading.

S4C’s figures need to be looked at in the context of a digital landscape where a widely publicised English language series such as “The Wire” with a much wider appeal attracts 38,000 viewers for the first episode of its final series on digital channel FX: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/may/05/tv-ratings-luther-idris-elba

This is a major drama series with a huge advertising budget and critical acclaim. Suddenly, S4C’s ﬁgure of 75,000 viewers for “Pen Talar” seems very impressive.

It would be naive however not to recognise that the channel could reach more people, and would once again advocate a scaling back of output in order to focus resources on must-see event television that could only be made in Welsh because of its subject matter.

5. The Potential for Further Collaboration between S4C, the BBC and Independent Broadcasters in Wales in Order to Reduce Duplication and to Achieve Economies of Scale

The Writers’ Guild is extremely nervous about further collaboration between S4C and the BBC. The BBC provides S4C with many of its core programmes, but we are worried closer collaboration will lead to the BBC consuming S4C in the long term.

A successful and healthy broadcasting industry requires plurality. The loss of S4C’s independence would be a threat to plurality in a Welsh context as ITV Wales has already lost its inﬂuence. While we appreciate closer collaboration could lead to savings in terms of personnel and overheads, we feel that a collaboration in terms of editorial policy would be a threat to plurality and S4C’s independence.

6. Should the Finance and Accountability of S4C Remain in Whitehall or Become a Devloved Matter

We do not believe S4C’s subsidy should be found in the BBC’s budget and are campaigning for responsibility for funding the channel to be returned solely to the DCMS, or better still, monies and responsibility for the grant given to the National Assembly for Wales.

It makes little sense that the issue of accountability following the establishment of the National Assembly for Wales should rest with Whitehall and considered by individuals who in general have little or no knowledge of Wales, the Welsh language and the output of S4C. November 2010 cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w7

Written evidence submitted by Mabon ap Gwynfor I have no expertise in the field of Broadcasting nor specifically regarding S4C other than being an audience member and a father to a three year old son who uses the service regularly. In my submission I will state my belief that: — S4C succeeds to fulfil its remit fully. — The impact of the recent announcements will have a detrimental effect on S4C, the Welsh Language and culture. — Funding should not be looked at through the prism of the open market. — The agreement as written by Sir Michael Lyons threatens the very existence of S4C. — A minority language and culture should not be expected to justify its existence and made to fight for its continued survival. — The cultural impact of S4C is its greatest success, but its economic impact should not be ignored. — That no other Broadcasting body could or would commission valuable programmes that are shown on S4C. — S4C has historically provided a valuable platform for developing world famous programming (not necessarily associated with S4C). — S4C’s recent governance has been questionable and questions regarding some key decisions should have been raised earlier. — With recent cuts in programme funding by BBC Wales and ITV it is questionable what collaboration could be achieved between larger bodies and S4C without diluting S4C’s remit. — S4C should be devolved to the National Assembly for Wales with sufficient funding. — Breaking up the BBC to reflect the constituent nations of the UK should be considered. — Placing S4C under the control of the BBC will lead to the loss of S4C’s independence and threatens its future. — Television continues to be a revolutionary communication tool allowing cultures and languages to evolve and thrive, and that Wales and the Welsh language should not be denied this opportunity. 1. S4C is fulfilling its remit of providing Welsh Television Programmes to viewers admirably. The programmes range from pre-school age through to programmes for the elderly. In fact I would argue that S4C achieves a far better result than any of the other channels considering that there is only one Welsh Language TV broadcaster providing programmes for every age group and every interested party while the BBC, for instance, can split its TV programming between four TV channels, with specialist programmes geared for specific tastes or age groups featuring on specific channels eg BBC3 providing Comedy programmes and programmes for the 18–25 age range. 2. The need to achieve this balance hasn’t always been successful, with some programmes less successful than others, but this is true of every broadcaster, and is not a problem exclusive to S4C. The fact that it has to achieve this balance on one Channel means that the success or failure of any given programme is magnified. 3. I fear the proposed spending cuts and the proposal to bring S4C under the control of the BBC will have a severely detrimental impact on S4C and its ability to broadcast high quality output. Prior to the Comprehensive Spending Review BBC Wales had already announced its intention to cut spending on producing programmes for S4C by approximately 17%. This alone would affect the quality of the programming produced by the BBC to S4C, but I understand that the BBC’s internal decisions are not within the remit of this inquiry. 4. Since this inquiry was launched on 15 October, nearly a week before the Comprehensive Spending Review with the announcement by Chancellor George Osborne, MP, that S4C would be placed under the control of the BBC with no knowledge at the time of the launch of this inquiry regarding such an announcement, I presume that the reference to “…potential future spending cuts…” might allow me to comment on the latest proposals. 5. The agreement as written by Sir Michael Lyons to the Chairman of the BBC Trust states: In the event that a new partnership model does not prove viable for any reason, the Government will not take licence fee money itself for this purpose. But in this situation the Trust will propose a one- off reduction in the level of the licence fee which would be equivalent to the contribution that the BBC would otherwise have made to S4C. This is not acceptable. The Government has washed its hands clean of S4C and given the BBC an opportunity to do so as well. The above quote does not give any qualifications or caveats to protect S4C (though it does suggest cash-back to UK license fee payers!), but simply allows the BBC to wash its hands of S4C “for any reason”. In the event of this happening Sir Michael Lyons states clearly that the Government will not fund the difference, therefore S4C would be expected to continue its service with the £7 million provided by Government and any revenues it can generate for itself. This is simply not acceptable. 6. A minority language and culture should not be expected to fight for its very existence in a global village where only a hand-full of languages dominate Global Broadcasting. The UK Government has a duty to protect cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w8 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

and promote its various cultures and languages, without which the UK would not be what it is today. Therefore the question of what level of subsidy should be provided should not be considered as a purely economic equation, but instead what value beyond economic ones does the UK Government place on its indigenous cultures in order to allow them to continue and flourish. The Welsh language poses no threat to the English language, and those of us who live our lives through the medium of Welsh pose no threat to any English speaking individual, organisation, or establishment. However, conversely our existence as Welsh speakers is threatened. 7. A small independent English Language Broadcaster has a greater chance of surviving on income generated from its own broadcasting, simply because of the dominance of the English language, the market value of which would make it worthwhile for advertisers to promote in. Maintaining a small niche market English Language Broadcaster who exists to provide entertainment in an open market might be a simple economic equation, eg number of viewers = £X, but maintaining a Welsh Language broadcast service, which has to cater for all tastes and entertain and educate in equal measures is economically more difficult. It is nonetheless vitally important. 8. You cannot underestimate the benefits of S4C to Wales, culturally and economically. From its earliest days through until today it has provided first class children’s TV, from SuperTed to the current Cyw service. No other broadcaster would broadcast such unique programmes as Fferm Ffactor, Cefn Gwlad, Bro, or would commission the production of dramas based on the Welsh experience such as Teulu, Tair Chwaer, Con Passionate, or indeed the longest running soap on the BBC Pobol y Cwm which portrays life in the Valleys of west Wales. No other broadcaster would commission a dramatisation of the works of Saunders Lewis, Daniel Owen or Caradog Evans. These and much-much more are uniquely Welsh, and without S4C would either be consigned to the Libraries or would never have been developed in the first place. Wales and our culture would be much the poorer without them. 9. Economically a recent report has found that the channel is responsible for sustaining over 2,000 jobs in Wales. These jobs are scattered across Wales, and not concentrated solely in the south east corner of Wales. But S4C has also enabled the development of a vibrant independent TV industry in Wales, resulting in first class facilities being available for use for other companies, allowing even more money to be pumped into the Welsh economy. 10. Without S4C it is questionable whether world famous personalities (on air and off air) such as Mike Young, Ioan Gruffydd, Rhys Ifans, Alex Jones, Ceri Sherlock, Marc Evans, Karl Francis, and a host of others would have achieved their successes if it wasn’t for the opportunity that was given to them by S4C. These in turn have created networks and brought in investment through their networks to Wales. 11. To highlight one example. Mike Young Productions started after Mike Young was approached by S4C to produce SuperTed. Mike Young Productions is now based in Los Angeles with the production studio in Merthyr Mawr. Today they produce worldwide hits such as Bratz, Horrible Histories, Voltron, He-Man and other recognisable cartoons. 12. It is questionable whether S4C was giving the best value for money, and according to some it was top heavy. I am not in a position to comment on its staffing structures, unfortunately. 13. I believe that S4C should have made better use of multi-platform services to deliver its output, which would have resulted in it being a class leader in new broadcasting technology. As a small broadcaster it should have researched other avenues instead of being content to compete on the same level as much larger broadcasters such as the BBC and ITV. 14. The question of reaching a wider audience is difficult. Its remit is to broadcast in Welsh. This should not be diluted. As mentioned earlier one must be sympathetic to the difficulty of having to provide programmes suitable for such an array of tastes. It could not be content on broadcasting for a niche market within the Welsh speaking audience as this would have alienated other equally important viewers. Welsh speakers after all are subject to the same whims and fashions as our English speaking brothers and sisters. 15. S4C’s decision to limit the amount of companies that it used to commission programmes from was a bad decision which should have been questioned much earlier. 16. The BBC already produces a large amount of the programming broadcast on S4C, including the News and Pobl y Cwm. ITV have slashed the hours of programming that they do for S4C to four hours a week already. If collaborating with either of these two producers is a serious option, then it can only be done by providing extra funding for them ring-fenced for producing programmes for S4C. 17. The natural home for S4C would be within the National Assembly for Wales. It would however be grossly unfair to devolve S4C without also providing the funding, as the Assembly has no means to raise its own funds. The logical answer would be for the license fee to be split between various broadcasters with a percentage sliced off to fund an independent S4C. Alternatively the BBC could be broken up entirely and follow the devolved nature of the UK, with a Wales Broadcasting Corporation coming under the control of the National Assembly, and the same with a Scottish, Northern Irish and English. These in turn could opt to contribute a percentage of their funding to fund a central BBC. Therefore the funding structure would be the converse of what it is now—rather than money collected centrally and distributed to “the regions” as we are cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w9

called, it could be allocated initially to the constituent nations within the UK and then decisions being made locally as to how that money is to be spent. 18. Placing S4C under the control of the BBC is not the answer. If the BBC chooses to continue with the proposed set-up then they will have ultimate control and answerability over S4C, effectively having a veto over S4C decision making. After all he who pays the piper chooses the tune. The BBC have no qualms in paying in excess of £16 million to eight of its biggest stars (who’s contribution to culture and education is questionable), but have no reservations in getting rid of the Asian Network, and threatening the existence of 6 Music, both of which contribute greatly to the cultural fabric of the UK. 19. I have grave concerns as to the security of S4C’s budget and its independence as a broadcasting body if it was to be controlled by the BBC. The BBC will in no way allow an independent body to be run completely separate of its influence but with £100m of its money. This would also add another tier of bureaucracy on top of the existing S4C governing structure, which will in time lead to calls to eradicate bureaucracy within S4C, tying the broadcaster even closer to the BBC (if the partnership gets that far). 20. The question is if the partnership between the BBC and S4C proposed by Chancellor George Osborne MP existed in 1982, would Mike Young have been able to develop SuperTed and go on to become one of the world’s greatest animators? Would Ioan Gruffydd have graced the studios of Hollywood? But more importantly would we have thousands of hours of documented evidence of an unique and ancient culture at the end of the twentieth and the turning of the twenty first century? Would Wales, its languages and its colourful culture be what it is today? The answer on all counts, in my opinion, is No. 21. The channel gives us a platform to express ourselves, to allow our culture to evolve and learn from other cultures, in a way which is not stunted or isolated. To deny us a fully funded Welsh language TV Channel is to deny the language its chance to flourish and find its way in the modern world through the broadest mass communicating tool used in the developed world. Television’s ability to spread trends, fashion, news, and ideas to groups of people (rather than the individualist Computer or Mobile Phone) has revolutionised the way we see ourselves and the pace of our cultural evolution. To deny Wales and the Welsh language this is to stunt our language and culture and ultimately to kill it. November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Professor Thomas P O’Malley, Aberystwyth University Abstract — This submission questions the propriety of the decision to place S4C under the BBC. — It points to the haste, lack of consultation and opacity of the process. — It argues that the decision reflects a lack of proper consideration for the autonomy of Welsh culture under devolution. — The consequences of the decision include: — removing S4C status as an autonomous cultural organisation based in Wales; — threatening the continuance of a Welsh language general service; and — undermining the ideas that the BBC should remain independent from government, and that the licence fee should not be used as an arm of fiscal policy, nor be top sliced or supplemented by advertising. — It recommends that: — S4C’s autonomy be restored pending the development of policy in relation to a new Communications Act; — the National Assembly For Wales and the Welsh Assembly Government establish bodies to monitor media policy in Wales; and — the Welsh Assembly Government should also establish a public inquiry into communications policy in Wales, one purpose of which would be to determine the conditions under which policy could be devolved to the National Assembly and the Welsh Assembly Government. 1. The decision to place S4C under the BBC came at the end of three interlinked processes. The first was the need for the DCMS to present savings to the Treasury—hence the offloading of financial responsibility for S4C. The second was the issue of the BBC’s future funding. This has to be seen in the context of ongoing assaults on the licence fee from a range of organisations and the willingness of the government, and it would appear the BBC, to respond positively to them. The constitutional propriety of arriving at such a major decision in so short a time without consulting Parliament or the licence fee payer is open to question. Thirdly, there were the tense, negotiations during the summer over the amount of money the DCMS wished to cut from its annual allocation to S4C. It now appears as if the DCMS simply wanted to “get rid” of the problem by dumping the channel on the BBC. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w10 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

2. In sum the decision making process in relation to all three areas was opaque, to put it politely. It was also top down, lacking even the semblance of consultation. Not only does the haste and lack of thought associated with the process reﬂect badly on the judgement of those who took the decisions, but it illustrates quite clearly how, in spite of devolution, the government seems less than willing to consult properly the Welsh Assembly Government and the people of Wales on matters relating to the future of key national cultural institutions such as S4C and BBC Wales. In addition the lack of consultation and the centralisation of power and resources consequent on this decision contrast starkly with the government’s avowed aim of devolving power and control over other areas of the operations of the state to the local level.

