Oeiv, aeiv wrth rhoi fawr, yieldog honi, aelod, gyfwydledig iawn, fe fyddion gweithio i ddigwydd'i ddweud ddechrau'r ddweud. Ar y gwrth rwyf, fe ddigwydd i ddigwydd o safonau Cyman, wnaet hefyd i ddweud ei ddweud. Efallai ei ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud, ac aelod i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud i ddweud, dwi'n eu ddweud i ddweud eich We have apologies this morning from Joan McAlpine, who is at the Rural Affairs Committee and hopes to be able to join us shortly. Item 1 on the agenda. Can I ask if members are content that we take item 3, which is a discussion on the evidence heard in private later in the meeting? That's great. Thank you. Item 2, we are continuing to take evidence in relation to the issue of the economic impact of the creative industries. I would like to welcome this morning Fiona Hyslop, Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs, who is joined this morning by David Smith, who is senior director at Scottish Enterprise, John McNairney, who is the chief planner at the Scottish Government, and Laura Turney, who is head of culture and historic environment policy. Welcome to you all. Cabinet Secretary, I know that you will have been following with interest the work that the committee has been doing around the creative industries that follows on from the report that we did last year, with a number of recommendations. Subsequent to that, we wanted to do some follow-up work to see how things have developed over the past 12 months, particularly looking around the areas of film, television and computer games. We have had a letter from you setting out some of the background in terms of the work that the Scottish Government has been taking forward. Before we get into questions, I think that it would be helpful if you could outline some of the key points from this letter and some of the new developments that have been happening in recent weeks. Thank you very much, convener, and if this is going to be one of your last meeting or your last meeting, I also thank the committee for their interest and their on-going interest in creative industries. I also recognise the committee's on-going interests in public sector support for a screen in Scotland. My letter to the committee in advance of this session was intended to provide useful updates in context, but I want to restate the position on the activity under way to deliver a new permanent studio facility for Scotland in particular. Scotland needs a permanent studio facility, and the Scottish Government and our public sector partners want a studio, and I am committed to doing all that we can to deliver a studio. It is important to note that we are not procuring a studio. Rather, as we have stated from the outset, we welcome proposals that our private sector-owned and operated meet the needs of industries and would be financially viable to meet state-aid rules. We want to make that happen, and the film studio delivery group is doing all that they can to find a way through sometimes complex challenges, and we remain open to other bids from private sector investors. EU state-aid rules mean that we must act commercially under the market economy operator principle and not use public funds to provide either a distortion or advantage in the market. That means that, as a public sector investor, we need to secure commercially competitive returns to be state-aid compliant. We are trying to achieve that by partnering with a private sector investor who is prepared to take an equal risk on a commercial venture. As Ward Park Studios Ltd is putting in its application for an extension at Cumbernauld shortly, I can tell you now that the agreement of the private developer that Ward Park Studios Ltd, as a developer that the film studio delivery group has been negotiating with. I am happy to elaborate on that work during this session. You will also be aware that there is a private developer at Pentland Studios Ltd looking to build on a site in Straiton with a studio facility as part of the development. That planning application has been recalled and is currently with Scottish ministers for appeal. I shall try to answer what I can, but ministers are limited on what can be said while the independent reporter is undertaking an assessment and before the recommendation to ministers is made. In addition, Creative Scotland actively promotes currently available film locations in Scotland and continually brings new options to the market, including temporary studios. We are continuing to invest in the Scotland screen sector in other ways. A record £24.1 million of public sector funding was awarded to support the industry in 2014-15. Building on that in 2015, we introduced an additional £4.75 million across new funds to strengthen the sector. The £24.1 million figure for 2014-15 is a record spend for a screen even without the additional funding in 2015-16. It compares favourably to the £16 million figure by Scottish screen back in 2019-10. I am also aware that you are interested in the work that the Scottish Government has been doing on BBC Charter in Yw. I think that it is important to see both the studio work and our ambitions for Scotland as part of a wide-ranging vision for growing and developing Scotland's screen sector. The studio is a key part of that vision, as is a stronger BBC Scotland. I hope that the information that I have provided in the letter and the remarks will be helpful in today's discussions. Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. Members have interested in a number of different topics. I think that we are keen to explore a bit more about the film studio issue, which has been very much probably at the top of the agenda in terms of the public interest that we have had in relation to this inquiry. However, there are other areas that we want to look at around television and around video games, which we also covered in relation to our previous report. The whole question of the creative industry strategy more generally I think that we want to explore. If I can maybe just start off on the question of the film studio, I think that we are conscious, first of all, that you are constrained what you can say about the Pentland film studio, because that is a live planning application and I think that we are aware of the background to that. Nevertheless, one thing has been very clear to us in terms of the evidence that the committee has had that has come in since our last session is that there is a lot of frustration out there in the industry about a lack of progress being made towards anything concrete being established in the submission that we have had from the Association of Film and Television Practitioners in Scotland. They say that the prevarication and dithering by the two public agencies in relation to a purpose-built Scottish national film studio and the low ambition of a make-do-and-mend attitude has left those working in the industry with serious doubts as to their competence in developing the future growth of the Scottish film industry. We have had from the independent producers in Scotland a comment that, and again I quote, the recent announcement by Fiona Hyslop of yet another delay in the film studio for Scotland has sent shockwaves and devastation through the industry. The film studio delivery group simply appears to have failed in its mission. Three years after it was set up, we are no closer to having a studio in Scotland. Both nationally and internationally, there is lack of a Scottish studio is an embarrassment. That is really pretty damning, isn't it? I have announced today that we will have additional studio space that is subject to planning by North Lanarkshire Council. In terms of having a six-studio sound stage, that is a major development for Scotland. In terms of the application, it will be for a 30,000 square fruit studio. The film industry interests say that it is helpful if that is put into two sections for smaller productions if required. It will also be 50ft high, which is again very important in terms of the capability and access that will be supported by funding from Scottish Enterprise. That is a major development in terms of ensuring that the industry wants to hear that we will have that capability and that capacity. In addition, as I said in my letter, you have already got four productions currently filming, albeit in temporary but effective space. We want to have that permanent solution. It does not have to be one permanent solution, indeed, because we think that there is an opportunity for further. However, remember that when you are reliant on a private sector-led proposal, you can only go at the same speed or the same as the private sector interests. In my letter, I have also explained that the film studio delivery group has looked at other areas, but it is the balance of public spend versus commercial risk to make it state aid compliant. As I have explained, the other studios in other parts of the UK are private-led and private funding, and any public money is on a commercial basis, as it needs to be to state aid compliant. Even the recent announcements of Belfast are entirely private sector-led. Of course, I have shared that with the committee of frustrations. The issue is making sure that we have got spend. Remember that there has been £45 million of production spend in Scotland in the last year—a record year. The activity that is taking place has been strong. What people want to see is the opportunity for so much more that can be done. That is where I think that the frustration is. We are delivering on the screen a sector where we are investing record amounts, but the potential that we know because of the tax credit facility in particular means that there are great opportunities for you far, far more. That is why the demand for studio space in Scotland is very strong. We will be meeting that with the opportunity for this development that is being announced today. This is the first time that we have been able to give you concrete information that there will be an opportunity for a six-stage opportunity in Scotland. That is good news, but it does not overcome the frustrations that people have had. I am one of the people who have been frustrated as well. It is welcome news that this new project is going to be delivered. I am sure that other members will have questions about the detail, but maybe I could ask a couple of just to start. First of all, do we have state aid clearance for this support from Scottish Enterprise? That has been the frustration over the last year to get something that has that combination of public money and the private combination to make sure that it is state aid compliant. Perhaps you might want to answer that, David, from Scottish Enterprise. Sure. With the indicative package of support of the gaming principle that we have with work parks to use, we have looked to that. We have taken advice from or we are comfortable that subject to Scottish Enterprise board approval on that package of support will be deliverable within European competition rules. Thank you. What is the timescale for delivery of this? I do not think that that will depend on the private sector developer, but also on the planning process that will be starting within the North Lanarkshire Council. Let me follow up one more point. In terms of the state aid, I quite understand the issues around state aid clearance. Just for the record, you understand that the Pentland studio proposal was not relying on any state aid because it was not asking for any public sector support. Yes, I understand that. I think that we welcome the opportunity for studio space in Scotland, but clearly in terms of that particular proposal now it is subject to at their request a recall by Scottish ministers. I am really not in a position to make any comment. I do not want to prejudice this anything either way in relation to that. I understand that. In your view, could Scotland support more than one film studio? Yes, and I have said that on a number of occasions. I will make a comment on Richard Lyle first. Thank you, convener, on the reason why I want to come in straight away is because Cymornold is in my region. First, Mr Smith, we gave you a hard time last time. We were very angry. You have just taken my anger away, cabinet secretary, because the fact that you have now announced