The next item on our agenda is the debate on the report by the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee, ‘The Big Picture: The Committee’s Initial Views on Broadcasting in Wales’, and I call on Bethan Jenkins, the Chair, to move the motion.

Motion NDM6329 Bethan Jenkins

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Notes the report of the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee, ‘The Big Picture—The Committee’s Initial views on Broadcasting in Wales’, which was laid in the Table Office on 1 February 2017.

2. Agrees that S4C, having accepted the committee’s recommendation to this effect, should lay before the Assembly annual reports and audited statements of accounts.

Motion moved.

Thank you, Llywydd. I am very pleased to open this debate on the initial report of the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee on broadcasting in Wales, ‘The Big Picture’. Thank you to the clerks and the Assembly Members of all parties for their hard work on the committee.

Despite the Assembly’s current lack of formal powers in this area, I believe there is now a consensus that the BBC and other media organisations operating in Wales need to be publicly accountable to the National Assembly for their responsibilities and commitments to Wales. Broadcasters wield enormous cultural and political influence in Wales, and the widely acknowledged absence of a strong, home-grown commercial and print media makes public scrutiny of their role even more important. While we expect and welcome broadcasters and the media to hold us to account as politicians, the Assembly also has a clear and legitimate interest in holding public service broadcasters themselves to account. Public service broadcasters have a clear cultural obligation to portray Wales and Welsh society in a way that holds up a mirror to this country and shows citizens here, in the rest of the UK, and across the world, who we are as a nation. I hope that the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee will provide the necessary focus for holding our public service broadcasters to account.

Nid yw’r adroddiad sydd ger ein bron heddiw yn ganlyniad ymchwiliad gan bwyllgor penodol. Yn lle hynny, ar ôl cymryd tystiolaeth gan nifer o ffigyrau a sefydliadau allweddol ym maes darlledu, yng Nghymru a thu hwnt, mae’n crynhoi ein safbwyntiau cychwynnol ar rai o’r materion allweddol. Dyma yw ein cyfraniad cyntaf i’r hyn y gobeithiaf y bydd yn ddadl barhaus ynglŷn ag a yw Cymru’n cael y cyfryngau y mae’n eu haeddu. Mae’n darparu sylfaen ar gyfer gwaith â mwy o ffocws rydym eisoes wedi’i ddechrau ac y bwriadwn ei wneud drwy gydol y Cynulliad hwn. Er enghraifft, rydym wedi cynnal ymchwiliad ar ddyfodol S4C—rydym yn cynnal ymchwiliad, dylwn ddweud—ac rydym yn gobeithio cyhoeddi ein casgliadau cyn toriad yr haf er mwyn dylanwadu ar ganlyniad adolygiad yr adran dros ddiwylliant, y cyfryngau a chwaraeon y gobeithiwn ei fod ar fin digwydd o gyllid a chylch gwaith S4C yn y dyfodol.

Rydym yn pryderu ynglŷn â dirywiad parhaus cyfryngau lleol a newyddiaduraeth leol yng Nghymru, ac rydym hefyd wedi dechrau ymchwiliad yn y maes hwn, ac rwy’n gobeithio y bydd yn argymell atebion go iawn a pharhaol.

Mae angen mwy o ystyriaeth i rôl radio yng Nghymru. Ychydig iawn o gynnwys Cymreig penodol neu newyddion Cymreig y mae rhai o’r gorsafoedd radio cyhoeddus a masnachol mwyaf poblogaidd sy’n gweithredu yng Nghymru yn eu darparu. Mae hwn yn faes arall lle rydym yn bwriadu gwneud gwaith mwy manwl.

Lord Tony Hall, the director general of the BBC, will be giving evidence to the committee once again on 28 June. In evidence to the committee in March this year, Lord Hall reiterated a commitment to additional funding for English-language broadcasting in Wales. As to how much that extra funding should be, we recommended, like a previous Assembly committee, the Institute of Welsh Affairs and the Welsh Government itself, that an additional £30 million should be provided annually. Extra funding at this level would have potentially allowed for a doubling of output and for BBC Wales to produce quality programmes that have a better chance of earning a place on the BBC’s network.