3. S4C was established as a result of concerted campaigning by the people of Wales over a long period. It is a rare example of broadcasting policy makers responding to bottom up pressure. In addition the fact that S4C broadcasts in the Welsh language is a matter of immense cultural signiﬁcance, not least of all because the language is one of the key ideas underpinning contemporary conceptions of what it is to live and participate in Welsh culture.

4. The effects of the decision to place S4C under the BBC have been widely discussed. They include: (i) Removing the autonomy of S4C and placing its governance under the BBC. The legality of this is questionable and is being challenged by the S4C authority. (ii) Raising fundamental questions about how the Welsh language programming of S4C will be protected from the inevitable financial pressures that will be exerted on the BBC over the next six years. The speed and lack of consultation over the changes has left this situation very unclear. (iii) Providing evidence to the BBC’s opponents that the BBC’s licence fee can be top sliced to service the needs of spending departments, when in fact the licence fee is a levy which, in principle at least, should remain devoted to BBC services. It establishes the licence fee as just one more form of taxation which the Treasury can use to fund services formally funded out of taxation, thereby removing essential elements of the BBC’s financial autonomy. (iv) Breaching the principle that BBC domestic services should not take advertising. The BBC’s freedom from the pressures generated by dependence on advertising finance has been one of the most important reasons why it has been able to achieve so much since 1922. By tacking on an organisation which generates revenue from advertising the government has provided an opening for those who want to see the licence fee replaced, ultimately, by advertising or subscription in the context of a BBC operating on the margins of the domestic communications environment.

What Can Be Done?

5. S4C should be allowed to retain its autonomy outside of the BBC and should be funded by the DCMS; a decision about the governance and future funding of S4C should emerge, after proper consultation, during the discussions surrounding the development of the next Communications Act.

6. The DCMS should continue to fund S4C in the interim at a level which ensures that it can fulﬁl its remit.

7. The National Assembly For Wales and the Welsh Assembly Government need to establish immediately mechanisms to allow high proﬁle, public consultation and intervention on the future of S4C and of English language broadcasting in Wales. As the report of the Broadcasting Committee of the NAFW (2008) recommended the Assembly “should establish a standing committee on communications which should be responsible for scrutinising the work of Welsh ministers in relation to broadcasting and related cultural and creative industries”.(1) Had this been in place then there would have been a forum in which these issues could have been aired in a systematic manner.

8. There should be a publicly funded independent advisory body, a kind of Standing Commission on Communications. It should be funded by WAG, but established so that it can act independently. It could consist of representatives, appointed by as democratic a method as possible, of people with interests and specialisms in the area, as well as people from organisations in civil society. Its job would be to analyse policy, consult widely on it and act as an independent source of advice to the politicians, a kind of counterweight to the industry lobby and the regulator, Ofcom. The Commission could also fund organisations in civil society that need money to enable them to intervene effectively in the policy process. These measures could be taken without recourse to legislative change at Westminster.

9. Finally, there is now an urgent need for a full public inquiry, or commission into the future of communications in Wales, prior to the drafting of the next Communications Act. Its remit should be to examine the current structures of ﬁnance, organisation and accountability of communications in Wales, taking in all forms of mass media, but, in particular, broadcasting, the internet, and the press, as well as cinema. This should be established by WAG, and should also work on determining the best method for devolving selected powers over communications policy to Wales It should have representatives on it from the media industries, trade unions and civil society organisations, and be chaired by someone independent of political parties and of the media industries. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w11

References (1) Report of the Broadcasting Committee (NAFW, 2008) p 69. November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Angharad Mair, Chair, Tinopolis Wales Introduction Tinopolis is one of the main independent media companies in the UK, producing around 2,500 hours of drama, factual programmes, sport and children’s programmes every year for more than 200 broadcasters worldwide. Our headquarters are in Llanelli but we also have production bases in London, Oxford, Glasgow and Cardiff. Our brands include Mentorn, Sunset+Vine, Folio, Fiction Factory, POP1, DEEM, Video Arts and Daybreak Pictures. In Wales a high percentage of our work is for S4C, and we employ around 200 full time staff to work on these programmes. This has a huge economic value to a town and area such as Llanelli, where there are very few well paid jobs. I welcome this inquiry into S4C by the Welsh Affairs Committee. The value of S4C as a guardian of the Welsh language and its culture is immense as is its economic value throughout Wales, and especially in poorer areas such as Llanelli, Caernarfon and Porth in the Rhondda Valley. In these areas the broadcasting industry— directly because of S4C—has been able to make a huge contribution to the local economy, and has enabled young people to have worthwhile jobs and careers in their own locality.

1. Summary 1.1 There is a need to correct some of the damaging misconceptions and myths about S4C and in particular its viewing figures. The reports in the press and even on various news and political television programmes during the last few months have suggested a channel in decline, a channel that is somehow less relevant now than when it was set up in 1982, and yet all of this negativity is based on the flimsiest of evidence. 1.2 Misinformation about the viewing figures of S4C is due to genuine misunderstanding, lazy journalism and even arguably driven by other agendas. Regrettably, this misinformation seems to have contributed to set the current Government policy for S4C. S4C is still popular and relevant to the people of Wales and I shall be referring to: 1.3 The YouGov poll on S4C October 2010. Research by Broken TV October 2010. The BARB figures. The truth behind the myth of “zero viewers” and “viewing figures halved”. The inequitable comparisons with BBC Alba. Personal evidence as Editor of S4Cs daily programmes.

2. YouGov Poll October 2010 2.1 A recent poll by YouGov questioned a Welsh panel on S4C. These are some of its ﬁndings: 2.2 “How often do you watch S4C?” All panel—Welsh and non Welsh speakers: 10% said at least once a week. 4% said everyday. Welsh speakers: 19% said every day. 14% at least three times a week. 16% at least once a week. 2.3 “Would you say that you watch more or less of S4C than you did ﬁve years ago?” All panel—Welsh and non Welsh speakers: 8% said more. 44% about the same. Welsh speakers: 9% said much more14% a little more 47% about the same. 2.4 “There is no need for a Welsh language television channel” All panel—Welsh and non Welsh speakers: 55% disagreed. Welsh speakers: cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w12 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

84% disagreed. 2.5 “S4C is important in safeguarding the future of the Welsh language” All panel—Welsh and non Welsh speakers: 55% agreed. Welsh speakers: 79% agreed.

3. Research by “Broken TV” S4C Compared to Other Digital Channels 3.1 In October Broken TV website conducted an independent survey into viewing ﬁgures. In a list of 229 channels in the UK from the most watched to the least watched, S4C was 69th. Below S4C were a range of channels that are considered to be popular such as the History Channel—78th, National Geographic—91st, The Biography Channel—94th, Eurosport—101st, MTV—105th, and even ESPN—77th—which has exclusive live Premier League Football. Sky Arts was 204th on the list with Men & Movies languishing at the bottom at 229. 3.2 Since S4C’s core audience is 1% of the UK population and those able to speak Welsh ﬂuently, this review suggests that S4C does remarkably well.

4. The BARB Figures and Anomalies 4.1 BARB figures have been the source of much criticism but these has significant anomalies.In Wales the BARB panel is accepted as statistically insufficient as the base panel is designed only to give UK statistics. This panel is therefore boosted by an additional 600 people. In my view, the enhanced BARB panel is likely to provide misleading data. In Wales our audience is derived from a number of pockets where the language and social patterns are wide and varied. There is such a high level of variation in language use across districts and families. This, combined with the panel being dependent on only 309 homes across Wales, is likely to produce results that are statistically inaccurate. 4.2 It is understood that the viewing habits and preferences of the Welsh speaking population are affected greatly in mixed households where one or both adults cannot speak Welsh. It is highly unlikely that S4C will be the channel of choice on a main television where one or more of the adults does not speak Welsh. The BARB figures purport to take into account homes of various degrees of fluency but given the small number of households sampled and the difficulties of identifying accurately household language use, the mathematical algorithms are being applied to already questionable data. 4.3 Whilst the Census gives a level of c 21% who note the ability to speak Welsh, in fact if we look at Welsh households, the proportions are significantly lower. Couple households, where both parents speak Welsh 8.2% Lone parent households where the adult speaks Welsh 12.3% Other households, where both adults speak Welsh 15.4% Overall % of Welsh speaking households 11.9% 4.4 It is therefore probable that the number of Welsh speaking households amongst the panel could be as low as 36, ie11.9% of 309, representing 71 panel members. 4.5 There is no greater evidence of the fragility of these viewing figures used by S4C than a comparison with the previous BARB panel. Both of the last two panels have purported to be accurate representations of viewers in Wales but the latest panel showed an immediate drop of up to 50% in S4C viewers. BARB figures are not designed for this purpose and S4C is now paying the price for accepting them in the past just because they found them acceptable. The truth is that we do not have accurate data about the viewing patterns of Welsh-speakers and certainly we do not have data solid enough upon which to base public broadcasting policy. 4.6 We have looked in detail at various anomalies and the report would be available should the Committee wish to see the study in full.

5. The Myth of “Zero” Viewers and “Viewers Halved” 5.1 Possibly the greatest damage to S4C, and how it’s perceived by others, especially those who have limited knowledge of the channel and its programmes—has been the myth that S4C has zero viewers, or indeed that viewing numbers have dropped considerably in the last few years. 5.2 Even the original story in the Western Mail in March this year supplied by an “anonymous TV industry insider” conceded that “most of the programmes with a zero viewer rating are children’s programmes” but the signiﬁcance of that fact—lost in the sensationalist zero viewers headline—was that as an audience these programmes aren’t measured in viewing terms by BARB. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w13

5.3 This constant untruth about zero ﬁgures has also been prevalent on BBC news and political programmes. Even on The Politics Show on 7 November Aled ap Dafydd the presenter who was interviewing Wales’ Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones suggested three times that S4C had no viewers. He made a reference to the March article in The Western Mail showing that S4C had “zero viewing ﬁgures”, he added that “1 in 5 S4C programmes attracted zero ratings” and again maintained that “the people of Wales were not watching S4C”.

5.4 This is an example of damaging journalism prevalent especially on the BBC in the last few months, with allegations made without challenge and arguments made without any balance but given added weight by being repeated often by highly respected BBC journalists.

This too has not helped a growing mistrust, on an anecdotal level, towards the BBC in Wales.

5.5 Viewing ﬁgures “halved”

In answer to a question from Newport East MP Jessica Morden in the Commons on 25 October, Jeremy Hunt said “that over the past five years the weekly reach of S4C had halved”. This is a simplistic and disingenuous view of the reality of the viewing figures. With the completion of digital switchover in Wales in March this year, S4C became an all-Welsh language channel and no longer carried any Channel 4 programmes. They included hugely popular programmes such as Countdown, Big Brother and Friends. One obvious consequence was that S4C’s viewing figures during all hours would reduce. It is inappropriate to compare S4Cs present viewing figures during all hours with those of earlier years when Channel 4 programmes were shown in a very different analogue environment.

6. Inequitable Comparisons with BBC Alba

6.1 On ITV 1 Wales’ political Sharp End programme—6 November—the presenter Keith Raffan posed a question about S4C to Jonathan Edwards MP: “Jonathan, BBC Alba for Gaelic speakers in Scotland has fewer speakers of the language, smaller budget and bigger audience. Doesn’t this show just how pathetic S4C has become; it’s become a very bad advertisement for the Welsh language”.

6.2 The truth is that it’s impossible to compare S4C viewing figures with those for BBC Alba. BBC Alba viewing figures are not monitored in the conventional manner but by polling conducted through TNS System Three. The viewing figures are calculated from a market research survey of 1,000 general viewers. There’s no way of knowing just how many people actually watch Alba, and more specifically what they watch because there’s no breakdown of various programmes.