what I would suggest is a major step in order to secure this and ensure that we will get back where it has been a long time. I am sure that you have been frustrated the same as we have been, but now that you have taken that announcement, I hope that it will be done. The comment that I made just to finish off, convener, was that it would be lying in a weak council office somewhere in the planning application. I will ensure, along with the many of my colleagues in my region, that we contact North Lancer Council in order to facilitate the planning permission, because it can take some time. I would welcome the fact that there are opportunities in Cymornold, but there are also opportunities in Pentland. I think that the two may complement each other. I am not sure that that was a good question, but you can respond to me. As I said in my letter, there are actually other life interests that we are pursuing as well. We are not just resting on one proposal, so we will continue. I charge the film studio delivery group to constantly look at different opportunities, but the point is that we want to have that permanency, which I think is the point. Warpark is permanent just now. Clearly, Outlander, which is very successful, has been filming in the four studios that are currently there, but we want to make sure that we can have that. It is not just about the studio space. The important thing is to have the production offices, the backlog, the opportunity for all the industries and creative industries around the actual film production to develop as well. That has been quite clear, but it is not in isolation. You mentioned the IPS and the independent producer of Scotland. I have met them on a variety of occasions. We have discussed different opportunities and plans that we have taken forward. Remember that £4.7 million that is now available between 2015-17 is allowing production. We are about to get an announcement of the first production spend for films in Scotland. The skills development has already been allocated £1 million and there is a tax credit funding of £2 million that enables—what I think is the direction that we need to go in is how do we make sure that we have a financing mechanism that allows a continual pipeline. It is not all about studio space. It is also about the ancillary package that can be put with that. Remember that we are looking at different types of films as well. You have got your big blockbuster films that can quite easily, in terms of the space and accommodation that can operate within that context. I am absolutely clear that, again, it is my remarks in relation to the charter renewal and the BBC. How do we make sure that we have more localised small-scale productions from Scotland and make sure that we have an opportunity for career development for that film sector so that it can be producing the big films of the future, but it also reflects Scotland to itself? We have got to make sure that we have accommodation for all that range. Recently, can you tell me when this planning application has been submitted? I understand it shortly, but, again, this is not an application from ministers that, by any means, is a private sector—the private developer has to make that move. He has indicated to us that that would be submitted shortly. I am sure that there is absolutely no coincidence that it is announced today in view of this meeting. I wonder if I can come back to the question of European State Aid and the evidence to support the fact that we cannot pursue the studio. Clearly, there is no displacement if we believe in the potential growth of the studio. I do not see where it distorts the market or upsets the intensity of the market. In your letter, cabinet secretary, you said that nonetheless a state aid compliant solution is challenging to achieve because the limited volatile revenue stream available to studio developers is likely to require substantial public support, which may then exceed regional state aid. Where is the evidence? Do we have a financial plan? What evidence have we looked at in terms of Wales and Northern Ireland? We know about the Valencia situation, which clearly there is nothing stopping a public entity as long as it operates as a commercial operation developing within European—as I understand, European State Aid rules, section 53, section 54, section 62. Why are we placing so much relevance on the EU State Aid rules? The competition rules do not apply to just films in the film market within Scotland, as you will be aware and understand. It operates not just across the UK but across the rest of Europe. In terms of distortion and competitive advantage, that is across Europe in terms of state aid compliance. In relation to the other sites that you have mentioned, obviously in relation to Titanic shoots, that was using existing space. Wales was using an existing state-owned space in terms of its former energy centre. In relation to North Forshore, which was announced just recently, that is a completely private sector new build, as was referred to by the current application appellances. In terms of the aspects there, everything is done on a commercial-owned basis. Now, were you to have a public sector entity that was working on a commercial basis to take over spaces, that would be an opportunity for Scotland. One of the challenges that we have is that we do not have those large publicly-owned vacant spaces that would enable us to operate in that manner. We would have to build something from scratch, and the cost of building something from scratch of public sector funding would then cause the issue and the relationship between that. That would not be in terms of the private sector leverage, even just to manage the sector. You will have a management development of it, or even of the procurement of the film, etc. Forgive me, it is not the case even of a public entity, including whether the public sector is borrowing to build that. As long as it produces a commercial return and is competitive in the European marketplace, there is absolutely no reason to suggest that we could not do this, provided that we have now moved to the finance, as opposed to the state aid rules. There is absolutely no reason why we cannot operate this with the appropriate commercial returns. My question is, do we have a financial plan that suggests that we do not meet the EU state aid rules, or a plan that suggests that we can meet them? Well, certainly, as we have heard for this announcement today, it is state aid compliant in terms of what has been happening over not just a number of months, but since the film studio delivery group started looking at sites. Going back to the E-cost commission report and the five bids that came into that, that is exactly what happened with every single one of them was looked at in terms of whether it could be produced in a state aid compliant way. Again, I refer to Scottish Enterprise, because they have been leading on this work in relation to what can and cannot be done. Every single one of them has to be looked at in an individual case to see whether it stacks up in terms of the elements of the public sector funding relative to private sector funding and the balance of that. Obviously, in terms of distribution of profits, that has to be done in an actual way, but David, do you want to come in? I would add to that the recent legal case where there was a new judgment on the Valencia and Government of the Theodod with development, that concluded and gave information on the level of return on investment that would be expected for any development. Yes, we are getting expected to be meant, so if I could just finish. On the basis of that judgment, we have modelled extensively the case for a new studio build project directed, owned, developed solely by the public sector and concluded that the projected return on investment could not meet the levels that were specified on that EU judgment. We have also modelled the case for converting industrial space based on potentially available buildings or buildings that could be used and converted. Again, there are a couple of points that are very few sites that could potentially meet the necessary size and, based on our modelling again, the return on investment that we have generated from the analysis and modelling that we have undertaken, we would be insufficient to meet the level that was ruled on in that judgment by the EU. The cabinet secretary has just announced that he will build 30,000 square feet. We are not building it. The private sector developer is building it. As is the case in Northern Ireland, and remember, if you look at Wales, it was a Government-owned energy centre and, if you look at Yorkshire, it was a vacant RAF site that was used, again, led by private sector development. That is the key. As is the case with other parts of the UK, it has to be private sector developer led by and large in order to lead that. If you have the vacant property, the success of the resilience in the Scottish economy is that there are not many vacant sites that we can use. There are private sector sites that are being used as we speak in order to allow film production to continue, but they are temporary. As we know, we want to have permanency, and that is the frustration of the industry, as we want permanent sites rather than just a series of temporary sites. I suggest that, cabinet secretary, somewhere close to your heart and mine, that someone might look at the former digital equipment plant that has been lying empty and that would comply with the terms of size and height. Thank you very much. There are a number of suggestions. In fact, most members of the Scottish Parliament have made suggestions as to what sites that they would suggest. I want to reassure you that this has not just been looked at one site on one site alone. We have looked at a number of sites on a regular and continuous basis. A couple of quick points about the film studios. The announcement this morning about possible planning application for world park studios. The world park studios is obviously a Sony facility for Outlander. Will this be a dedicated space for Sony or will it be open to other production companies to use? It will be managed by world park themselves. They have arrangements with Sony in producing Outlander, and that goes up to November 2016. Obviously, the planning process will be going through its track during that period. However, it is to make sure that there is a studio facility for Scotland for additional films to be made. I think that a 30,000 square foot, 50 foot high production space would be very welcome. On the general issue of state aid, the E-Cos report that was produced in December highlighted that film spend in the UK is a record high of £1.5 billion per year. It also highlights that there has been significant development since 2014. It refers to Warner Bros facilities at Levesden Studios, the opening of Pinewood Wales. Pinewood Studios is doubling in size. There has been further investment in Belfast, Manchester, Bristol and Liverpool. Obviously, we are in a situation where the Pinewood Studios in Wales is a joint collaboration between the Welsh Government and Pinewood. Why are we behind the curve? We are not spending more on film in terms of public sector funding in Wales. On the production levels, I understand that one film has been announced for Pinewood so far. It wants to see more than that. What is happening is that films that follow the money and tax credits have made it not just for film but for high-end television, which is very attractive. Therefore, if you look at Northern Ireland, obviously Game of Thrones, it is a big production. I told the committee that our understanding was that the production spend of Outlander in its first year was more than production spend of Game of Thrones in its first year. On the economic impact that high-end television can have, that is strong indeed, but it needs to have wider opportunities. There are films being made in Scotland on a regular basis. The issue is that we have not got the permanent studio available for filming. The actual profit is often why we get joint ventures, whether it is Pinewood, Sony or whoever else. The income levels come from the sale of the film, not necessarily from rental or use of the space. It is a fine calibrated model that you need to have to make