Ers i ni gyflwyno adroddiad, mae’r Arglwydd Hall wedi ymateb gydag £8.5 miliwn ychwanegol ar gyfer darlledu Saesneg yng Nghymru. Er bod unrhyw gynnydd i’w groesawu wrth gwrs, yn bersonol rwy’n siomedig ei fod gryn dipyn yn llai na’r £30 miliwn y mae’r pwyllgor wedi galw amdano. Rwyf hefyd yn siomedig fod y cyllid ychwanegol ar gyfer Cymru gryn dipyn yn llai na’r £40 miliwn ychwanegol y mae BBC Scotland yn mynd i’w gael, gan gynnwys cyllid ar gyfer sianel deledu ychwanegol wedi’i neilltuo ar gyfer yr Alban, yn enwedig gan fod Ofcom wedi dweud wrthym—wrth ein pwyllgor—fod yr Alban wedi’i gormynegeio mewn perthynas ag ariannu ar gyfer y rhwydwaith. Mae’r angen am sianel bwrpasol ar gyfer Cymru yn fater ar gyfer trafodaeth, ac nid ydym wedi ei chael eto, ond mae’r gwahaniaeth yn y swm o gyllid ychwanegol yn arwyddocaol ac yn galw am eglurhad pellach. Rwy’n sicr y bydd y pwyllgor yn sicrhau bod yr Arglwydd Hall yn rhoi’r esboniadau hynny ymhen pythefnos.

It is fair to note that Wales has secured more than its population share of spending by the BBC. In large part, this reflects the considerable success of the Roath Lock complex and the programmes made there. However, much of this spending does little to reflect a distinctly Welsh identity and viewpoint. We also have concerns about the future of Roath Lock once guaranteed commissions from the BBC come to an end. There are also concerns that have just been raised with regard to the fact that ‘The Wales Report’ is coming to an end, and that we need to recommission that political programme. We need more political programmes, not just a dilution of the ones that we already have.

On radio, the news output of popular BBC radio stations like Radio 2 and Radio 1 does little to promote the very distinctive news agenda in Wales—and we saw that during the general election, too—and can often reinforce or create more confusion about the responsibility for political decisions across the nations of the UK. So, we have recommended a Wales news opt-out for Radio 2 and Radio 1. And this, we understand, will be considered as part of the BBC’s news review and I look forward to the outcome of that.

O ran cefnogaeth y BBC i newyddiaduraeth leol, rydym yn falch fod y BBC yn edrych o ddifrif ar ffyrdd o helpu i wella craffu ar ddemocratiaeth leol yn y DU. Fodd bynnag, mae gennym amheuon ynglŷn â sut y maent yn ymdrin â hyn. Mae hwn yn faes y bwriadwn graffu ymhellach arno fel rhan o’n hymchwiliad i newyddiaduraeth leol yng Nghymru. Rwy’n meddwl—o’m rhan i beth bynnag—fod gennyf amheuon yma ynglŷn ag os yw newyddiadurwyr yn cael eu lleoli mewn llefydd fel Media Wales, a fyddent yn gweld y byddai arian y BBC yn darparu ar eu cyfer o bosibl, drwy allu cymryd rhai o’r swyddi sydd ganddynt ar hyn o bryd yn y sefydliadau hynny yn ôl. Ni fyddem am weld hynny’n digwydd ar unrhyw lefel, a byddwn yn gobeithio y byddai’r Gweinidog yn cytuno ynglŷn â hynny.

In terms of the governance of the BBC, the committee had a number of concerns about the new governance arrangements for the BBC. For instance, that the director of BBC Cymru Wales will no longer be a member of the BBC’s main board; that insufficient weight has been given to the audience’s view in the new BBC governance structures; and whether the resurrected post of BBC director of the nations and regions is the best way forward, as we are not convinced that one individual can carry out this role effectively. Perhaps Lord Hall will have some information that can ease our minds in that regard, but at present, we don’t think that that’s been strongly said.