6.3 Once again the presenter here, on a highly regarded political show, attacked S4C with a statement that is completely untrue.

7. Personal Evidence

7.1 As a presenter on S4C since it began in 1982 and therefore one of the channel’s “faces” I am very aware of the importance of S4C throughout Wales in various communities because people tell me so. This anecdotal evidence was backed up recently when I presented a programme on 25 October asking viewers what they thought of S4C. Many people responded to say how important S4C is to them and their families, ranging from the elderly who see S4C as a hugely important part of their lives—as a “friend” as much as a channel, to parents—who might not speak Welsh—of young children who love Cyw. Should the Committee wish to see them, they are all available.

7.2 As the editor of S4Cs daytime programmes—Wedi 3 broadcast live between 3–4pm Monday to Friday with a highlights show on Sunday and Wedi 7 broadcast live between 7–7.30pm Monday to Friday, I can also testify that we have many e-mails weekly from viewers. These range from requests asking us to publicise a concert or an event in their area, to ideas for items on the programmes. We have a strong relationship with our viewers, and the amount of correspondence doesn’t seem to have any correlation with our supposed viewing ﬁgures. Again I could present you with all this varied correspondence as testament to the popularity and relevance of these programmes to the people of Wales.

7.3 Our on-air competitions attract a large number of entries. If we accept the BARB numbers 1 in 4 of the households watching the programmes choose to compete. Experience in television across the UK suggests that television competition entries account for under 1% of viewers. There are too many examples of anomalies such as this for it to be accepted without serious challenge that the published viewer numbers are accurate. November 2010 cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w14 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

Written evidence submitted by the Institute of Welsh Affairs I have pleasure in enclosing a submission from the Institute of Welsh Affairs to the Committee’s inquiry into S4C and other related issues. The IWA will be content to see the whole of its evidence placed in the public domain. The IWA has been concerned with issues surrounding public service broadcasting for some years. We have given oral evidence to the BBC Trust’s Impartiality Report on network news and current affairs undertaken by Professor Anthony King. We made submissions to the different phases of Ofcom’s second review of public service broadcasting and during that process were commissioned by the Welsh Government to carry out an audit of media in Wales. Our chairman was also a member of the Welsh Government’s broadcasting advisory group, which published its report in November 2008. We conducted public consultations on the issues in different parts of Wales, in collaboration with Ofcom, and also held a seminar on the future of PSB in Wales, publishing an edited transcript of the proceedings. Last year we also published a book on what we see as a crisis for English language television broadcasting in Wales. This was a selection of essays that dealt both with the general situation and the factors surrounding different programme genres. We have also supported the previous UK Government’s proposals for independently ﬁnanced news consortia to deliver news for Wales on ITV. In recent months we have been in correspondence with the Chairman of the BBC, Sir Michael Lyons, on the failure of the BBC Strategy Review to deal with the issue of services in Wales. Geraint Talfan Davies Chairman

Executive Summary 1. Whether the 24.4% cut in S4C’s budget announced by the DCMS was inevitable or not—given the UK Government’s approach to public expenditure—the cut still represents the largest single reduction in cultural expenditure ever experienced in Wales. 2. The cut to S4C has also to be placed in the context of other cuts to television programming for audiences in Wales—within ITV Wales and BBC Wales (across both languages). According to Ofcom between 2004 and 2009 the spend on English language television services in Wales fell by 44%, with further reductions in 2010. 3. In totality these reductions represent a significant diminution in Wales’s capacity to reflect fully its own society and perspectives back to all members of that society, whatever their preferred language. Every effort must be made to ensure that this level of service attrition does not continue, as currently seems likely. In this context the BBC’s failure to address the services for Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and its March 2010 Strategy Review should be of particular concern to the committee. 4. The scale of the cut to S4C cannot but affect the available options for shaping its service in the years ahead, as well as the viability of parts of the independent production sector. The range of its programming will be significantly constrained, even if a more creative commissioning process improves the quality of that which remains. 5. The budget reduction should, however, force a thorough and valuable review of the organisation’s strategies and operations—a review that is long overdue. S4C itself set out a possible approach to such a review in its submission to the DCMS. Such a review remains necessary, notwithstanding the proposals of the Secretary of State for a BBC-S4C partnership. 6. S4C will retain a capacity to deliver very substantial public value to viewing audiences and to wider Welsh society. Its effectiveness in optimising that public value has declined and needs to be revived, through a reconsideration of a range of strategies, better programming, more active engagement with stakeholders and improved governance. 7. The potential for collaboration between S4C and the BBC is substantial, regardless of the more fundamental partnership agreed between the Secretary of State and the BBC. Any proposals for collaboration will need to be justified on grounds of cost-effectiveness for both parties. This stipulation will need to be rigorously applied, especially given the asymmetry of the new S4C-BBC partnership. 8. The new partnership governance arrangements proposed by the Secretary of State need substantial reconsideration if they are to fulfil his stated commitment to the continued independence of S4C as well as avoiding the creation of an unnecessarily heavy administrative overhead. The BBC Alba model is not suitable for current circumstances in Wales. 9. Necessary effective negotiation between S4C and the BBC will not be easy to achieve given the S4C Authority’s palpable loss of authority and influence in recent months. This is damaging its relationship with the UK Government, with Welsh Ministers, the production sector and its own staff, at the very moment when it needs to be at its most effective. The issue should be addressed urgently. 10. Accountability for S4C must become a formal responsibility of the National Assembly and the Welsh Assembly Government, although the future budgetary link with the BBC will mean that some locus for the cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w15

DCMS, which sets the licence fee, will remain both necessary and desirable. This reflects the reality that within the UK devolution of responsibility for broadcasting will always involve a sharing of responsibilities between Cardiff and London. In this instance more detailed work is needed to define a set of relationships between four parties—S4C, BBC, WAG, DCMS—and a crucial fifth, the regulator, Ofcom. The DCMS and WAG should establish a working group to carry out this task.

A Context for the Cuts 11. For decades past Wales has prided itself on the strength of its public service broadcasting institutions. We have witnessed decades of growth in television programming for the Welsh audience, from the inception of BBC Wales in 1964, through the gradual growth of hours of production on ITV and the BBC, the creation in 1982 of the Welsh language service S4C and, following the migration of all Welsh language programmes to S4C, the growth of English language services on the BBC and ITV channels. 12. In the last decade, following the introduction of digital bandwidth, S4C, a service that had begun by broadcasting only about 22 hours a week of Welsh language programmes and sharing its channel with English language programmes from Channel 4, developed into a single language service broadcasting for more than 12 hours a day. At the same time BBC Wales experimented with a solid block of programmes for Wales in a nightly BBC2W service. 13. The first signs of a turning of the tide came with the gradual reduction in the volume of programmes for Wales on ITV from its peak of 12 hours a week at the end of the 1990s. ITV pressured the regulators consistently to reduce its regional programming obligations, and this has seen the service for Wales diminish to little more than a news service. At the same time the BBC abandoned its BBC2W experiment, and imposed budgetary cuts that has seen the scale of its service for Wales shrink. Reductions in the BBC Wales spend were already set to continue until 2012–13, and will no doubt intensify now that the latest licence fee settlement will reduce the BBC’s income by another 16%. 14. In its latest Report on the Communications Market in Wales Ofcom reported that between 2004 and 2009 the spend on English language television programming for Wales declined by 44%. It will have declined further in 2010. This is a necessary context against which to view the planned reduction of the S4C grant-in- aid from just under £102m in 2010 to £90 million in 2011 and to £83 million a year between 2012 and 2014. Gloomy estimates by the Welsh Assembly Government Advisory Group in 2008, that television spend on programmes for Wales would decrease by £25–30 million by 2013 compared with its peak in 2006, have actually proved wildly optimistic. The reduction, in less than a decade, will now be nearer £45 million. This must exacerbate the concerns expressed by the Welsh Affairs Committee in its report on English language television in 2009. 15. For some years S4C escaped this attrition, buoyed by a funding formula that guaranteed increases in line with the retail price index, and a generous settlement from the BBC that saw the BBC spend on output for S4C increase from just under £22 million in 2006–07 to more than £25 million in 2008–09 (an increase now to be sharply reversed, a reduction of £5.7 million) Arguably, these two bulwarks distanced S4C from the realities facing the rest of the broadcasting industry, and the English language services in Wales in particular. 16. Now S4C is faced with similar challenges of retrenchment. S4C has scope for efficiency savings both within its own organisation and through seeking greater synergies with the BBC in Wales. But no public service broadcaster can lose 24.4% of its grant without it affecting the broadcast output, without some constraint on the range and value of programming, even if a more creative approach to commissioning improves the quality of that which remains. 17. This has cultural and economic consequences. Taken together, these reductions across English and Welsh language services represent a significant diminution in Wales’s capacity to reflect fully its own society and perspectives back to all members of that society, whatever their preferred language. It will now be more difficult to meet the aim set out by the Welsh Assembly Government’s Advisory Group, that “the totality of media provision in Wales must contribute to and fully reflect: (i) a properly informed democracy, able to access high quality reportage, analysis and investigation from a variety of professional sources; (ii) a culturally rounded society, for which the media provide adequate room for full and varied expression; and (iii) a visibly creative economy in which the media pioneer innovation and are a driver of the creative industries.” 18. On the economic front, these reductions are a blow to a key part of the creative industries sector, a sector has been singled out for development in Wales. Many in the independent production sector have found in S4C a valuable outlet for their talents, sometimes when the paucity of output in English language services has provided no outlet at all. It is the volume and regularity of output on S4C that has allowed some people to build significant production businesses that go beyond a cottage industry. 19. Worryingly, there is no sign that the process of attrition is at an end. Although, S4C has some certainty about its admittedly diminished income, coming eventually in a combination from the licence fee (92%) and cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w16 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

the DCMS (8%), the BBC is facing a 16% reduction in its licence which will almost certainly impose further budget reductions on its programme services for Wales on top of those that are already in train. Welsh civil society and politicians will need to develop very urgently a much sharper and more robust challenge to the BBC’s centrally-driven priorities if we are to avoid services for Wales sliding further down an increasingly slippery slope.

Change at S4C 20. No-one should underestimate the extent of the challenge posed for S4C by the onset of digital transmission, and the creation of the multi-channel environment with its concomitant fragmentation of audiences. It has been especially difficult for S4C, because these changes have run side by side with massive changes in the nature of the Welsh-speaking audience, its demographics, self-perceptions of fluency and even the nature of the spoken language itself. That is the rationale behind the joint study being undertaken by S4C, BBC Wales and the Welsh Language Board to arrive at a shared understanding of the audience to Welsh language services—television, radio and online. The study is an essential foundation for any decisions on the future shape of the S4C service, and the balance of linear television and online investment. 21. Even so it is arguable that S4C underestimated the scale of the change in recent years, and the one benefit that may emerge from the harsh reduction in its budget is a much more radical re-evaluation of every part of its service and organisation. In its submission to the DCMS the S4C Authority described this as “a process of renewal”, and admitted that “it may not have made the correct judgments on all occasion or taken sufficient care to carry everyone with us.” 22. Such a process is urgently needed, notwithstanding the proposals of the Secretary of State for an S4C- BBC partnership. But some traps must be avoided. S4C has called this process a “root and branch examination”, but it is important that the current atmosphere of protest surrounding the channel does not constrain it from examining radical options. There has always been a danger that the weight of emotional capital invested by the some part of the Welsh-speaking community in a solution that was right for the 1980s might deter S4C from taking the right decisions to shape the channel from the next decades. It must resist such pressures. 23. It has said that it wishes to engage with key stakeholders “to become an even more effective partner in assisting the Welsh speaking community to achieve a wide range of social, cultural, educational and economic goals”. S4C needs to turn this into reality. Despite the budget cut, S4C will retain a capacity to deliver very substantial public value to viewing audiences and to wider Welsh society. Its effectiveness in optimising that public value has declined and needs to be revived, through a reconsideration of a range of strategies, better programming, more active engagement with stakeholders and improved governance. 24. This will entail a considerable cultural change in the organization that must reach right up the S4C Authority itself. In recent years the organisation lost the ability to reach out, squandering a previously wide coalition of support. It ceased to be self-critical within or to communicate without. Some of these faults may be laid at the door of senior management, but it has also been a failure of governance, and the Authority to date has been singularly unwilling to shoulder any part of the blame. This is now a central problem for S4C itself, since the Authority lacks credibility at the very moment when it most needs it—in negotiation with the BBC, an organisation that never lacks self-confidence even when on the back foot. 25. The S4C Authority’s palpable loss of authority and influence has been a key factor in its current plight. It has damaged the organization’s standing with Ministers in London and Cardiff, and with the production sector. It also weakens the position of its own staff. The issue should be addressed urgently.