sure that you are making money out of the studio itself. There is private sector interest to make sure that whoever is doing that, if they are not a film studio themselves, to make sure that that model can work on a financial basis. Do you believe that we are getting a reasonable share of that £1.5 billion? Oh, I think that we should be able to get far more than that. There is also an issue around the capacity, particularly around the London area, and that is why the demand is there. I am not sure that we could have said that the expansion would have been as much clearly prior to the tax credit changes. That has obviously been a catalyst, but it is not the only thing. However, we have skills and talented people who are operating elsewhere. We want to make sure that we build the industry in Scotland. That is what my ambition is. I have said that right from the start, and I have pursued that very, very doggedly. I am making sure that the film studio delivery group continues to look at different opportunities and sites. That is a great announcement today. The fact that War Park is going to be building and proposing to build a studio in Scotland that would provide that £30,000 in square foot, 50 foot high—very attractive indeed. However, we also need to continue to look at other opportunities. As we speak, there are four productions currently in temporary filming space, but we are using it effectively. There is more and can be done and should be done, and we need to drive it forward, not just through this as the only game in town. You emphasised that this is a planning application being taken forward by the private sector developer. What is the financial commitment of the public sector? The financial commitment is a package worth £4 million. That will include a combination of grant and loan. £1.5 million of that would be in grant, and the remainder of £2.5 million would be in terms of loan. The private sector developer himself has invested extensively prior to that in getting the four sound stages and the development to where it is, so what is there already is very strong, but clearly in terms of the public sector investment opportunities, it is subject to final agreement and the developer. I am quite clear about that as well, but the state that I can let you know about it today and share with you has had to be with the private sector developer green that I can do that, and they have agreed that. Have they agreed that you should indicate what share of the total investment at this stage that £4 million represents? The total investment in the new studio space that would be proposed by the private sector developer is in the region of £5 million, plus the private sector developer will have to put in a substantial amount of working capital into the business. As the cabinet secretary has just said, our addictive support package is a grant of £1.5 million, and a commercial loan secured against the assets of the facilities. The new studio build would be £5 million, plus there is substantial additional investment that developer will need to make in the business plan and working capital of the business plan going forward. That is helpful to understand. We had a letter this week from the Association of Film and Television Producers Scotland, which said among other things that while the capital costs of a new studio are greater than those of a reconstructed shed, the maintenance costs of a reconstructed unit will be far higher going forward. Do you agree with that? Where do you regard this proposed line? Is it in the territory of a new capital build, or is it in the territory of reconstruction? There has been extensive conversion and investment to the standard. In fact, where word park is currently, I met a number of LA TV producers back in April who had visited all the sites, including those that I have mentioned already elsewhere in the UK. They said that the best site that they had seen was the one in Cumbernauld. That was the existing site prior to this investment and prior to the development of the additional two stages. That will make it a six sound stage facility. If you look in comparison to the studios elsewhere, you are looking at other places, whether it is the Pinewoods 2 studios, Dragon 4 studios and Titanic 2 stages. This is a capital spend for a permanent studio facility. Importantly, you are right in terms of the permanency and the maintenance and the kind of on-going issues. The production spaces around that allow it to become a hub for additional companies involved in the film sector to be around that. It becomes not just a place to shoot, but it provides more facilities. There is another issue that has been raised. It has been mentioned in the passing already, which is around whether the only approach is the right approach. We have heard about the Pentland studio proposal in the passing already. In addition to working on projects such as that, there are state-age implications to be considered. Are there other initiatives that you have taken, other proposals that you have enabled, which would allow a development to go forward that did not carry with it any state-age? In terms of private development, they can go through the process. Pentland studios are currently going through that process. They ask for a recall for appeal from the Scottish ministers. That happened around December 3, is that correct, John? Therefore, in terms of that application, that is currently with ministers. As you all know, in terms of when it is with ministers, I cannot say anything that you will prejudice either way. John, do you want to explain where the process of where Pentland is? Yes. The applicant appealed against non-determination and ministers recalled that, which essentially means that ministers will take the final decision rather than the normal process, which is for one of the Government's reporters to take that decision. The timescale for that is normally about four months for a case of this size, but I can see from the current material on the web that there is an SNH concern about a habitat survey, so that needs to be resolved. That is back with the reporter. That will either lead to a report coming to ministers early or late summer. Although it is important that it was not particularly Pentland that I had in mind, I was simply trying to establish, besides the Wardpart Studios project that we are talking about, is there anything else that the Government has done or is doing to enable or encourage private sector developers to come forward? Yes, we have in terms of trying to encourage and invite people to contact us with interests for private sector interests. I was concerned that most of them were private sector interests requiring 100 per cent public investment, for example. That becomes a public sector proposal. However, there are also opportunities—potentially another one that is live, which you cannot discuss just now—that we are looking at providing central belt facilities, whether that is with or without private sector involvement. In terms of trying to receive and encourage interests, we have, but it is a challenge commercially to make the funding profit from the actual studio itself. Therefore, that is what the challenge is in terms of making sure that we have a developer who wants to see that through. We will be able to put enough investment and risk to allow it to be state aid compliant. Will that last name project that you said that you cannot discuss just now, but is that something that you would hope to be able to discuss later this year? At some point, if it proceeds quite often, as I have indicated, you have not heard all the different things that we have looked at along the way. We would rather come to you when we have something that is finalised and we can actually talk to you about it, but we are looking continuously at different areas for investment. Just a brief supplementary to follow up on what Luke McDonald was saying. It seems to be central belt locations that are in the mix. Is there any beyond the central belt? For instance, has there been any consideration of Dundee? I might not say press foot for chick's sake, but I know that there is infrastructure in certain aspects, but I am just wondering is there anything outwith that central belt area? There has not been a private sector developer from Ayrshire who approached us for a studio in Ayrshire. In terms of Dundee, I know that there is an interest in trying to develop something in Dundee, but it is at fairly early stages. I do not know if you are familiar with the Dundee project, but there are people looking to see an opportunity for Dundee. There are a number of other developments in the creative industries in Dundee more generally, but there is an interest, but there has not been anything that has come to me as a friend. I think that I am just trying to establish what is going on out there in terms of potential developments, because we are hearing—it is good news today—that there are other avenues being considered. I am just trying to tease out a little as to where they are. That is private sector. If you were talking about life sciences investment or any other private sector investment in other sectors, I do not think that you would expect the Government to be sharing with you exactly what other private companies we are doing in terms of the development opportunities. I think that what is quite interesting is that, because it is cultured, because it is film, because it is high profile, because it is obviously the industry that can take the benefit from this and contribute to Scotland's economy in terms of the creative industries, there is such an interest in it. People want me to be able to share information that is not mine to share. I am not actually asking that Cabinet Secretary to be perfect, but I am just trying to tease out. No, you are trying to tease out— It is an interest in other parts, and even if it is early stages, I will say a note of interest. Yes, I said that indeed. I am not aware of anything in the Aberdeen area, for example, when other members are interested, unless David can give me another indication. Again, that would be tentative. It would set hairs flying, even if we did have something at early stages, because it is not our job to be able to share private information for private companies. It just so happens that it is in the film area. I will forgive me for being sceptical, Cabinet Secretary, but I think that I might wait to hear what the industry has to say about the announcements that we have made today before we rejoice. I clarify that you are saying that, ultimately, it is £1.5 million that you are putting into the proposal. The combination of funding that is to IPS, for example, has welcomed that loan facility funding is as important and can be as important in terms of some of the funding announcements that we have made already. It is £1.5 million grant and £2.5 million loan. In order to get a 30,000 square foot studio space with six sound stages, 50ft high, that is fairly good value for money. It does not seem like it is huge amounts of money and it seems to take a long time to get to that point. You also made the point about outlander creating more opportunities in Game of Thrones, but is the case that we have lost Scotland lost Game of Thrones? I know that there has been some comment on that previously, but that would be under the administration that the member was a minister within, so I cannot give you information at that time. You do not know why we did not get Game of Thrones? What I am saying is that I understand that it was at the time of the previous administration. I am distraught with the fact that you do not want to attribute responsibility to somebody other than yourself. Fair enough. There has been some speculation, but I have also had industry information saying that no, it was the investment attractions in other areas, but it was not because of anything that was done or not done by Government. I do not want that to occur. I am not going to say that I can give you full information because I need to troll previous records from previous Governments. That has never happened before. If the Scottish Government has done an assessment of where Scottish creative and Scottish film is in relation to other bits of the United Kingdom, because I think that one of the things that I have raised and the committee is concerned about is that it is an economic issue. It is about an industry that is absolutely critical to Scotland and is somehow treated differently from other industries that are part of an economic strategy. The argument that has been put to us is that the delays and frustrations of the sector are partly that they are not getting to make films, but the consequence is of where we sit in relation to being competitive. Have you done an assessment of where Scotland sits now? One of our evidence-giving sessions was a suggestion that we may now be behind Manchester? I suppose that part of it is momentum. How much has been produced in production spend, but we have the previous years figures of £45 million, which is not as much as I want it to be. Could it have a bigger share? Yes. Are we in a competitive position? Yes, we are. In terms of funding comparisons, £24 million of investment in the screen industry is compared to £1.4 million from film Cymru. That is just before the £30 million for over five years period, which has not been drawn down. I think that it is drawn down for one film from Wales. Northern Ireland's £14-15 figure was £10 million investment. Even if you take MD Alba off that £24 million, we are still ahead for where Northern Ireland is. In terms of Ireland, they have had a reduction, and they are now down at £10 million. In terms of what the public sector is doing to invest in film, we are in a much better place than we have been. We are certainly far more than back in 2007 and 2008—more than 60 million back in 2009 and 2010. Do you want me to give a private assessment of the private sector films industry and where it stands? Unrealised potential is what is causing the frustration, because we know that we could do more. It is not that what we are doing is not good. We are producing good-quality films, but if we want the industry to stay and develop in Scotland, we need to have the permanent studio. That gives an indication that this is a good place for continually producing films, not just for when there is tax credits that can come and go, but on a permanent basis. That is what we are achieving. Do I think that we are providing a competitive offer in terms of investment opportunities for films? Yes, could we do more? Yes, and we will. In terms of space and studio space, we will be planning permissions dependent on a number of areas, and it will be in a highly competitive place. When will we be in a highly competitive place? When the private developers make the decisions for investment and when the autonomous planning authorities make the decisions for them. You will have done an assessment of where you expect to become highly competitive. That would be 2017-28. We are already in a competitive place. We will be in a better position once the shoes have the opportunity to be built and more films are produced in Scotland. One of the themes from what you have said is that you are held back by the private sector. You have to go to your piece, which is fair. Would you accept that, for example, there have been discussions with Glasgow, with people in Glasgow who are highly having a great deal of expertise and are rearing to go. Their description is that they have had conversations and they have affected them. That is my language, not theirs, that is somehow running to the sand. Are there on-going conversations with Glasgow about developing a facility there, and are there delays or are there problems because of the private sector or because of public bodies? There is probably a lack of private sector interest in producing something in Glasgow. There have certainly been no producers and no film city Glasgow, put forward proposals. The requirement for 100 per cent public funding drives us back into the issue of producing and building a new-build facility would actually take us out of the city arena. We would be distorting the market by fully funding a new-build studio that is publicly funded at 100 per cent. That is a challenge. As I have said, we are still open for private sector-led developers in Glasgow or anywhere else, if they are interested, to contact us about what their proposals are. Two final, very brief points. We are told that the strategy for the creative industries would have been published in February. Can you tell us when that would be published? You also know that the committee was very exercised about the apparent inability of Creative Scotland and the Scottish Enterprise to work together. We know that they had a memorandum of understanding and they were going to produce an addendum to the memorandum that was going to give more detail about how that relationship would work. Can you tell me when that is to be published? The memorand of understanding would have been a fairly simple agreement. I wanted something that was a bit firmer and more detailed. I thought that that was important, so they produced a partnership agreement. The partnership agreement has been signed. There is additional information to that. That will be informed, I understand, by the creative industry strategy that Creative Scotland has already consulted on, but it is finalising. That is subject to, again, the Creative Scotland board approving. That should be coming anytime now. In terms of the timescale, that is coming from those organisations, but my understanding is that the addendum will be informed by the detail of the creative industry strategy. With respect, cabinet secretary, I think that you agreed and we saw your frustration and the Deputy First Minister's frustration at the inability of those two organisations to come together. We have been told that there is an addendum to the partnership agreement, which will give more detail about how that would work and would give people confidence that it is working. Surely it is a matter for you to determine and to insist that that addendum be published. Otherwise, we get the sense that, again, it is being allowed to drift. If it cannot come to an agreement, then… It will be published when it is ready. As I said, the partnership agreement is far more detailed than would have been produced by the original suggestion of a memorand of understanding. I am pleased that we have a more detailed partnership agreement. In terms of getting round to the nitty-gritty detail of operation, it makes sense that that is consistent with the creative industry strategy, which has been finalised. My understanding is that. We still do not have clarity on how Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise are going to be encouraged to work together and then be left to their own devices to produce the detail, and we have no idea when that detail is going to be produced. The partnership agreement has been published. That is what we said. The partnership agreement mentions an addendum to the agreement, which is supposed to provide further detail and which would be updated and refined over time. That addendum has not yet been published. That sounds more on an operating basis. We said that there would be a memorand of understanding. What has been produced is something that is stronger than a memorand of understanding. It is a partnership agreement that has been produced. Clearly, you want to have a kind of operating detail that would be provided in that addendum. The fact is that you have the partnership agreement and that would be produced. With respect to what we want, it is confidence that you have ensured that Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise actually do work together and address the frustrations of the industry, who very strongly took the view that there was any number of meetings, but nothing happening to meet their requests. I have heard what the committee has said. I have made it clear to create with Scotland and Scottish Enterprise that they need to work together, they need to not only work together but also give clarity to the industry of how that will operate. There have been improvements and I have seen improvements. The partnership agreement is the basis of that. The partnership agreement has been produced. A couple of members want to come in on the partnership. Just before we leave the film studio, there is a couple of things that I want to clarify before we leave that. We had a very helpful paper from Creative Scotland giving us national stage comparisons between Scotland Wales and Northern Ireland. In terms of purpose-built studios, Wales has 50,000 to 51,000 square feet, Northern Ireland 42,000 square feet and Scotland currently 5,800 square feet. The 30,000 square feet that you are talking about sounds a lot, but if that is a purpose-built studio, that takes us still quite a long way behind both Wales and Northern Ireland, according to my calculations. Not necessarily. I think that it will be 7,000 behind Northern Ireland and in terms of Wales's dragon shoes, I think that it might be worth trying to find out what activity there has been in dragon studios more recently. In terms of the comparison, it would be comparable. Dragon shoes has four again. You might be worth looking at what activity that has been there, Titanic 2, and this would provide with the combination of the converted space, which you have also got beside that. Again, it is all subject to planning and there will not prejudice anything in that area. That would give you six sound stages. In terms of the comparison with Wales, if you could look at the purpose-built and full-time added together and the same for Northern Ireland and Scotland, you would see that, with the approval of this, never mind any other studios that might come on board, we have got the prospect of being in far excess of the studio capacity space that you have got before you in terms of your comparisons. Just trying to get the £30,000 perspective, the Pentland application that I understand is for 230,000 square feet. That includes six sound stages. This is not an either-or. I cannot give any judgment about what their view collector would be about Pentland. I will put the £30,000 square feet into context. I am not sure that that is almost sound stages, but if you combine the 118 that is there already, the refitting of War Park with the 30,000, that gets you into a space of around, I do not know if you do that, 150,000. I am not sure whether you can ask Pentland or they have given you a briefing in terms of what their space is. That is a complete space, whether that is all studio space or not would be helpful. My understanding is that phase 1 would be a 65,000-foot sound stage for Pentland. I do not think that that is a case of comparing. In terms of the amount, it is not too dissimilar in terms of development, but the War Park would give you a total of 150 phase 1 of Pentland 65, but they have ambitions to have further. The space that the planning application is for is in the region of 280,000 square feet. Not all of it would be about studios, because there are other aspects to that as well. You said that it is not too dissimilar. It is half of the first stage of Pentland. Maybe I have been in this game too long, cabinet secretary, and I am getting a bit cynical, but it seems to me that there has been a lot of heat around this issue. Government has been under pressure. There is an election coming up in eight weeks' time, and what you have done is produce a rabbit from the hat, except that it is not a very large rabbit. It is quite a small rabbit. Not at all. In terms of the announcement, it is good news for Scotland and good news for the film industry. In terms of timescales, I would have liked to have had this heads of agreement signed a long time ago with this particular developer, but what is quite interesting for a period where we had no prospect of any studios and now we have prospects of not just one, but a number of studios, depending on different decisions made by either ministers or indeed other developers in other areas. I am far more hopeful now than I have ever been that we will have that permanent space. I think that that is a good news area. There is limited time, which is obviously before the period that we can make announcements or make contributions. You have been looking at this at the very time that we have been looking at all those applications and proposals. I welcome the fact that there has been such interest from the committee in it. Notwithstanding