S4C and the BBC 26. In the current climate it is only right that we should seek to maximise the synergies between two public service broadcasters in Wales. There are plenty of ways in which savings could be achieved, even if those that require capital investment may take a few years to materialise. But if this is to be achieved it will be essential for both parties to surmount a degree of mutual distrust. The prize could be considerable. Some will see a danger of an asymmetric relationship. That is incontrovertible when one considers S4C up against the wider BBC. Within Wales the two organisations are much nearer in turnover, but in people terms the BBC is still much the bigger organisation simply because it is a programme producer as well as a broadcaster. However one measures these disparities, it will be essential to avoid a one-way asymmetric relationship. 27. The Secretary of State’s letter to the BBC outlining his view of the partnership shows signs of the speed with which the plan was cobbled. He was right to stress the need to retain S4C’s independence, including its commercial freedom. But this must entail more than simply a freedom to commission programmes crucially important though that is. 28. Implemented in the form set out in the Secretary of State’s letter to the BBC, it would produce a cumbersome governance system, in which S4C’s independence would be only partial. In reaching for models ofﬁcials alighted on Scotland’s BBC Alba. This is not an appropriate model for Welsh circumstances. BBC Alba is a BBC branded channel. S4C is not. The BBC partner in the Scottish venture is the Gaelic Media Service, which is not a brand in its own right, and does not have the history and track record of S4C. The bulk of Alba’s budget comes from the Scottish Parliament. In future the bulk of S4C’s money will come from the cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w17

licence fee. The management arrangements for BBC Alba lack clarity, and few pretend that the relationship between the BBC and the GMS is one of equals. 29. Among the top line issues that need to be resolved in the next weeks we would list the following: (i) The lack of financial commitment to S4C beyond 2014–15, despite the fact that the licence fee extends to 2016–17, albeit that the level for the last two years is not yet fixed. (ii) Who decides on the S4C budget beyond 2014–15, or beyond 2016–17, the BBC or Government—and if it is government, what role, if any will the Assembly Government have? (iii) How to simplify the draft proposals in the Secretary of State letter. The proposals imply several tiers of governance: first, a joint management board with a majority of independent directors; second, a combined board of the S4C Authority and BBC Trust to oversee delivery of a service licence or operating agreement; and third, but not mentioned in the letter, there would be the S4C Authority and BBC Trust as independent entities. This is a wedding cake of governance that needs flattening. One possible way of simplifying this would be to revert to the original practice of BBC representation on the S4C Authority. (iv) The routeing of the money. There will be no independence for S4C if the money goes anywhere near central BBC management. In order to have funding stability for S4C the money will have to be passed direct from the BBC Trust to the governing body of the channel. (v) The form of the service licence. In order to distinguish the S4C service from the BBC’s services, it might be best to avoid the normal form of service licence and opt for a looser operating agreement. (vi) Who appoints the Chair of the key governing body? In our view this must be someone independent of the BBC Trust? (vii) What level of oversight is accorded to the BBC Trust? The letter of 10 November 2010 from the Chairman of the BBC Trust to the Chairman of S4C, states that the Trust as “the guardian of the licence fee…will need to have oversight of how this money is spent”. This should be defined in a broad way that does not impinge of the managerial autonomy of the channel. 30. This is far from being an exhaustive list of issues that need to be resolved. There will be some pressure to reach an answer quickly, but it is more important to get it right. As we have noted above, the circumstances are less than ideal for S4C, currently under an interim Chief Executive and an unhappy governing Authority.

Devolution and Broadcasting 31. It is surprising that it has taken so long for the issue of devolution for some element of broadcasting in Wales to come to the fore. That it has not done so before now is the result of fear—fear of having to pick up the bill but, more than that, fear of having to decide on the funding of S4C against competing priorities. That has not only been a less than mature approach, it has also been counter-productive. It has shielded S4C from proper scrutiny and it may be one reason why Wales not been listened to when it comes to other broadcasting issues. 32. The deficiencies of the broadcasting infrastructure in Wales—notwithstanding the existence of S4C— have been known for a long time: the collapse in spend on English language services, the weakness of commercial radio and the lack of Welsh involvement in allocating radio licences, the fact that BBC Radio Wales does not have full FM coverage, the fact that Radio Wales and Radio Cymru and Radio Cymru do not have full DAB coverage. 33. Equally obvious, has been our failure to influence decisions. Devolved administrations have so far failed dismally to achieve their objectives in the broadcast field, while at the centre of UK policy-making business and technological considerations have easily trumped cultural considerations. 34. In his report on the creative industries in Wales, Ian Hargreaves, commented on the fact that the level of public debate about S4C within Wales was not in line with its importance both culturally and economically, and asked whether this state of affairs was “a consequence of the fact that S4C is funded and largely regulated from London”. In his own words: “The UK authorities involved (Ofcom and DCMS) lack the instinct and self- confidence to animate this uniquely Welsh debate and the Assembly Government lacks the formal mandate.” The debate has now been animated by the DCMS purely on financial grounds. 35. Without a willingness to contemplate the devolution of responsibility for some elements of broadcasting, such as S4C, we will leave the whole of media and communications policy for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to be decided at the margins of a British debate—dominated by centralised institutions and centralised considerations—that will exhibit neither the will, nor the knowledge nor the empathy to generate solutions adequate to our needs and potential. We have to seek to change the nature of those institutions and to change our own approach. 36. We need urgently to address the issue of responsibility for S4C. Accountability for S4C must become a formal responsibility of the National Assembly and the Welsh Assembly Government, although the future budgetary link with the BBC will mean that some locus for the DCMS, which sets the licence fee, will remain both necessary and desirable. This reflects the reality that devolution of responsibility for broadcasting will always involve a sharing of responsibilities between Cardiff and London, not to mention Brussels. In this cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w18 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

instance more detailed work is needed to define a set of relationships between the four key parties—S4C, BBC, WAG, DCMS—and an important fifth party, the regulator Ofcom. The DCMS and WAG should establish a working group to carry out this task. 37. While this should be the prime task, we must also begin to look beyond the issue of S4C at possible new governance structures within Wales as well as for organisations such as the BBC, that better reflect the new constitutional shape of Britain as well as changing technologies and consumer behaviour. November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Plaid Cymru 1. Summary of response: (a) The question of S4C fulfilling its remit is a wider one. Plaid Cymru believes that DCMS has not shown the ability or willingness to effectively scrutinize the channel’s obligations or develop its remit or potential in line with developments in the field of Broadcasting and the Welsh Government’s Economic Renewal Programme. (b) The cultural and economic benefit of the £100m per annum has a positive impact on the Welsh economy. It is arguably the base from which the Welsh creative industry grows and competes globally. The cuts to that money jeopardize not only the jobs in the industry but also the competitiveness and excellence of those companies. (c) The funding of S4C is still based on an 1980s approach to broadcasting with no consideration of the wider demands of a broadcaster such as developing digital, on-line and HD content. (d) Plaid Cymru is very concerned with the proposals regarding bringing S4C under the BBC. Although there is scope for cooperation, there is little sign that the BBC has an interest or willingness to develop quality or quantity or Welsh content. Plaid Cymru is very concerned that the merger will compromise the editorial independence of S4C and jeopardize the already fragile plurality available to the people of Wales. (e) We believe that it is time to devolve powers over the field of Broadcasting to the Welsh Government. We have no faith that DCMS has the interests of the people of Wales or stakeholders at heart in relation to S4C and believe that S4C, its remit and budget should be devolved as soon as possible in order to address the crisis facing the channel. 2. This paper sets out Plaid Cymru’s response to request for submissions and observations by the Welsh Affairs Select Committee regarding its inquiry looking at the Welsh-language broadcaster S4C. The paper will present Plaid Cymru’s views on the points referred to in the call for submissions as well as making several other points. It is important to note however that Plaid Cymru, together with the leaders of all other major parties in the National Assembly, have written a joint letter calling for an independent review of S4C. We believe that many of the points raised and explored by the Welsh Affairs Select Committee in this inquiry could be explored more thoroughly by such a comprehensive review. 3. Before addressing the points raised by the Committee’s inquiry, it is important to set S4C in its context and to make a general statement of its value to the people of Wales. A popular movement in Wales campaigned for years for the establishment of S4C until Thatcher’s Government finally delivered its manifesto pledge to set up an independent Welsh-medium television channel. It has, since its creation, been the vehicle through which high-quality broadcasting has been commissioned on behalf of and delivered to Welsh speaking audiences. This has been the settled will of the people of Wales regardless of the language they speak. It is of incalculable importance to the further strengthening of the Welsh language as well as to the successes of Wales’ creative industrial sector, and it has an important role to play in ensuring much-needed plurality within Wales’ media. 4. S4C belongs to everyone in Wales whether they speak the Welsh language or not. Its programmes—the sport, the entertainment and its provision for children—play an important role in our shared aspiration to create a truly bilingual Wales where people can hear, listen and speak the language. If we are serious about protecting Welsh as a living language in Wales, then it is our duty—our responsibility—to safeguard an independent, properly funded S4C for future generations. 5. Plaid Cymru does not believe that S4C should be included in the Public Bodies Bill currently going through Parliament. 6. The Public Bodies Bill places too much power and influence at the hands of a single Minister in Westminster. His or her political whim should not decide the fate of an entire channel, essential to the survival and development of a language. 7. S4C is a Public Service Broadcaster and should not be treated in the same manner as a Public Body. S4C should be subject to Parliamentary debate and proper consultation when changes are proposed. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w19

The extent to which S4C is fulﬁlling its remit:

8. We believe this to be an interesting matter that raises wider concerns over the running and management of S4C. The responsibility for setting and reviewing S4C’s remit has been with the Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) since the channel’s genesis. Many have claimed recently that the channel does not fulfil this remit, however any failure of S4C to fulfil its remit must in part reflect the failure of DCMS to scrutinize and adapt the remit effectively over time. It is disappointing that DCMS has not undertaken a comprehensive review of S4C since 2002–03, during which time there have been many developments in the broadcasting world; not least the rapid and massive expanse of the smaller, digital channels that now compete against the traditional channels (BBC1, BBC2, ITV and Channel 4) and indeed claim a 41% annual share of television viewers. Surely, while the BBC is reviewed comprehensively and regularly in order to ensure that the license fee offers value for money, S4C should be subject to similar levels of regular constructive scrutiny.

9. DCMS has however shown a lack of interest in, and scrutiny of S4C and has failed to prove that it has any interest in ensuring that the channel continues to develop in line with its remit and wider developments in the ﬁeld. Neither has DCMS shown any willingness to explore or develop the wider cultural or economic beneﬁts of S4C.

10. Conversely, the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) has great interest in developing S4C due to its centrality to the creative industry. The WAG’s Economic Renewal Programme (ERP) has identified the creative industries as a key field which it hopes to develop as part of a wider economic development programme. For WAG, regular review of the remit and potential of S4C is crucial in developing the economic benefit of S4C. If the WAG had the capability to review and set the remit of S4C, it could ask S4C to apply performance conditions requiring a certain percentage of programmes to be sold in translation outside Wales or require S4C to foster international collaboration. This could be done by restricting the extent to which S4C acts as sole commissioner and encouraging international co-commissioning. There are exciting opportunities to develop the role of S4C as economic catalyst but with debate polarized and stifled and constructive review of the institution unlikely while the remit remains dormant at DCMS, Wales is not getting the most from S4C. The devolution of S4C’s budget, remit and powers to review the institution and appoint its Authority could go a long way to getting much more from S4C.

(The cultural and economic beneﬁt to Wales of the investment of over £100m per annum of public subsidy for S4C is appropriate and sustainable over the long term.

What impact recent and potential future spending cuts will have on S4C and what level of public subsidy for S4C is appropriate and substantial over the longer term?)

11. The potential impact of the spending cuts is of great concern for Plaid Cymru. The cuts not only put the future of Welsh-language broadcasting, the quality of programming and the future of independent creative industries under threat, but are also a direct threat to the Welsh Government’s Economic Renewal Strategy.

12. “Without S4C, Wales may well not have any independent television production companies at all. Almost all the Welsh indies have their roots in making programmes for S4C and they are spread across Wales in a way that has helped to broaden the geographic base of the Welsh creative industries sector. The decision, following the 2003 Communications Act, to allow independent production houses to retain intellectual property rights in their own productions, was designed to encourage indies to develop the kind of muscle that would enable them to trade beyond Wales into the UK television networks and beyond. In recent years, S4C has sought efficiencies of scale by commissioning a smaller number of indies, a move which has also had the desirable effect of encouraging the emergence of larger, stronger companies able to compete on a wider front, as well as to make its own procurement practices more efficient. S4C, through its 2004 Creative Excellence programme, has played a strong leadership role in the development of quality training and skills provision for the television sector in Wales, as well as collaborating with the IP Fund on joint investments in films and television programmes.”2

13. An assessment of the full economic impact of S4C on the Welsh Economy commissioned by S4C from the Welsh Economy Research Unit of Cardiff University Business School in 2007 estimated that it was responsible for supporting 2,254 jobs (full-time equivalents) through spending in that year of £96.7 million, not counting the jobs impact within BBC Wales resulting from the creation of 524 hours of Welsh-language programming at a value of £20.6 million. Most of the jobs S4C sustains are in the independent production sector and like most jobs in the public service broadcasting industry, they are characterised by relatively high levels of skill and pay.