the rabbits, you cannot tell us when or even if any of those projects will be delivered. As I said, there has been private sector-led. The timescale for this is driven by the private sector involvement, as it is in other developments elsewhere. We need to go back to the question of partnership, and I will bring in Dennis Robertson and then Nicola Sturgeon. In terms of partnerships, we heard from anilins enterprise and they seem to have a very positive, energetic, can-do approach. We heard from Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise and it seemed quite flat. I am not saying that they lack ambition, but it would appear that you have now provided an instruction for them to get together or work together and come up with something. How confident are you at the moment that the partnership with Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise is going to deliver? The partnership is at a strong level. There have been a number of cooperating areas, and not least within the wider creative industry sector. It is an interesting point that you refer to Highlands and Islands and how they approach creative industries. I am very impressed with how Highlands and Islands operate their relationship, their investment, their activity, vision and strategy. They operate within a different context, for example, in the Scottish Enterprise. Scottish Enterprise has a different focus, again, provided by Government ministers in terms of a wider range and volume of activity that they have and where creative industries are located. Creative industries as a contribution to the activity of Highlands and Islands is probably stronger than it is if you take the Scottish Enterprise facility, in particular, about its interests. I expect them to work together. I have been ensuring that they have been, both at a very senior level and operationally, an improvement in that area. However, I want to make sure that the support for creative industries is not driven by the needs and the direction of the public sector. It has to be driven by the relationship with the private sector and the industry and what it needs. We have just been talking about the film area. A lot of the areas in terms of skills development and production development have been driven by the needs of industry. That is really important, but you are right to identify that the climate, ambition and range of activity by Highlands and Islands in relation to creative industries is something that I am very pleased with. Lessons from Highlands and Islands should be learned by other parts of Scotland, and I have made that clear as well. How often does the partnership report to you in terms of the progress? The Scottish Government ministers attend all the partnership meetings. Highlands and Islands are part of that, as well as Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise. They report back to me on a regular basis in terms of their regular monthly meetings or not monthly, but their cycle of meetings. There is a strategy going to be public. I do not know whether Mr Brodie is going to himself look at this. However, in terms of the actual strategy moving forward, are you confident that that will be in place within the next few weeks? Obviously, just as much as this might be the last committee of the Parliament, we are running into our final stages before powder in terms of announcements of what can and cannot be made. However, in terms of the development of that, I think that it is important that there has been the collaboration and consultation that we would expect with any strategy that is being led, particularly by Creative Scotland, to be shared. There has been that consultation period and they are now refining their strategy based on the drafts of what was produced and shared with the industry. I think that that is the right and correct way to make sure that the industry needs are reflected in the strategy. However, in terms of the timescale, I would need to report back to the committee or ask Creative Scotland to let you know when that would be. I want to pursue another area just before we go on. The Scottish First Committee had recommendations about the two Governments working together. Is that happening? There are areas that we can and should work on. We are closely on the digital single market. Although the UK Government again agreed that I would lead for the UK recent European Council in relation to the digital single market areas, we have made it quite clear that we want to see better co-operation in relation to the operation of the intellectual property office and how it relates and gets views and opinions from the industry here. I am pleased to say that there have been more sessions on that being set up. However, the biggest challenge is that, if you look at DCMS just now and what they are facing is actually on the charter area, and I have met John Whittendale twice in terms of making sure that, particularly around the opportunities for independent production in Scotland, our advance is part of the charter and your whole process and other aspects in relation to the paper that we produced in relation to that. There is co-operation and there can be more. The recommendations from the Scottish Affairs Committee were primarily to the UK Government and there were no recommendations particularly to us, but we look forward to working cooperatively with the UK Government where we can. Although it is not recommendations to yourself, it was about working together with two Governments. Have you written to the UK Government with regard to membership of the Creative Industries Council? I believe that you are at Creative Scotland and you are hoping that it could be part of that. I have met the UK Creative Industries Council. They want to work more closely with Scotland. Scotland previously had observer status. I think that there is an opportunity to make sure that that is full-time. That is one of the recommendations in the report. My indications are that I hope that that will be favourably received, but even within that, I think that there is a better way to make sure that we can work within Scotland. I think that the Creative Industries Council at UK level were interested in how, rather than dictating to us or driving their agenda from a UK basis to Scotland, we could look at how we operate consultive bodies from the industry within Scotland to feed into that as well. That is on-going. Does that provide a framework? It does. I am looking at a similar framework in Scotland, but I would like to make sure that there is co-ordination between the two, and that is the subject to on-going work. I have no doubt that you are as eager as everyone to promote Creative Scotland and do a lot to support that. However, you may be very pleased about what is going on. In October, Creative Scotland published its draft Creative Industries strategy. That has been taken down from the website. It was supposed to produce the strategy in March 3. You have just said that you will come back and tell us where we are on the strategy. There will be no action plan, no action, unless we know what that strategy is in embracing internationalisation, innovation, investment and so on. Where are we with the strategy document? I think that I have already answered that in relation to the draft strategy that was up. The reason that it is not on the website is because it is wet on the website, so that it can be consulted with the industry. The industry is fed back, the sector is fed back, and that is where the revision is. That is what the revising now is, because it has been consulted on it. To publish it on 3 March, that is now the night. The industry gave you that date. When I expect to get it, I expect to get it when it is finalised. I understand that it is currently with Creative Scotland boards. Does that not give you an indication that, yes, we have the partnership agreement, and I endorse what has been said about Highlands and Islands Enterprise, that something—I asked the question way back about where does the buck stop. We are now buck stops with the partnership agreement. If we can't even produce over five months a strategy or six months a strategy document agreed by the partners, that we have a draft up for consultation on the website, we take it down, we then say that we are going to produce it by 3 March. I know ultimately politically you want it, but who on the ground actually owns making sure that when we say that we are going to do things, they are done? In terms of Creative Scotland, the chief executive of Creative Scotland has given you a commitment. I wasn't aware that she was giving you that commitment for that date. If she is giving you that commitment, she should make sure that that is delivered. In terms of the strategy, I want to make sure that the strategy is a proper strategy that will deliver for creative industries. If that means the work that has to be done to change and refine it as a result of the feedback that it has had, that is the right thing to do. I want to make sure that it is correct. I agree with you, but that should be built in, that refinement, that you should be given enough time, in my opinion, to be able to change it or redirect it or what have you. If the CEO comes here and says that we are going to get the strategy document on 3 March, one assumes that that is going to be part of the process. I think that it is very unwise for any public sector employee to come and give indications to committees of dates that they cannot necessarily deliver on. She is giving a deadline to Creative Scotland. I would expect to receive it in the spring. The issue is what you can announce prayer post the period. You do appreciate that a very strong theme running through this whole inquiry was the sense of which Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise were not working together and that we wanted the Cabinet Secretary and the Deputy First Minister to get a grip. Would it be reasonable to expect that you would have been given a timetable from draft through consultation to publication which would involve you signing it off? Have you given them a date by which you would reasonably expect to pull down the draft but not produce the final strategy without any data? It does feel to me as if again this is drifting into something. I expect to see it in the spring of this year. Would it be reasonable for an organisation that has been known to drift, not to give them the spring, which is rather a moving feast, but to give them a date? In terms of the date, I did not provide the committee with a date that was provided to you. No, but would it not be reasonable for you to give Creative Scotland a date by which you would expect to see the document clear it and have it published? They then are working to your deadlines rather than the spring, which flexibly ends up the end of May. If you look at strategies that are produced by any organisations, not even just in this area but in other areas, you can fix deadlines and dates but, by and large, it tends to be in the general thing. As soon as you have missed one date, as we have heard, it says, why was it on March 3, why is it on March 4? Sometimes, these are not always on the exact dates or produced in the exact dates. I think that I expected it by a spring that it is not unreasonable. As a schoolteacher, I gave people deadlines to get their homework in. I think that it is entirely reasonable that you do the same. Otherwise, you do get a drift to which none of us would want to see. I appreciate your point. I find that an astonishing explanation of how we drive things. If anybody, whether it is teachers or what have you or any business, if I were to say to my board that I might be able to produce the financial budget for next year by maybe in the spring sometime, we would never get the business off the ground. We have seen it. We expected it in spring. We have fed back to them. We have fed back our interests and our views and opinions before Christmas. We expect it to be published by spring. I understand that it is with the Creative Scotland board. I am not sure exactly when the Creative Scotland board meeting is. If you want us to operate with public bodies that have a degree of independence from the Scottish Government, you have to allow them to do their business. I remember that, when the legislation