14. The numbers reﬂect much more than the relatively small numbers working for the independent television companies themselves and take into account the employment down the supply chain. 2 Hargreaves I.The Heart of Digital Wales Review on behalf of WAG (2010) p32. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w20 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

15. Table E.1 THE ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT AND VALUE ADDED IMPACTS OF S4C ON THE WELSH ECONOMY 2002–063 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

S4C Gross £95.9m £94.5m £95.0m £95.6m £96.7m output (£m)* Estimated 2.240FTE 2.180FTE 2.150FTE 2.120FTE 2.250FTE Employment Impact of S4C on the Welsh Economy Estimated Value £77m £82m £80m £82m £87m Added Impact of S4C on the Welsh Economy *Total S4C spend turnover. Note ﬁgures have been rounded.

16. Translating employment effect into value added effect shows that over the ﬁve-year period, S4C activity has supported well over £77 million in the Welsh economy per annum. 17. “The independent production sector represents S4C’s largest expenditure category, accounting for over 80% of S4C’s total spending in Wales in any one year. Therefore, there is a clear need to understand that S4C’s economic impact extends beyond its direct employment which is relatively small. For example, S4C pays an independent production company to produce an agreed amount of hours of original programming. In order to produce that output the company will then purchase goods and services (eg camera operators, lighting equipment etc). All of these factors need to be considered when estimating the economic impact of S4C and a full understanding of the supply chain linkages is needed.”4 18. S4C is clearly crucial to the broadcasting companies and the creative industry in Wales, not only as a commissioner that supplies them with the stable base from which they can expand and develop but as a developer of skills. The remit, management and budget of S4C are therefore vital components of the Welsh creative industries’ fortunes. It is essential therefore that the budget is adequate to ensure the base income to the Welsh independent sector. A management and authority that seeks to expand the skill-base and provide assistance in raising standards is of great value to the wider industry. Finally, it is crucial that the remit ensures not only that the money is passed on to the independent sector but that best use of it is made. The cutting of funding will clearly impact upon every independent Welsh TV company with their roots in Welsh programming, not only when the cut is passed on to the commissioning of programmes but a cut in the S4C’s development fund, aimed at developing and improving structural competitiveness of the industries—this is arguably a more serious threat than the loss of a few programmes as this impedes the ability of the independent companies to develop and compete in a global market. 19. S4C’s cultural value is enormous. If the Welsh language is to thrive and prosper, it is vital that Welsh can be seen and heard in all areas of Welsh life, especially on television. S4C is the only means of receiving Welsh television programming. 20. S4C is of particular importance to children in this regard and its support for and work with the Urdd provides Welsh children with an unique experience. The Urdd plays a vital role in the cultural, social and educational development of children in Wales as well as the Welsh language and much of its recent success is owed to the support and publicity it receives from S4C. The loss of any of this support will deprive children in Wales of the incredible experience the Urdd gives them.

Whether S4C is maximising the use of its financial and other resources to achieve value for money, to optimise the quality of its output, and to reach as wide an audience as possible 21. It must be noted that the funding arrangement of S4C dates back to analogue days when there were but four channels on UK television and broadcasting was restricted to analogue television. S4C has, using the funding based on an 1980s model of television broadcaster, been able to develop a digital channel, a development fund to improve the skills of the industry, web-based content and broadcasting as well as its high-definition capabilities. We see this as an impressive achievement on a budget aimed solely at delivering programming for television. 22. The quality of programming is largely a subjective issue, however recent leaks and reports of zero viewing figures have distorted the debate. Again, it is unfortunate that such debate takes place in a largely 3 DTZ/Welsh Economy Research Unit “Economic Impact of S4C 2002–2006”, July 2007. 4 DTZ/Welsh Economy Research Unit “Economic Impact of S4C 2002–2006”, July 2007. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w21

disinterested and ill-informed London-based media. Such a debate would be far more fruitful within democratic institutions with an interest in improving the channel’s service rather than running it down. A National Assembly committee for example is in an ideal position to bring the opinions of stakeholders, S4C itself and viewers together in order to map a constructive path for the channel; DCMS, whose responsibility this is, has failed miserably to do so in recent years. 23. Plaid Cymru believes that it is the responsibility of DCMS to develop the funding formula in line with developments in the industry as well as the founding principles of S4C. DCMS, through inaction and lack of interest has created a situation where a 1980s budget must stretch to cover the demands of 21st Century, multi- platform broadcasting.

The potential for further collaboration between S4C, the BBC and independent broadcasters in Wales in order to reduce duplication and to achieve economies of scale 24. We agree that there may be potential for increased efficiency and effectiveness in delivering Welsh- language media services through improved partnership between the BBC and S4C. This partnership has been a feature of S4C’s many successes in the last 30 years. Cooperation over the possible “Media Village” project in Cardiff for example could prove fruitful for both broadcasters as well as the wider creative industry in Wales. 25. We believe however that the influence of Wales (indeed Scotland and NI as well), upon the strategic decisions in the field of Public Service broadcasting has declined in the devolution years. This is reflected in the failure to devolve more of the BBC's programming outside of England. BBC’s commissioning is still woefully un-balanced with only 413 hours (2.5%) out of 16,585 hours of its programming being produced outside of England—the vast majority is produced within the M25. Regional broadcasting has declined in quantity and arguably quality, certainly in its diversity with the vast majority now news related. Also, the 2006 BBC Charter diminished the influence of the nations further. 26. Regional Broadcasting decline between 2005 and 2009 BBC Wales (at a time when the license fee increased) Regional Output fell from 824 hours to 696 News & current affairs from 500 to 420 (16% fall) Other programming from 324 to 276 27. Looking at these trends, as well as the recent cut in BBC funding of Welsh-language programming, it is hard to see any immediate benefits to the Government’s plans for bringing S4C under the BBC. The BBC has not shown much commitment to improving and diversifying its Wales-orientated output in any language in recent years. 28. With the funding coming from the BBC’s budget there will be pressure to bring much of the production and editing in-house, thus further jeopardising the futures of the independent companies. 29. Crucially, the editorial independence of S4C will be compromised. We see the current government plans as a direct threat to the editorial independence of S4C and will damage the already fragile measure of plurality that is on offer to Welsh television viewers.

Whether the finance and accountability of S4C, currently the responsibility of the Department of Culture Media and Sport, should remain in Whitehall or become a devolved matter 30. Plaid Cymru strongly believes that it is time to devolve the responsibility, powers over the remit, and budget of S4C to the Welsh Assembly Government. 31. We believe that there is a lack of interest or willingness to develop the role of the channel by DCMS. There is a lack of understanding of the channel’s cultural and economic importance to Wales within DCMS. These have been exemplified by the unwillingness to constructively develop the role of S4C and the shockingly flippant attitude shown towards laws intended to protect the channel as well as the arbitrary nature of these very deep cuts. 32. We believe also that the “behind closed doors” decision, with no consultation, to move S4C under the BBC shows a disturbing lack of transparency, a disregard to the democratic process as well as a complete lack of respect by the Minister and his department toward Wales and its democratically-elected Government. 33. This recent “track record” shows that the DCMS is incapable of responsibly overseeing S4C. 34. The National Assembly for Wales on the other hand has shown an interest in developing the role of S4C as well as addressing the wider concerns within the field of Broadcasting in Wales. It has commissioned major reviews into the creative industry and the role of public service broadcasting as well as holding cross-party committees on broadcasting, consulting widely with stakeholders. It is the settled opinion of all parties in the National Assembly for Wales that there is much work to be done in the field of Welsh broadcasting to ensure plurality, quality, competition and excellence in the field in Wales. DCMS has however shown no such commitment or willingness, however the key powers still remain at Westminster. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w22 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

35. Plaid Cymru would also argue that much more than the powers, budget and remit of S4C should be devolved. We believe that it is time that the whole field of Broadcasting in Wales is fully devolved to the democratically elected Government of Wales. 36. We believe that the National Assembly for Wales should have the power to: (a) Set the budget of S4C. We suggest that this should be set in an Assembly Measure similar to Westminster before the Minister began changing law without consultation or democratic legitimacy. (b) Set the remit of S4C. (c) Secure a BBC trust for Wales and make appointments to it as well as the S4C Authority and Ofcom boards. (d) Establish formal procedures to ensure that the opinion of the NAW can be expressed effectively in the field of Broadcasting (e) Allocate FM frequencies in Wales and ensure that Welsh DAB stations are available to all (f) Influence the way in which the ITV license is determined in Wales. Currently, as an ad-on to the England license, it is of little value to ITV that has resulted in a deterioration in quality and quantity of public service programming over recent years. Allocating a license for Wales alone could attract companies with a vested interest in improving the quality of programming in Wales. 37. Plaid Cymru would like to see the field of Broadcasting completely devolved to Wales at once. Devolving S4C alone will place all the focus on the Welsh language broadcaster and take attention away from the responsibilities and potential of the BBC and ITV license. There is a great risk of over-scrutinizing S4C, and neglecting English-language broadcasting in Wales which is in serious decline in both quality and quantity. This would be a missed opportunity to address the difficulties facing the Broadcasting industry with stakeholders, reflecting the will of the people of Wales and in line with the wider economic aspirations of the ERP 38. Plaid Cymru however believes that the situation facing S4C is extraordinary and the channel is faced with a crisis. We do not believe that the DCMS has either the will or understanding to remedy the crisis they have created for the channel. We strongly believe that the NAW is far more suitably placed to address this crisis in an open, democratic and effective way that has the long term interests of the people of Wales, stakeholders and Welsh economy at heart. 15 November 2010

Written evidence submitted by PACT Executive Summary 1. We welcome this inquiry and ask the Committee to make two recommendations: ﬁrstly, that legislation guarantees S4C’s funding and independence; secondly, that S4C acts itself and develops an exports-led strategy to help the Welsh production sector grow.

S4C’s importance 2. S4C has been a cornerstone of public service broadcasting, providing audiences with an independent editorial voice and championing the Welsh language. 3. S4C underpins Wales’ production sector by spending £73 million5 per annum on Welsh-language programming, dwarﬁng BBC and ITV investment in English-language programmes for Welsh audiences.6

Ensuring continued funding and independence 4. The announcement by the Government and the BBC only commits to a level of funding for S4C until 2014–15. Beyond this, we expect the BBC to consider further cuts. 5. We also have serious concerns that the announced joint BBC Trust/S4C Authority governance structure cannot guarantee genuine independence for S4C. 6. We ask the Committee to recommend the strongest possible safeguards for S4C within the legislative and regulatory framework available, particularly the new Communications Act and the Royal Charter and Charter Agreement, including: — A requirement to allocate a ﬁxed level of funding to the service. — An undertaking that the S4C service will be independently managed and regulated. — A requirement that programmes made for S4C come from external suppliers. 5 Communications Market Report: Wales, Ofcom, page 53. 6 Ibid, page 50, shows that spending on English-language programmes speciﬁcally for Welsh viewers by BBC and ITV was £33m in 2008. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w23

Increase S4C’s positive impact on the Welsh economy 7. We welcome the Welsh Assembly Government’s recent report, The Heart of Digital Wales by Ian Hargreaves, which stated that public funding was failing to maximise the growth of Welsh creative companies and proposed a greater focus on exports. 8. We ask the Committee to recommend that S4C develop a strategy to help producers develop businesses on a global level, with a greater focus on exportable genres. This could be underpinned by introducing a stronger economic element to S4C’s remit. 9. This will help Welsh companies replicate the growth of the UK’s independent production sector as a whole, which has grown by 40% since 20037 and helped increase exports of UK television content by 40% (independent and in-house).8

Introduction 1. Pact is the trade association that represents the commercial interests of the independent production sector. The sector produces and distributes half of all new UK television programmes,9 as well as much of the UK’s content in digital media and feature ﬁlm. 2. The independent television sector contributes £4.3 billion per year to the UK economy (GVA),10 and employs 20,950 people—more than the television divisions of the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Five combined.11 The sector has helped increase exports of UK television content by 39% since 2003,12 and uses the resulting revenue to invest £200 million per year in the development and production UK content.

Response to Questions Raised in Terms of Reference Question 1: The extent to which S4C is fulfilling its remit 1. We propose in this paper several ways in which, in our view, S4C could significantly increase its positive impact on the Welsh creative economy, as well as offer audiences a more engaging range of Welsh-language content across all platforms not just traditional television. However, there is no doubt that S4C is a cornerstone of public service broadcasting in Wales, underpinning the Welsh television production sector as a substantial source of investment in programming, and providing audiences with a distinct editorial voice as well as championing the Welsh language. 2. We think that historically S4C has broadly fulfilled its public service remit, which is defined under the Communications Act 2003 (Schedule 12) as: “the provision of a broad range of high quality and diverse programming” that is primarily in Welsh.13 However, we believe the challenges involved in continuing to deliver this remit will require a root and branch review of the type of content commissioned by S4C, the way in which it is commissioned and the way in which it is financed. 3. We believe that S4C’s independence has enabled it to achieve significant successes over its 30-year history and believe this continued independence will be essential if it is to grasp the opportunities presented in a digital world in a challenging funding environment.

Question 2: What impact recent and potential future spending cuts will have on S4C and what level of public subsidy for S4C is appropriate and sustainable over the longer term 1. The Welsh production sector is facing a sustained decline in funding from broadcasters for English- language programming specifically for Welsh viewers. Spending on such programming by the BBC and ITV— the only public service broadcasters other than S4C that provide programming specifically for Wales—has fallen by a third since 2003, according to Ofcom.14 Although Ofcom does not break down spend by broadcaster, the regulator states that delivery by hours of programming has declined at both broadcasters in recent years, the BBC falling 15% since 2004 and ITV 11%.15 2. The recently announced cuts to S4C’s budget going forward will greatly exacerbate the pressure now facing the Welsh production sector. While the above noted declines represent a drop of around £17 million in funding since 2003, the reductions in S4C’s funding amount to a further fall of £25 million over four years. 3. S4C should therefore minimise any reduction in its programme budget resulting from cuts to its overall funding, thereby limiting any drop in the quality of what is on screen for the viewer and the negative impact 7 Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates for Pact. 8 Annual Television Exports Survey, TRP for Pact/UKTI. 9 Ofcom, Communications Market Report, 2008. 10 The Economic Impact of the BBC 2009, Deloitte for the BBC. 11 Employment Census 2006, Skillset. 12 Annual export figures, TRP for Pact/UKTI. 13 2003 Communications Act, Schedule 12, 3 (2). 14 Nations and Regions Communications Market report 2009: Wales, Ofcom, indicates that spending on English-language programmes for Welsh viewers by the BBC and ITV fell from £50 million in 2003 to £33 million in 2008, the latest available year (page 50). 15 Nations and Regions Communications Market report 2009: Wales, page 59. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w24 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

on the Welsh production sector. S4C should also create a commissioning environment which encourages independent producers to be even more entrepreneurial in the way in which they fund content, ensuring that the decline in S4C’s funding is mitigated by third-party funding from co-production, international sales, digital exploitation and other commercial opportunities. 4. In the medium to long term, we are very concerned that the recent announcement by the Government and the BBC only includes a commitment to the level of funding for S4C until 2014–15. Beyond this, we expect the BBC to consider further cuts to S4C’s funding, based on the BBC’s recent history of reductions in spending on programmes for Welsh viewers, as mentioned above, and the fact that, prior to the Government’s announcement, the BBC had already announced that it would be cutting the amount it spends on S4C programming by 17%, to £19.5 million, next year.16 5. We therefore ask the Committee to recommend that the BBC’s Charter Agreement include an undertaking to fund a Welsh-language service as S4C and that this undertaking includes in the Agreement a requirement to allocate a ﬁxed level of funding to the service. 6. We ask the Committee to also recommend that, if appropriate, this should also be reﬂected in the new Communications Act (Schedule 12 of the 2003 Act covers the public service remit of the Welsh Authority services).

Question 3: The cultural and economic benefit to Wales from the investment of over £100m per annum of public funds into S4C 1. We note the findings of the 2010 report, The Economic Impact of S4C 2007–2010, which indicated that the broadcaster contributed a GVA of £85 million to the Welsh economy in 2009. The report goes on to state that S4C supports 1,950 external jobs, the majority of which are in the independent production sector. As the report notes, the broadcaster thereby contributes to the Welsh Assembly’s aim of developing a highly skilled, knowledge economy.17 2. We would particularly like to highlight S4C’s role as a publisher broadcaster, commissioning from external, Welsh companies. Investing in content from such independent suppliers, rather than a broadcaster’s own in-house production division, enables these companies to develop the skills and experience to win commissions from other broadcasters, allowing them to further develop their businesses, and therefore has an indirect benefit in terms of nurturing a sustainable production sector that keeping production in-house within a broadcaster cannot. 3. We therefore welcome the Secretary of State for Culture’s recent statement that, as part of the funding arrangements with the BBC going forward, S4C’s “total content commissioning budget will be for independent producers (outside of the BBC’s ongoing statutory commitments).”18 To reflect this, and to provide the Welsh production sector with clarity going forward, we ask the Committee to recommend that the new Communications Act and the Charter Agreement include a requirement that 100% of programmes made for S4C come from qualifying independents or other external suppliers.

Question 4: Whether S4C is maximising the use of its financial and other resources to achieve value for money, to optimise the quality of its output, and to reach as wide an audience as possible 1. We welcome the findings of the Welsh Assembly Government’s recent report, The Heart of Digital Wales by Ian Hargreaves,19 which stated that current public funding was failing to take advantage of opportunities to maximise the growth of Welsh creative companies. The Hargreaves report stated that: “The disappointment has been that so few companies in the Welsh independent television production sector have matured into units capable of operating throughout the UK and beyond”. 2. Hargreaves went on to highlight the need for a greater focus on exports and working with companies in the wider UK and abroad, stating: “The challenge today is for the Welsh indies to become still more adept at bidding for UK network commissions, as well as pursuing international co-productions and sales.” 3. In order to help deliver this, S4C should in our view help Welsh companies take advantage of global opportunities. Even with reduced funding, its annual budget represents a substantial level of investment in Welsh content—far higher than the combined spending by the BBC and ITV on English-language programmes specifically for Welsh viewers, which was £33m in 2008.20 However, in our view, S4C often tends to interpret its remit in a way that looks inward at the Welsh production sector, at the expense of encouraging Welsh producers to embrace wider opportunities, both in the UK and the global market. This has meant that many companies are indeed reliant on public funding through S4C, as the Hargreaves report suggested. 4. Such an inward-looking approach is at odds with developments over the last decade in the wider independent production sector across the UK. Since 2003, the UK independent production sector has grown 16 Broadcast online, “S4C programme budget facing £4 million cut”, 11 October 2010. 17 The Economic Impact of S4C on the Welsh Economy 2007–2010, DTZ for S4C. 18 Letter from Secretary of State to Sir Michael Lyons, Chairman, BBC Trust, re: BBC Funding Settlement. 19 The Heart of Digital Wales: A review of creative industries for the Welsh Assembly Government, Ian Hargreaves. 20 Nations and Regions Communications Market report 2009: Wales, page 50. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w25

by 40%,21 with the emergence of substantial companies with a global presence, and a surge of 40% in export revenues from UK TV content (independent and in-house).22 5. As a result, independent producers are increasingly raising funding for programme costs outside the amount paid by the commissioning broadcaster—this is known as deficit funding. Last year, the UK independent sector invested more than £200 million in UK production in this way, and co-production with other broadcasters is an important part of this, representing around £40 million per year.23 Investment raised by independent producers in this way has enabled them to fill the gap left by declining spending from UK broadcasters. We see this as particularly relevant for S4C in light of the recent announcement by the Government that its funding will be reduced. This will inevitably mean S4C will have to seek to reduce its total programme budget, in turn placing increased pressure on producers to cover the resulting gap through deficit funding. An increased global focus will therefore not only encourage the growth of the Welsh production sector, it will also enable producers to raise more funding for Welsh content, driving quality for the viewer. 6. Does such a focus on UK and global markets necessarily entail a loss of Welsh culture? In our view, no. S4C’s specific statutory duty is to promote the Welsh language, which is clearly not in question as the majority of its programmes will be broadcast in Welsh.24 In terms of S4C’s broader representation of Welsh culture, independent producers across the UK successfully work in global markets without necessarily watering down the public service or UK cultural elements in their work. ITV’s successful Downton Abbey, for example, is an original British period drama that, through the producer, Carnival, was part funded from overseas sources. 7. An increased focus on exportable, popular genres would in our view refresh S4C’s schedule, not diminish it, potentially helping S4C engage with a broader range of audiences. 8. In our view S4C therefore needs to develop a comprehensive strategy to encourage the Welsh production sector to develop businesses on a UK and global level. This should be underpinned by the inclusion of an economic element in the remit of the S4C Authority and developed in close consultation with industry to ensure it genuinely reflects the needs and aspirations of Welsh creative businesses. As part of this strategy, S4C should through consultation with the industry identify the genres and types of programmes that best lend themselves to generating exports—many core public service genres will need to be fully funded by S4C, but others are able to attract substantial levels of funding from wider UK or global markets. Similarly, the UK has excelled at exporting “formats”—ie the right to remake a show for overseas audiences—and is the global leader in this area with a market share of over of 50%.25 S4C’s strategy to encourage the growth of creative companies in Wales should include a focus on developing formats. 9. In terms of whether the Welsh production sector can deliver such an ambitious plan for growth, independent producers across the UK respond to the needs of broadcasters in order to win commissions from them. To date, there has been little incentive from S4C for Welsh producers to develop exportable programmes. S4C should develop and make public a clear, long-term strategy for developing exportable programmes that would provide the production sector with the clarity and security it needs to invest in the longer term in such programmes, eg recruiting the appropriate production talent or investing in project development. 10. We would also welcome a specific commitment in terms of spend and/or hours to home-grown feature films, as is the case for the BBC and Channel 4 under the Charter Agreement and Communications Act respectively. A commitment to film should be aligned to recommendation of the Hargreaves Review for a re- organisation of Wales’ support for the film industry to eliminate duplication and maximise economic impact and efficiency.26 11. Additionally, we ask the new management at S4C to review the broadcaster’s digital/new media strategy to ensure that S4C takes full advantage of opportunities to engage with audiences across different platforms. While we note that S4C outlines its digital strategy in its programme policy statement, the widespread anecdotal experience of our members is that the broadcaster is often not as interested in cross-platform proposals as other broadcasters.

Question 5: The potential for further collaboration between S4C, the BBC and independent broadcasters in Wales in order to reduce duplication and to achieve economies of scale 1. The opportunities for further collaboration in order to reduce duplication and to achieve economies of scale should be explored with a wide range of partners, not just the BBC. We believe there is a risk that too close a relationship with the BBC would shut off opportunities to collaborate with other partners in the UK and internationally. 2. There is a particular threat to plurality in children’s content by tying S4C too closely to the BBC. S4C is currently the second largest investor in original UK production for children behind the BBC. For many 21 Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates for Pact. 22 Annual Television Exports Survey, TRP for Pact/UKTI. 23 Pact annual census 2010. 24 2003 Communications Act, Schedule 12, 3 (2). 25 Rights of Passage, TRP for UKTI/Pact. 26 http://wales.gov.uk/topics/businessandeconomy/publications/heartofdigitalwales/?lang=en cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w26 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

producers it is the only alternative to the BBC as a commissioner of children’s programmes in the UK. S4C’s independence is vital in ensuring plurality and competition in this important genre of programmes. 3. We deal further with S4C’s relationship with the BBC in response to Question 6, as this falls under regulatory control and ﬁnance following the Government’s recent announcement about a link up with the BBC.

Question 6: Whether the finance and accountability of S4C, currently the responsibility of the Department for Culture Media and Sport, should remain in Whitehall or become a devolved matter 1. We have serious concerns over the Government’s proposal that the BBC Trust should take over joint responsibility for S4C along with the S4C Authority from 2013–14. We see this as a potential risk to S4C’s independence, as well as a move that may lead to further erosion of funding for S4C and cut off opportunities for S4C to collaborate with other commercial partners. 2. As noted above, funding for programming specifically for Welsh viewers from the BBC and ITV—the only other public service broadcasters providing programming specifically for Wales—has fallen by a third in recent years. In terms of network programming—ie programming not specifically for Welsh viewers—only the BBC is genuinely active in Wales in our view. Ofcom figures indicate that Welsh-made network programming accounted for less than 1.4% of the output of ITV1, Channel 4 and Five by both hours and value. The BBC was substantially higher, recording 3.7% by value and 3.4% by volume, but it is important to bear in mind that a large share of this will be made in-house and therefore not benefit the independent production sector.27 3. We are therefore concerned that S4C should continue to represent an alternative source of funding for programming to the BBC, as well as have a distinct editorial voice. This is not a criticism of the BBC; rather, we are concerned that it should not be the only home of Welsh programmes, either for Welsh audiences or for the UK in general. 4. The Government has outlined a similar structure for S4C post 2013 to that of BBC Alba, ie a distinct service licence overseen by the BBC Trust and the S4C Authority. We do not think the BBC Alba model provides genuine independence: we note that the BBC Alba’s joint management board of four includes the BBC Scotland head of operations and BBC Scotland head of programmes, while the BBC Alba head of service is a BBC employee. 5. We therefore ask the Committee to recommend the strongest possible safeguards for S4C’s independence and funding within the legislative and regulatory framework available, particularly the forthcoming Communications Act and the Charter Agreement. These should include: — A requirement that 100% of programmes made for S4C come from qualifying independents or other external suppliers. — A requirement to allocate an appropriate level of funding to the service. — An undertaking the S4C service will be independently managed and regulated. November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Mercator Institute for Media, Languages and Culture, Department of Theatre, Film and Television Studies, Aberystwyth University Summary — An appropriately funded broadcaster is essential to the future sustainability of the Welsh language. — Media institutions are vital to language maintenance. Television makes a significant contribution in five main areas: economy, status, linguistic, democratic communication, culture. Language communities with strong media provision are more viable in the long term. — For three decades S4C has been regarded as a world leader in minority language media as well as an example of progressive policy-making on the part of the UK government towards the Welsh language. — Any substantial reduction in budget should be evidence-based and should not undermine S4C’s core mission of providing high quality and a diverse range of programming in the Welsh language. — An independent S4C should explore further collaboration with other broadcasters and production companies as well as with other organizations within the Creative Industries Sector. — There is a growing case for the financing and accountability of S4C to be devolved, though this is not without its complications.