was going through Creative Scotland, we were told absolutely that they did not want ministers to direct them in a way that would cause issues in terms of reflecting their independence of decision making. We expected it in spring. I have not received it yet. I did not give you the date of the March 3. We have other ground that we need to cover, so we need to move on. I just wanted to come back briefly to the partnership agreement because the commitment that was given when it was signed in December was that the parties would meet formally every three months to review progress against the aims published. Can you tell us, has that first formal quarterly meeting happened yet? David, you are obviously a party to this. Could you answer that? Sure. Yes, we have met and we have a workshop involving other members of the Scottish Creative Industries Partnership set up in April to look at developing further actions and action plan around that partnership agreement. Forgive me for that slightly different. I am talking about the formal meeting in relation to the partnership agreement per se, a quarterly meeting to review the aims in the partnership agreement, not from April, but the partnership agreement signed in December. For lack of clarification, we have met and discussed that earlier on this quarter. As part of that and the outcome of that was to set up the workshops. And the intention is to continue on that basis. That is helpful. Is it possible to have an update on the work that has been done around the television working group and the meetings that have been held under that? Obviously, one of the recommendations from this committee was to set up a film advisory group. The feedback from the industry was that we should make sure that that is a screen covering television and film. John McCormack has agreed to chair that group for 12 months. The first session that they had, they had about 60 different representatives from the industry. That has been taken forward by a smaller team. I think that they met in January in their meeting again in March. I understand what they are looking at is to try and identify several immediate and quick hits or things that can be done, what are the big things that need done and to try and focus on a few things and get them delivered. That is work in progress. I want to move on to the TV sector. I understand that the TV working group met in December 2015 to agree terms that included the development of a clear business and financial strategy for growth. Can you update us on that? In terms of the operation of the screen group, that has been taken forward, as I have just explained. Obviously, there is other interests at on-going issues from the TV working group. I think that we are operating particularly with Scottish Enterprise in terms of some of the areas there. Obviously, the TV is an awful happening in relation to whether it is charter, renewal from BBC, also STVs developments, and they have a regular and on-going dialogue, individually with the Government and Scottish Enterprise. Is there anything that you can say about what the strategy for growth is, how they are going to achieve growth? Again, that is for the group to come forward. Do you want to maybe comment on that? We could give the committee a read-out from the last TV working group, if that would be helpful. Not now, but in writing afterwards, I can get a read-out. The reason for asking is that I was having a look at the budget for public sector broadcasters in the UK. BBC has a TV budget of £2.4 billion, and ITV has a budget of £1.9 billion and channel £4.6 billion. Between the three of those £5 billion TV spend of which £2.6 billion is first-run, originated TV content. Do you think that we get a fair proportion of that £2.6 billion that is spent in the UK in original programmes? No, we don't. As part of the evidence to the Education and Culture Committee, Anne Bolton from BBC Managing Financial Director stated that, in terms of the BBC spend, it was only £35 million for original content that is commissioned. I said that in my opening remarks. It is important that we look at the support for screening in the wider context. I think that there is real opportunity to make sure that we get more production spend in Scotland. It is also done in a strategic way. It is part of my conversation last Monday with Tony Hall, the director general of the BBC in my discussions with him. As an organisation, I am not convinced that they use their whole spend in a strategic way to help the creative industries as much as they can. They do a lot. I am not underestimating the amount of activity and the impact that they have. In Scotland, that can certainly be done in a far more strategic sense. I have talked about the development funding that we have already, additional funding that Creative Scotland has got to spend. However, we need to look at how we can manage that more effectively for the sector. That is for the wider independent production sector. We have to make sure that BBC Studios does not crowd out unnecessarily opportunities in Scotland. We need to give that continuing and ongoing scrutiny as the white paper develops on that. However, in relation to STV and others in terms of production spend, the reason why we want to see more decentralisation of the pot of money that is available to spend on BBC, as you have gone through in your figures, is to make sure that that can be done in a strategic way. Again, I thank the committee for their help in setting out the arguments in relation to concern of lift and shift. If the accounting for investment by productions is after the event in a tick-bock exercise, it does not allow strategic decision making about what type of work can be done by whom to have a long-term sustainability. I am starting to make impact in making sure that public service broadcasting is seen, yes, for the audiences, absolutely number one, but also in the sustainability of what can be provided for the sector. We can get more value out of it and more production. Tony Hall has certainly grown from the BBC's point of view that there needs to be far more commissioning control in Scotland and decision making in Scotland. The shape of that we have yet to see and that is part of our on-going discussions. However, it has been helpful informed by the two committees of this Parliament, this committee and obviously the one that took some evidence sessions in relation to the charter renewal. That is quite a long answer, but I think that that is an important area. I have been a big critic of the BBC and I managed to obtain this week off-coms made outside London programmes title register 2014. It highlights that nearly 1300 programmes were made across the UK outside the M25 corridor. What concerned me was not necessarily the BBC, although I do have other concerns about that. It was obviously during the enquiries that we have done that Scotland has television production companies that have got a wealth of experience and we have obviously got a wealth of talent in Scotland, yet channel 4 only produced 27 programmes in Scotland, channel 5 produced 9, and ITV with a total television budget of £1.9 billion made no programmes in Scotland. How does the Government engage with and encourage commercial broadcasters to increase their spend in Scotland during the case of ITV and spend any money in Scotland? Obviously, they will make their decisions about where they spend their funding, but it is quite clear that they are missing out on either reflecting genres that are reflected in Scotland, but also talent and the opportunity to widen that. There is something about diversity in all of this. We do not have the same production or producers seeing the same stories. A widening and competing arena is really important that we have good quality but choice within that. The other issue is probably in the numbers. I do not have sight of the numbers that you have there. Some of the important aspects are the recurring drama. The recurring drama is the lifeblood for making sure that we can develop the industry. That is what we want to see more of in Scotland. Again, it is an indication from the BBC that they acknowledge that that needs to happen in regard to whatever happens with the wider commissioning decisions. The recurring drama is very important. You would then get recurring game shows etc, but that provides jobs undoubtedly. In some of those areas, so many of those are centralised in terms of the production's recurring drama or game shows or long-running series. That is where the numbers will come from in terms of programmes that are often done in a safe environment of who you know and what you know and experience. What we have to change in Scotland is the confidence from commissioners to be able to commission. Yes, we have tried and tested producers in Scotland, but we also have the new and versioning talent that we have. That is why relocating the commissioning for all of those would allow—and certainly from the BBC's point of view—to tap into that. In terms of working with the private sector, in terms of either ITV or Channel 4, the issues will again come around operating with Ofcom. They are already in terms of the recommendations of quotas or other areas. Now, as part of the process of looking at the sustainable creative industries in broadcasting, it is how we can work with Ofcom to make sure that it is meaningful and that it helps to grow the sector and does not centralise or take some monopoly by any means by having a decision-making all happening out of the M25 corridor, but to try and improve that. The Ofcom aspects of that are going to be very important as well. Some of it, we can leverage through the charter changes that are coming through, and some of it will need to be done by regulation, but that is the balance that we can—that is in terms of what leverage does Government have. Again, we do not have responsibility for broadcasting. In terms of our remit, we can try and influence it. We do not have legislative or other areas, but even not having that, we can see the activity that this Parliament and the Government have had in trying to improve the sector. Given the budgetary pressures that are around all broadcasters, we are currently looking at a situation in which 57 per cent of all TV jobs are in London and 50 per cent of BBC jobs are in London. We have a situation in which accommodation costs tend to be extremely higher in London than they are elsewhere in the UK. We also have London waiting in terms of salaries, etc. In London, so surely it would be cheaper for production companies to base themselves outside of London, predominantly, obviously, in Scotland. What are we doing when we have conversations with the production companies, broadcasters such as ITV and BBC, to show the competitive edge that is there when they are under those pressures? Obviously, there has been a lot of relocation out of the M25 corridor from the BBC themselves. Most of that is obviously located in Salford and their movements there as well. However, that has not resolved the problems that they have. That is the issue. They have made a major investment, but it is quite clear that it has not actually changed the culture of commissioning. The culture of commissioning is something that has to be changed in relation to what they do. That is why decentralisation, which the Parliament has agreed, decentralisation of decision making is really important. We think that decentralisation of budgets, because a lot of that falls where the money is. If the money has been used in Scotland, that will be an incentive for relocation as well. However, you are absolutely right in terms of cost provision. The opportunities for value for money in the screen sector more generally is that we can be a better offer than what is now looking like quite a crowded space down there as well. How proactive are Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland trolling for those businesses? How proactive are they? We went back to the Hines and Lyons and they would just snap something up. Are we going out and being proactive in trying to seek that business for our skilled workforce in Scotland? Clearly, yes. In the film sector, you say that on a regular basis. However, in terms of television, part of that comes down to who makes the decisions and where the budgets