Introduction 1. The establishment of S4C in the Broadcasting Act 1980–81 is widely regarded as an historic and signiﬁcant milestone in revitalising minority languages in Europe and indeed across the world. Its creation as the ﬁrst substantial television channel operating in a minority language marked the beginning of a new epoch 27 Nations and Regions Communications Market report 2009: Wales, Ofcom, pp 57 and 58. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w27

for minority language media, with a number of other public service broadcasters following suit such as Basque, Catalan, Galician (1980s), Frisian (Netherlands) and Irish (1990s) and Swedish (in Finland), Scottish Gaelic, Maori (2000s).

2. The public campaign that led to the creation of S4C has also served as a source of inspiration and empowerment for communities concerned with the future of their languages. In addition, the S4C model is often cited as an example of a successful broadcasting policy for planners at all levels of government.

3. S4C’s contribution to the development of the Welsh language over the past three decades has been acknowledged by media specialists and sociolinguists. It is widely recognised that media provision in a minority language is one of the key indicators of linguistic vitality and that language communities that have a substantial media presence consistently score higher across a range of different studies than those without. (a) Television, in particular, has an effect on the status of a language both within its community of speakers and beyond, which in turn has a trickle-down effect on attitudes towards the language, including language use and linguistic behaviour. (b) Moreover, it has a significant economic impact in the media sector itself (through institutions, companies and the freelance economy) in diverse satellite industries and it plays a role in strengthening and supporting other creative industries. (c) At a “linguistic” level, television can maintain and develop the linguistic repertoires within a language, stimulating and disseminating new words as well as increasing the levels of inter-comprehension between different dialect forms within the population. It is also accessible—through subtitling and ancillary services—to a wider audience beyond fluent speakers in a way that traditional radio and print media cannot access as easily. (d) Television is part of a wider forum for democratic communication, and in the Welsh context, it is even more important due to the weak position of print and electronic media. (e) Finally, television is an integral part of a community’s cultural expression. It reflects the community’s image of itself: it is a vehicle to tell stories, to explore who we are, to reflect on our history, our present and our future. It shapes our understanding of our society and presents us with a “window on the world”. It is part of creating shared identities. Television increases the visibility of a community and can have an impact on the confidence and self-esteem of its speakers and those who identify with it. It can also help to nurture positive attitudes towards the language, and make it more ‘relevant’ in particular in the case of children and young people.

4. Over the years, S4C has been time and again selected as an example of good practice: (a) an example of successful media policy in the context of language revitalization and (b) the example of innovative, effective and progressive policy making in any sector in the case of the Welsh language.

The extent to which S4C is fulﬁlling its remit

5. The remit of S4C is to provide a high quality television service in the Welsh language. This is stated in the Broadcasting Act 1980/81 and reafﬁrmed in subsequent legislation (Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996; Communications Act 2003). This clear and consistent emphasis on delivery of high quality and a diverse range of programming in the Welsh language is evidence that S4C operates as a Welsh language broadcaster within the traditions of British public service broadcasting with high production values and high percentages of original programming.

6. The Welsh audience’s expectations of S4C’s output are equal—though not identical—to its expectations of major television broadcasters. S4C’s current budget of course in terms of cost per hour is signiﬁcantly lower. S4C’s Audience Appreciation Index ﬁgures (available in S4C’s Annual Reports) show that viewers rate its output in this comparable context, with Welsh language programmes and genre scoring higher, equivalent or lower than their English language counterparts. The quality of S4C’s output can also be judged by the sustained record of awards that its programmes have won in several parts of the world.

7. The diverse range of programming has been sustained and developed over three decades and has embraced many of the universal changes that have taken place in the television environment over this period, in particular the development of new genres, scheduling tendencies, ancillary services (such as subtitling and audio description) and on-line access. However, developments across the television sector have resulted in the creation of niche channels (the BBC’s suite of eight channels compared to two in 1982; Channel 4’s suite of four and the +1s etc) as well as a more candid approach to the ways in which the diversity of our society is reﬂected more directly in programmes.

8. Minority language television audiences are by no means homogenous—just smaller numerically—yet, one single television channel must cater for all needs. When ﬁrst established, S4C was one of four television channels. Nowadays it competes with hundreds of television channels and their online editions, and television itself sits alongside the wider internet and computer games in the converged digital landscape. Some minority language broadcasters have established separate channels and an advanced on-line presence in order to address cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w28 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

these audiences in a multi-channel environment. The strategies deployed by the Catalan and Basque public service broadcasters28 have led to niche television services, in particular aimed at children and young people. 9. Likewise, S4C has strengthened its children’s programming through Cyw (for young children) and Stwnsh (for older children). These services have increased the provision of Welsh language television for children at a time where speciﬁc children’s channels (CBeebies, CBBC, Nickelodeon, CITV, etc) dominate children’s viewing patterns. The availability of early morning children’s programmes increases children’s access to Welsh language television. However, the absence of S4C on some web-based distribution platforms—such as through Wii, ipod touch—makes Welsh language children’s programmes less accessible than BBC’s English language children’s programmes. These constitute unnecessary “barriers to consumption” when in fact equality of access should be facilitated.

What impact recent and potential future spending cuts will have on S4C and what level of public subsidy for S4C is appropriate and sustainable over the longer term 10. The continued operation of S4C as a high quality public broadcaster cannot be achieved without sustained and continued public investment. Decisions to reduce funding to the detriment of range and/or quality of programming will seriously undermine the fundamental purpose of S4C. The S4C Authority itself has stated that the cuts proposed will affect programming. For reasons already noted, compromising on quality or on range of programmes is not the way ahead for a minority language broadcaster at this juncture in the media environment. In addition, at a time where sustained public investment in the Welsh language is beginning to show a longer term positive impact (eg Census 2001’s reversal of the decline of percentage of speakers for the first time etc) it would be rash to jeopardise the progress that is being made in revitalising the Welsh language across the board by weakening S4C. Media, and television in particular, are cornerstones of language maintenance in any community, not only minority language communities. 11. The appropriate level of public subsidy must be an evidence-based decision, taken with a full knowledge and understanding of the requirements of a successful Welsh language public service broadcaster. 12. The Council of Europe’s European Charter for Regional and/or Minority Languages was ratified by the UK Government in 2001. In its Third Periodical Report submitted in 2009, the UK government states the following in relation to S4C: “The UK Government is committed to a sustainable future for Welsh language broadcasting. The Welsh Fourth Channel Authority, S4C, receives a statutory government grant—£92,817 million in 2007–08— updated each year in line with inflation for the provision of Welsh language television services. In addition, S4C has a statutory entitlement to receive a minimum of 10 hours a week of Welsh language programmes from the BBC, free of charge; the Value of these programmes in 2006–07 was approximately £20.6million”29

The cultural and economic benefit to Wales from the investment of over £100 m per annum of public funds into S4C 13. The cultural and economic benefit of S4C has already been mentioned in this submission. The most recent research shows that 2,000 jobs are derived from this investment, and previous research points to similar figures. In addition, television work plays a pivotal role in many freelancers’ repertoire of economic activity, in an “eco-system” of inter-connection between the various creative industries. Reductions in this budget may well have a domino effect on other creative industries (such as theatre, literature, film, journalism etc) which in turn enrich the talent base required to produce good television. 14. Furthermore, it is important to recognise that this specific investment has benefited several geographical areas in Wales, with strong production centres outside Cardiff as well as in the capital area. There is a case to argue that the awareness of a wider geographical impact on local economies and work opportunities beyond the capital has informed S4C’s strategic decisions to a greater degree than the other broadcasters in Wales over this period of time. Further reductions in S4C’s production budget will have a detrimental impact across Wales.

Whether S4C is maximising the use of its ﬁnancial and other resources to achieve value for money, to optimise the quality of its output, and to reach as wide an audience as possible 15. As the recipient of a substantial sum of public investment, S4C’s use of its ﬁnancial and other resources should be the subject of a comprehensive review undertaken with regularity as the law allows. However, it is important to view its performance in the full context of the digital environment, not merely in the role of the traditional broadcaster. 16. Public criticisms of S4C’s strategies also include the public’s concern with excessive use of repeats within the schedule (as voiced in Radio phone-ins etc) and the Unions’ concerns that budgets are being stretched too far. The extension of children’s hours—Cyw provision—was established without requesting additional resources, a move that was welcomed by some but criticised by others. 28 Catalan Audiovisual Media Corporation (www.ccma.cat) and the Basque Public Service Broadcaster (www.eitb.com) 29 Third Periodical Report by the UK Government presented to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in accordance with Article 15 of the European Charter for Regional and/or Minority Languages. Page 73. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w29

17. Reaching a wide audience in the digital world means being able to distribute on a myriad of different platforms. To date, S4C material is not available on all the platforms that carry BBC, ITV, Channel 4 etc. As stated earlier, it is important that minority language media are high quality, visible and easily accessible in order for citizens to be able to make meaningful choices.

The potential for further collaboration between S4C, the BBC and independent broadcasters in Wales in order to reduce duplication and to achieve economies of scale 18. Historically, there has been considerable collaboration between S4C, the BBC and the independent broadcaster (ITV) in Wales in the provision of Welsh language programming. However, the role of ITV in Wales has diminished considerably over the past decade to the degree that this has provoked deep concerns about the plurality of the (English language) media in Wales. The relationship between S4C and the BBC has continued over the years, with the BBC providing important programming (News, Current Affairs, Soap, Sport, Children’s etc). Yet it must be noted that the statutory requirement on the BBC to provide at least 10 hours per week of programming has remained static, despite the fact that the BBC’s overall output has increased. 19. The independent production sector is also an important element of the Welsh media landscape. There is an important dialogue to be sustained between S4C and the independent sector. Located in different parts of Wales, there could be strategic advantages of shared facilities. 20. Further collaboration with the BBC, ITV and the independent production sector should be sought in order to identify areas of duplication and potential economies of scale. However it is important that S4C maintains its independence as the Welsh language television broadcaster in order to ensure that this speciﬁc mission is sustained at the heart of discussions with other organizations whose missions are broader.

Whether the finance and accountability of S4C, currently the responsibility of the Department of Culture Media and Sport, should remain in Whitehall or become a devolved matter 21. In terms of language policy alone, it makes sense for S4C to become the responsibility of the National Assembly for Wales. However, there are many other cases where providers of Welsh language services are accountable to Whitehall. While broadcasting itself remains an undevolved matter, there is an argument that the Welsh language broadcaster should be able to make its case directly to that level of governance alongside other public service broadcasters in the UK. 22. However, given the cultural and economic importance of S4C to Wales, and its pivotal role as the Welsh language television broadcaster, its moral accountability lies to the people of Wales. In addition, it is a rare example of media policy based on a bottom-up approach rather than the usual top-down model. It is indeed time to review its accountability. 23. The relationship between the proposed new financial arrangements (major contribution through the licence fee) must of course be aligned to the accountability of S4C. In this context it is useful to remember that that from the very beginning, the creation of S4C (its funding, its remit and its relationship with the BBC and the production sector) was an innovative and unique formula in the UK broadcasting landscape. All avenues should be explored to find the best settlement. November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Mr S G Jones I write to impress upon all of you how important Welsh Language Television is for the future of the language and the identity of Wales. This channel was set up after much suffering and after a long and expensive campaign, and simply must not be allowed to wither and eventually disappear at the whim and ignorance of one or two Government Ministers in London. Complete independence and an adequate budget is essential for the survival of S4C. 12 November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Celebrating our Welsh Language S4C's Future We write to express our concerns regarding the announcements made about the future of S4C. We therefore call upon you to support taking S4C out of the Public Bodies Bill. This would ensure that its future could be discussed and considered following a comprehensive review as the leaders of the parties in Wales have asked for, and done so in consultation with the people of Wales. S4C is a unique investment in the Welsh language and a cornerstone for Welsh culture. There are hundreds of channels available on our screens today and it is crucial that we can have the assurance of being able to see and hear the Welsh language on our screens. One of the main reasons for campaigning for a Welsh language channel in the 1970s was to see the Welsh language as the medium of new media and not old fashioned, and cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w30 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

S4C has played a huge part in this transformation of attitude towards the Welsh language giving conﬁdence for the people of Wales in the future of the language. The demand for Welsh medium education is on the rise throughout Wales, and this is supported by S4C who provide a wide range of programming for children with Cyw, Planed Plant, and recently, Stwnsh for older children.