lie. Part of that can be an encouragement, but trolling for businesses is not quite the same. That does happen in film. The location is film-location extensive. I am sure that you have seen the publication from Visit Scotland about film locations and where they are, and the production is many, many up in Aberdeenshire north of Scotland. I visited the Guy Ritchie set for the one that is coming up. There is a lot of filming taking place in Scotland, so there is a lot of it. The screen commissioner is very active in that area. We do let get locations. It comes back to the point about having the film set. Television is more tricky because it comes down to the commissioning. Government agencies are working with commissioners. That is something that there is more activity on. For example, BBC and Creative Scotland are looking to develop a memorand of understanding of how they can work together better. That is an indication of doing that. Obviously, it is more challenging potentially with commercial operators. Can I turn to one of the subjects that we have not coloured yet and maybe speak up on something that the convener spoke about earlier? The video games industry and the animation industry are your bugs bunny. Basically, the situation is that I could not resist that one. The situation in the video games is multi-million, in fact, billions. Most children, most adults now purchasing and going into different shops and video games. In the report, we suggested here again that poor Creative Scotland is going to get pelters. The lead co-ordination of the industry, academia, public bodies, establish a national strategy, leading and working with the video games industry to identify skills, gaps, promote job opportunities for young people and commission research into digital media. I note that they had a meeting with Scottish Enterprise in order to develop a strategy so that none of the two are working against each other. What steps are you taking? That is a major industry and could be a major industry in Scotland. You have solved the TV industry, hopefully. What are you going to do for the video games industry? I have not solved the TV industry issue. We are working hard on it. In terms of the animation sector review, the work on that has provided you with updates on the different actions that you have asked for. I do not want to repeat what you have already received in an update. There has been an appointment of an organisation to look at the animation sector review that was asked for by the committee. The report is expected to be published in June. I hope that that is quite specific. It will inform CS's work with the sector and activities over the next 12 months. I say that advisedly, but that is the indication. In terms of animation funding, co-lic films have received funding. There has been support, particularly, that is welcomed by the sector in relation to international opportunities to showcase in terms of industry events internationally. There is a delegation of 15 animation professionals attending the expo in Burbank, for example. Individual animation production companies help to attend those markets. In terms of the tax credit advance facility, there is also financing in the area. Some of that is much about loan facility and oil and the wheels for funding, particularly for smaller companies. There are very successful large companies, but in terms of the industry in particular, a lot of it is about new entrants and how they can develop in their involvement. In terms of open funding that is available, animation sectors can also apply to that, but I am happy to provide whatever update we can in terms of the detail. I do not know what detail you are after, but that is some of the information that is provided to you. You believe that Creative Scotland is developing and is going to enhance the work that has been done. As you said, a lot of new people are coming on who are developing games. Some games do not work and other games wish suddenly that they are the most successful game out. What steps are we taking to improve and enhance Scotland's position in relation to video games? There are two things—an animation and an interrelation between the two, but there are two distinct sectors, although there is an interplay between them. The gaming sector is very strong in terms of not just Creative Scotland, but the Scottish Enterprise support for the gaming industry. That is hugely important. You are absolutely right in terms of Scotland's profile, its reach and its impact, but it is probably one of the most important areas of support in relation to skills and development and the pipeline of new people coming into the industry. We have a situation in which the desire for people to study subjects or get into the sector is a challenge. Therefore, a lot of the work that we are doing, whether it is on STEM or indeed Steam, is encouraging more women into the sector. It is encouraging more young people to see digital as the future in whatever shape or form it is. One of the areas that is really important and the attractiveness of getting young people into the sector is the idea of creative content. A lot of it will be about programmers and how you can programme games, but the incentive is to look at the wider sphere of it and the idea of working in a creative sector and creating content is particularly attractive. Some of our biggest challenges are about skills development and making sure that we have the numbers of people in the future. We are very attractive because of the skill base that we have, but that is not just the level of skills, but the volume of skills and what we need to do is to make sure that, in that area, that is not just our area but also in relation to Rosanna Cunningham's responsibilities and also Angela Constance's education and what we are doing to try and drive that. To me, that is probably one of the biggest challenges that we have for the digital sector. That was my next question. What is Creative Scotland doing to work with universities like Abertape and other places in order to develop computer game skills within universities? A whole variety of different agencies are involved in that area. I mean certainly, as Minister for the Responsibilities, I have been a keen driver of the sector promoting it in China on different occasions and what they are doing in Abertape, particularly in some of their international reach and attracting students from elsewhere, becoming a real international hub. I am seeing the dare-to-be digital showcase grow from a very small event to something that is very, very large. Again, Scottish Government has provided funding for that and I deliberately did it because I wanted to raise the profile and attractiveness and support and international recognition and to get teams from Finland, which is another place that we are looking about competitors in terms of activity in digital gaming. Experts are elsewhere, so they want to come and live and work here. We want the brightest and the best to come and stay here. Again, coming back to the interplay with different portfolios, post-study work visa is a challenge in this area if we want to keep some of the brightest and the best, particularly in the digital gaming industry. That is why we are taking forward some of the issues around that with the UK Government because that can make a big difference keeping the brightest and the best. You may as well come and study, but if you have to leave, we are not going to get the benefits from you. Lastly, what would you like to bring in Scottish Enterprise? What are they doing in order to encourage job fairs, conferences, in order to pull together computer firms together? Do you want to answer that? I consider the short answer, but, for example, through the work of Talent Scotland, which is an arm of our international work, we are reaching out particularly to a number of the countries in Europe, where there is a considerable amount of talent for the digital creative industry sectors and trying to promote the opportunities that exist here in Scotland for people to come and live and work here. We are doing a great deal with the community of ambitious growth companies to bring them together around international opportunities. Increasing numbers of companies are going to events such as a game developer conference, so 33 going this month to a game developer conference in San Francisco. Around those kind of events, there is a great deal of work that is done to bring together companies in industry and encourage them to share best practice and to have exchanges around how best to attract and retain talent. We are doing a lot with Skills Development Scotland, which is leading on the development of the skills investment plans, both from the ICT and digital perspective, but also from the creative industries perspective, to ensure that industry is heavily engaged, particularly when ambitious faster growth companies are engaged in supporting the development and implementation of the skills investment plans. That has led to things such as Dare to be Digital, which is a very strong big campaign that is trying to increase understanding and increase attractiveness to young people and to influencers, parents and others, to pursue opportunities more broadly in the digital aspect of the creative industries. First of all, I agree strongly with the points that you made about the post study work visa, and I hope that there will be continued support across all political parties for pressure for movement from the UK Government on that. I was a wee bit unclear about your response to the questions about the committee's specific recommendations in the games sector. Albeit, our hearts might sink if we are talking about getting another national strategy and how long that can take, but is it your intention to instruct Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise to develop a national strategy for the games sector, and is that happening? Remember that part of the evidence to your committee was that there was concerns by the sector itself. If we have a strategy, we could end up, such as the fast evolution, particularly in this sector, that your strategy ends up being behind where the industry is. Part of what the provision is is to have a regular six-monthly survey of the games sector with Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Games Network, which, obviously, you took evidence from the Scottish Games Network. It was perhaps then that said, be careful about just tying yourself to some kind of strategy that would necessarily be overtaken by the rapid movement in the industry. The first survey was opened on 22 January, and it closes on 8 February. There have been about 200 responses to that, so that means that, in terms of what the sector needs and what its interests are, it means that it can be a rapid response to those needs in an almost like a time-in-motion area, so that allows them to keep in touch exactly with what industry needs to respond to it, and that is going to be on a six-monthly basis. Your answer is, no, that it is not the intention to produce a single document, but to have that rolling on-going process every six months. Obviously, in the future, there may be work around a strategy. Again, the Scottish Creative Industry's strategy itself will clearly cover the digital sector in terms of its interests, but, again, responding to the interests of the industry themselves is the idea that, when they spoke to me and I think they gave this evidence to the committee, they were not desperate that they would have a kind of document that you could then share, they would actually more and want to have rapid response and action to changing needs, because this industry moves very quickly, the individuals move very quickly, and that is what we have responded to. One of the things that came through very strongly was the lack of clear objective information about the size and scope and the scale of the game sector, not only some anger from the industry about very low estimates in the past, but disagreement among industry bodies about what the overall economic size of the sector is. It relates also to the comments from Dennis Roberts earlier about the co-operation between the Scottish and UK Governments, because the figures from the two Governments for those things tend to differ, with