We are worried that the cuts to S4C’s budget will affect the standard of programmes they will be able to produce. Fair funding must be ensured to maintain and develop the channel's provision: dramas such as Pen Talar and Teulu, events such as the National Eisteddfod and the Royal Welsh, current affairs and sports. Without money, the channel won't be able to compete with other mainstream channels in terms of quality and creativeness. By cutting S4C's funding, you are not only going to see the service deteriorate, but it will also have a directly negative effect on the Welsh language.

The decision to move the responsibility for S4C to the BBC will undermine the independence of the channel, and in the end it will be a further threat to the level of funding for Welsh language programmes and services. We fear we will return to the situation before S4C was established by an act, where Welsh language programming has to compete with English language programming for money. We are concerned S4C will not have the editorial independence because of the partnership with the BBC to make the best decisions for the Welsh language channel.

Taking S4C out of the Public Bodies Bill would ensure that its future could be considered following a comprehensive, open and transparent review which would ensure: — managerial and editorial independence for S4C from the BBC and Government; and — a funding formula for S4C which is based on inﬂation.

S4C is a treasure too important for our language and culture to make decisions on a whim. BECTU EQUITY Merched y Wawr Mentrau laith Cymru Menter laith Caerdydd Cymdeithas yr laith Gymraeg (The Welsh Language Society) Cymdeithas Alawon Gwerin Cymru (Welsh Folk Song Society) RhAG (Parents for Welsh Medium Education) Cymuned Yr Eisteddfod Genedlaethol (The National Eisteddfod of Wales) Urdd Gobaith Cymru Cymdeithas Cyﬁeithwyr Cymru (The Association of Welsh Translators and Interpreters) UCAC (Welsh National Teachers Union) UMCA UMCB Cymdeithas y Cymod (The Fellowship of Reconciliation in Wales) CYDAG (Welsh Society of Schools for Welsh Medium Education) Cronfa Glyndwr Friends of the Earth—Cyfeillion y Ddaear Eglwys Bresbyteraidd Cymru (The Presbyterian Church of Wales) Cwlwm Cyhoeddwyr Cymru (Welsh Publishers League) Writers Guild of Great Britain—Undeb yr Ysgrifenwyr National Union of Journalists—Undeb y Newyddiadurwyr 19 November 2010

Written evidence submitted by Peter Edwards and Huw Walters

The Future of Welsh Language Broadcasting

In the midst of the ongoing crisis facing Welsh language broadcasting we believe it’s important to maintain a clear focus on how S4C can (once again) become a conﬁdent, ambitious, popular, appreciated and respected broadcaster in the minds of its viewers, industry peers, government and other stakeholders.

We believe there is a risk that the current situation is simply put down to organisational, structural and regulatory failings and personality differences. In fact, the issues and challenges are much wider and were apparent before the meltdown began during the summer.

With regard to the channel’s future direction, there has been an alarming reluctance amongst many of S4C’s stakeholders to recognise the scale of the challenge and the radical extent to which Welsh language broadcasting needs to change, but also the huge opportunities which exist for those prepared for the challenge. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w31

Schools of thought seem to fall into one of two camps: Either : — A significant cut to S4C’s funding is potentially fatal and a direct attack on the Welsh language. The solution lies in campaigning and protesting with the passion which helped set up the channel 30 years ago. This view often romanticises S4C’s past history in order to gloss over some of its current weaknesses. Or: — Those who regard the challenge as a largely financial one which can be faced by improved systems of commissioning, providing more stability for the production sector and by making efficiency savings. The concentrations of talent and resources which currently exist in the production sector can be squeezed further to make up for the funding gap. More of the same but cheaper, with some services cut completely. We believe that a far more radical overhaul is required. The current S4C model is not delivering viewers in sufficient numbers. It is not delivering enough for the Welsh economy. It is not delivering public value in return for the significant investment which is currently being made by DCMS and which has been committed for future years via the Licence Fee. If the model doesn’t work on a £100 million budget how will the same model work with an £83 million budget? We believe there is a golden opportunity to reinvent Welsh language broadcasting in a way which can increase viewer engagement across existing and new delivery platforms, can reinvigorate the creative industries in Wales and can demonstrate clear public value to the government and other stakeholders. This will require a major rethink of the type of content which is commissioned, the way in which it is commissioned and the way in which it is financed.

What Would it Look Like? As media entrepreneurs we are concerned that any new organisation that replaces S4C should be transparent in its operation, that it engages with the new technologies and that competition drives transparency, cultural and economic vitality. We are not particularly concerned with the past failures, preferring to change the mindset of Welsh language broadcasting, to reinvigorate the audience and to engage with Welsh learners and the younger audience who have turned their backs on S4C. The S4C Authority could be replaced by a small board not dissimilar to the new Creative Advisory Board set up by WAG with a representation of business, media, music and the digital technologies and content, not necessarily all Welsh speaking. The relationship with the BBC would require one representative from the BBC on the Board. The Board would regulate the executive management of S4C which would remain responsible for the operation of the service. Having industry experience at Board level would make scrutiny of the Executive more effective. There must be a clear process of engagement by the Board with the audience and the production sector who should know who they are and what responsibilities they have.

The Commissioning Model In any small country with limited resources there are inevitably difficulties in ensuring plurality of opinion and variety and vitality of entertainment, artistic endeavour and talent development. Essentially in the past we have had one person making the programme decisions in the Welsh language and one in the English language. This is patently dangerous. We have to introduce an element of competition other than at commissioning level. We are suggesting two competitive funds. The major fund would deal with output where a high degree of local content and origination is desirable—eg news, sport, current affairs, events and soap. The second fund (ideally co-funded from S4C’s commercial fund) would deal with content which has universal appeal—eg children’s content, landmark series, high-end drama and documentary, film and digital media. The responsibility for commissioning from each fund would be separated. This would open up opportunities for internal and healthy competition. Both funds should be driven by the mindset in which co-funding is the norm. This would be a major psychological change for the independent sector in Wales which has become obsessed with “regional” 100% funded output. Not everything can be co-funded, but this requirement would certainly sharpen the commercial nous of our companies and drive them to put the world market at the forefront of their thinking. As these funds would be competitive and subject to deficit funding and our concern being to develop an audiovisual sector which is competitive and genuinely commercial, the entrepreneurs must have an opportunity to profit from their business. The issue of both Welsh language and English language rights becomes important. In the way that companies elsewhere in the UK have gained complete control of their commercial rights then the same must happen in Wales. cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [E] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Ev w32 Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence

Particular genres present speciﬁc opportunities:

Film The announcement that the UK government is willing to increase investment in film is extremely encouraging and we see an opportunity in Wales for the Film Agency for Wales to play its part in partnership with S4C. The work of FAW is built upon backing the talent, and this has led to considerable success with films like Separado, Sleep Furiously, Submarine and I am Slave. Development of talent is the gold dust of any branch of the creative industries and this is where S4C have failed for the last 10 years, limiting the creative imagination of a generation. Outside Wales, the Film sector is 100% co-funded,and there is no reason why Welsh language film shouldn't be as successful as it has been in the past. FAW has the expertise to develop and co-fund a number of films annually. As a means of rebuilding the audience, exhibition of films in the village halls and cinemas of Wales has an important role to play. The allocation of a sum of money ring-fenced for film co-production and development could be managed by FAW, answerable to a joint board of S4C and FAW.

On-line This area has been consistently ignored by S4C. It is however the crucial area for talent development, new programme ideas and rebuilding the audience. It is the low -cost entry point for new talent and new businesses. As a sector it has grasped the opportunities of the new technologies and the zeitgeist of the audience. Limited amounts of public funding could make an enormous difference to build the sector. However, the current frontier-type freedom that exists on-line is an essential part of its appeal therefore. Whatever funding comes to the sector must therefore be at arms length from any corporate style S4C or equivalent. A small fund with a very light touch administration and answerability could make a real impact.

Children’s Services There will be a need to gain maximum content provision for minimum cost without sacrificing quality. We believe there are three ways to achieve this: 1. International co-production, if set up properly, will deliver high production value original content at relatively low cost. In some cases, it will also generate income through overseas licensing of originated programming. Superted, Fireman Sam and others were all shown first on S4C and generated significant revenues for the channel and its commercial partners. 2. The consumers of content—in this case children and their families—will represent a well defined and valuable niche market for appropriate goods and services. Managing the advertising, sponsorship and merchandising functions will require specialist expertise. Managing a balance between generating income and maintaining the ethos of the service will be key. 3. The traditional broadcast industry is an insufficiently broad source for content. Games and comics will be equally engaging. Patterns of audience involvement are likely to be very different from traditional tv channels. Content will therefore have to be developed and acquired by cost effective means from a multitude of sources. We firmly believe the focus should be on seeking innovative ways to add value to the existing investment in children’s public service content as outlined above. A franchised children’s service broadcast on S4C in Welsh, but including an English language partner and commercial partners willing to invest in return for a share of exploitation rights would be a highly saleable proposition as well as providing a better quality of service for children in the Welsh language. Such a service would also provide a useful counterbalance to the near monopoly which the BBC currently has in public service content for young children.

Partnerships The relationship between S4C and the BBC will become even more important under the new funding arrangements, however it should not become an exclusive relationship. One of S4C’s historical strengths has been its ability to work alongside a wide range of partners in the UK and internationally—particulary in the co-production of programmes. Why limit these opportunities by getting too close to the BBC? Why not Sky Sports or Sky Arts in their respective fields? As a general strategic principle, S4C should be giving priority to engaging with a wide range of industry stakeholder/partners. This would: (i) provide added financial value; (ii) build relationships with partners who might be supporters of Welsh language broadcasting during difficult times; (iii) would encourage S4C and its suppliers to raise their game and prove its value by measurable successes. We think the proposal to fund S4C from the Licence Fee is a neat solution at a time when there is very little room to manouevre in the public finances. Assurances from DCMS of editorial and operational independence are welcome, although we are puzzled by the lack of explicit guarantees regarding financial independence from the BBC. Why is DCMS stopping short of confirming that? Is it nervous of opening a can of worms by asserting that the Licence Fee is an investment in public service broadcasting rather than the BBC’s money? cobber Pack: U PL: CWE1 [O] Processed: [06-05-2011 15:45] Job: 007747 Unit: PG01

Welsh Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev w33

Guiding Principles for a New S4C — A national rather than a local or regional service. It’s content should reflect the broad range of subject matter which a national service would cover. — A cross platform service where digital content is as important as linear television content— particularly for demographics which aren’t currently being reached by tv. — A service which uses its public funding as a base not a ceiling for its activities and which will pro-actively seek out opportunities to co-finance content with a wide range of partners in Wales, the rest of the UK and in the international market. — It must make a genuine economic impact for the people of Wales and the economic benefits of S4C should do much more than merely translate programme spend into jobs. — A service which encourages the production sector to innovate—creatively as well as technically. — A service which encourages the production sector to be entrepreunerial and to find new ways of funding Welsh language content. Remember, this is a broadcaster which has garnered three Oscar nominations, two US Emmy Awards and whose programmes have sold to over 100 countries around the world. Ambition will be crucial to the future success of the service. November 2010 Peter Edwards is currently Chair of the Film Agency for Wales and a former Head of ITV Wales drama department. Peter has produced and directed hundreds of hours of television as an independent producer, for ITV and BBC including being a director on the first team of Eastenders. He has produced feature films including the BAFTA Carl Foreman award winning A Way of Life. He has produced 14 x 2 hour tv movies in the A Mind to Kill series—made in Wales which have sold to over 90 countries world wide. He has worked in Spain, South Africa, Netherlands and Poland Huw Walters is a director of Calon and has 20 years experience of media business affairs, programme finance, co-production and sales. Uniquely amongst producers in Wales, Calon’s recent track record includes working with S4C, ITV, BBC 1 and 2, Channel 4, BBC Alba, Five and Nickelodeon in the UK. Calon programmes are currently licensed to broadcasters in the UK, Ireland, France, Germany, Italy, Scandinavia, Australia, South America and the Far East. Prior to joining Calon, Huw worked as Director of International Business at S4C where he brokered co-production deals in every major territory with partners including HBO, Discovery Networks US, ZDF Germany, France Television and ABC Australia. He also led a team exporting programmes made in Wales to over 100 countries around the World. During his time at S4C he sat on the board of the commercial subsidiaries which generated additional revenues for the channel.

Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Ofﬁce Limited 05/2011 007747 19585