one estimate might take into account only people working in those specific companies, other estimates might take into account people doing those kind of jobs in other companies that do not show up as game sector or creative industries. Are we any closer to getting a clear consistent methodology, not just between the two Governments, but with industry, about how we figure out the size and scale of the industry in order to support it better? Yes, on a number of levels, and I think that you are right in terms of the different measurement issues and categories that there are between the different jurisdictions. One of the things that I initiated at the British Irish Council, we have a new workstream, Creative Industries Workstream, which was a request of the British Irish Council when we met in the Channel Islands a few months back, was to agree as part of our support for the industry across not just, obviously, UK and Scotland, but useful comparisons with Ireland and Wales and Northern Ireland was to look at some common methodology in terms of what the creative industry is, not just digital and gaming, but elsewhere. Clearly, that is your pin point and areas where there is a particular difference. Sometimes IT jobs have been categorised in what would be digital and what we are looking at is the creative element. I think that it is the creative aspects that we want to make sure that we have a handle on and support and develop. That is one initiative that I think will be very helpful. We do not want to create an industry around statistics, but I think that it will be helpful in ensuring support. It can also help to drive what public support and indeed other support is there for the sector, although, in particular, Scottish Enterprise will be working with a number of companies in terms of their criteria about who they work with. The challenges will be small startups and how do you help to support those in particular who might not necessarily have the volume of turnaround that would necessarily interest Scottish Enterprise's largest group? The last thing that I was going to say is that it is even more than just thinking about small startups. More so than film and television, the games industry does not have a clear border between companies that exist and work that is happening that could lead to stronger results in the future. It may well be that some of the most exciting people are not working in a company, but working for fun. That may lead to a company being established in the future, but the support for the sector needs to think not just about companies that already have a business plan and a formal existence, but about how we create spaces in which that creative activity can happen accessible by anyone. Some of the witnesses in the inquiry talked about whether there was the potential for creating some hub or creative space that people can access regardless of whether they are already thinking about that in economic terms or whether they are simply creating for the hell of it. Is there anything in the current discussions that looks at the porousness of the approach between established companies and others? You absolutely pinpoint the challenges of supporting the creative industries because it is not just pre-packaged companies' PLCs. Most artists and musicians are self-employed. A lot of the support that they need in their operations is on a networked basis, networking on different projects as the lifeblood of what they do. It is not even self-employed—it may not be employed—or it may be employed doing something boring in a supermarket. Therefore, how you calibrate and support that very porous sector that you described in terms of people moving in and out is a challenge. You have seen the wasp studios in terms of hub spaces for artists. Similar operations that we know are happening in this city in terms of gaming are very successful. Build it and they will come. If you have a look at a number, I was at the biscuit factory in looking at a real hub for creative industries. Some of it will be artists and some of it will be in gaming in different areas. It is not always about putting all the gamers together, but that interplay and networking is really important. If you are looking at either animation or digital, every company that you can think of will now be producing creative content of some description for websites, Facebook and you name it. Therefore, the jobs opportunities are huge. However, how the industry works and people coming into this is not in the traditional sense of what you would have as business support. That comes down to how you make sure that for creative industries you have the level of support and how you operate that. The point about co-operative management structure, whether it is business development or personnel or other things that are helpful in terms of being on a co-operative basis, going back to what we are working with on the film aspect, one of the requests from the independent producers of Scotland was to have some kind of similar kind of idea concept of a co-operative hub that could help with, because business can come in and out at different times. Therefore, the backroom aspects of what you can support to help develop with its advisement and personnel issues, as in when you need it. That idea of a co-operative model is something that is requested from the area. It already happens to a great extent a lot of artists, worst studios and other areas. The opportunities for doing it in digital and gaming is very strong, but I would be very careful about the idea of trying to segment going back to that point about encouraging young people. It is like that. Also in the STEM subjects that are put in STEM, in the A, the arts into it, because that is the creativity of the content that is added value and makes the difference. I am keen on that agenda. The provision of public support will follow what the industry needs, and doing the survey—I said that I had 200 responses from the one that is just there—will help to shape what that offer is. That is helpful. I assume that you would be able to commit to ensuring that our successor committee gets a six-monthly write-up of that forum process that is going on. Obviously, it is up to the committee to decide what its legacy is. I did say to the convener in terms of when you first wanted to look at creative industries, I was really keen that you did, because there is so much attention on other sectors, and raising the profile of creative industries has been very important. Despite our frustrations and our challenges in that, because of what Patrick Harvie has just said, the particular nature is not as easy as perhaps other sectors provide the business support because it is a different area. All I mean is that there will be a report on a six-monthly basis from the Scottish Government as a result of those projects. I cannot take to the committee what it would want, but I would strongly encourage it to continue with the successor committee to continue its interest in creative industries. From the Scottish Government's point of view, I would be more than happy to be able to share updated information, because it will move on a regular basis. I am trying to recall, but in terms of support for Creative Scotland and Scottish Enterprise for that sector, the gaming sector primarily, was there not some discussion about creating a portal either on Scottish Enterprise or Creative Scotland website? People had access to information that, if they wanted to go down a particular route, they needed support, for instance, to become maybe self-employed or just accountancy or whatever, but the information would be there. Does that exist? There is certainly work that has been taken forward by ourselves as a Scabie to Care of Scotland in relation to the screen setters in particular, which is going to result in a portal being created on Care of Scotland's website. I think that it was one of the things that they asked for. We are somehow looking at how we best present and signpost companies across the care of energy sector and the gaming sector to ensure that they can very quickly find the information on all the support that is available. Providing more update, I was given an indication from the clerk that you want to focus primarily on film and the BBC area, not on digital, but I am happy to provide more information to you. Okay, I think that concludes our session. Cabinet Secretary, I thank you and your officials for your attendance this morning and for answering our questions. There were two or three issues where I think you said you would come back to us in writing, so you can follow that up in the next couple of weeks, that would be very helpful. Just before we move into private sessions, this might be our last meeting on the record. Can I just take this opportunity on behalf of the committee to say enormous thank you to our clerks for all their assistance over the past years, diligently helping the committee with all our work and all the administration in shooting everything runs smoothly. So thank you for that. Can I thank the official reporters for their diligence and assistance? Can I thank SPICE in its various guises and their officials for coming along and assisting us? On a personal level, can I just say thank you to all my fellow committee members for their diligence, hard work and co-operation and general consensual operation over the past number of years? For those of you who are standing for re-election, can I wish you success? At this point, we will suspend and go into private session.


Hi, my name is Tracy Togohame Spinoza and this is a welcome to our course on synchronous online learning tools. In this course, we're going to be looking at the definitions, sort of distinguishing synchronous and asynchronous learning. We'll put this all into the context of the greater teaching and learning decision-making process. How do we choose which learning tools are best at what moments? In our classroom dynamics, we'll balance this out with these advantages and disadvantages of using different types of tools and spend time trying to put this into context of how to choose the right types of tools. We'll look at some recommendations that come from some reliable sources and then offer you a framework on how to choose different types of tools, activities, methodologies, depending on your learning objectives. Looking forward to seeing you. Take care.


Hi everyone, Joe for Jasper's Case Breaks.com. We did it, we knocked out the last filler break in near record time. Thanks everybody for making this happen. We're gonna do the break first. Big thanks everybody here. Big help from Carl, everybody else chipping in. I appreciate that great teamwork here. And thanks to the teams for existing. That's a different dice roll, right? Oh, that's from 14 minute mark. Let's roll it right now. If you're watching live, there you go, 36 minute mark right there. Two and a two, four times for names and teams. One, two, three. This is just for the pack anyway. Different dice roll for the giveaway part. For the hard way for the teams, one, two, three, and four. All right, there's the first half of the list right here. There's the second half of the list over here. As you know, no trade windows, it's just keep flying here. Hit you with the print and rip. There's the pack right there. This will be in the next video, separate video. Of your buys, it looked a little different, but it's not just the disco pattern in the background. Danielson Lament for the Padre 73 out of 85. We'll go to Carl and the Fryers. And that's that. Let's go back here. Let's gather everybody's names. Oh yeah, Carl putting in work and everybody else too. Some good teamwork here. One out of six, seven times. Top 10 after seven. Thank you everybody and good luck. One, two, three, four, five, six, and a one, seventh and final time. Now from 11 on down, sad times. But thanks everybody for giving this a shot. Let's see how many Carl gets here. One, two, three. Danny's in. Michael's in. Danny's again. Four, five, six, and seven. I think Carl gets seven of the 10 spots. But Danny with two spots. And Michael, you snuck in there as well. So congrats to all of you. Thanks everybody for watching and for giving this a shot. I will see you in the next video for that flawless break. Jaspy'scasebreaks.com. Bye-bye.