Gwrandawiadau cyn penodi: gwn fod Lee Waters wedi bod ar flaen y gad ar hyn. Fodd bynnag, rydym yn falch o nodi bod angen caniatâd Llywodraeth Cymru yn awr cyn y gellir penodi aelod bwrdd newydd y BBC ar gyfer Cymru. Ond argymhellodd ein hadroddiad y dylid cael gwrandawiad cyn penodi ar gyfer y swydd hon, ac y dylai’r enwebai ateb cwestiynau gan y pwyllgor cyn i Weinidogion Cymru benderfynu a ydynt am roi eu cydsyniad i benodi’r sawl a enwebwyd ai peidio. Ers cyhoeddi ein hadroddiad, mae Llywodraeth Cymru, wrth gwrs, wedi ymatal rhag rhoi ei chydsyniad i benodi’r ymgeisydd a enwebwyd ar gyfer y rôl hon. Deallaf fod y broses benodi yn cael ei hailgynnal felly. Mae ymateb Llywodraeth Cymru i’n hadroddiad wedi derbyn yr egwyddor o wrandawiad cyn penodi. Felly, nid yw’n ymddangos i mi fod unrhyw reswm ymarferol pam na all y Gweinidog roi ymrwymiad syml yma heddiw na fydd yn rhoi ei gydsyniad i benodiad hyd nes y ceir cyfle i gynnal gwrandawiad pwyllgor gyda’r ymgeisydd a enwebwyd. Ni fyddai hyn yn cael gwared ar hawl Gweinidogion i gadarnhau’r penodiad, ond byddai’n caniatáu iddynt ystyried barn y pwyllgor cyn gwneud y penderfyniad hwnnw.

As I mentioned earlier, the committee is currently undertaking an inquiry into the DCMS review of the remit, funding and accountability of S4C, so I don’t intend to cover this aspect of our report in detail today. But we have said that the real-terms cuts to S4C’s budgets since 2010 are severe and disproportionate. These cuts have led to a situation where 57 per cent of S4C’s programmes are now repeats. This is far too high and is a matter of considerable concern to the committee.

S4C has willingly appeared before Assembly committees. While this is welcome, it is no less than we would expect. However, we are pleased that S4C has recognised its accountability to the National Assembly and has agreed to formalise the relationship by laying its annual reports and audited accounts before the Assembly. The motion that we are debating today will enable those documents to be laid before the Assembly in future, and will provide a regular focus for scrutiny of S4C by the committee and the Assembly.

Yn yr amser sydd gennyf yn weddill, fe soniaf yn fyr am ITV Cymru. Mae’n bosibl eu bod yn rhan o gwmni preifat, ond mae’n dal i fod i raddau helaeth yn ddarlledwr gwasanaeth cyhoeddus gyda rhwymedigaethau i’r cyhoedd y mae’n eu gwasanaethu. Mae ITV wedi nodi ei fod yn rhagori ar ofynion ei drwydded ar gyfer cynulleidfaoedd yng Nghymru. Er y gallai hynny fod yn wir, mae’r gwasanaeth trydedd sianel yn yr Alban sydd mewn dwylo annibynnol unwaith eto wedi cynyddu ei ddarpariaeth nad yw’n newyddion yn y blynyddoedd diwethaf, ond mae darpariaeth ITV Cymru wedi dirywio. Byddwn yn annog ITV i feddwl am arddel safbwynt mwy rhagweithiol o ran darparu cynnyrch sy’n fwy penodol Gymreig. Er y gallwn eu canmol am raglenni fel ‘Aberfan’ ar y rhwydwaith, rwy’n credu bod llawer mwy i’w wneud.

Wel, roeddwn yn mynd i ddatgan buddiant gan fod fy mrawd yn newyddiadurwr ar ‘Channel 4 News’, ond efallai y bydd yn ddiolchgar i wybod nad wyf yn mynd i siarad rhagor, er mwyn gadael i’r Aelodau eraill gyfrannu. Rwy’n sicr y gall Aelodau eraill hefyd sôn am Ofcom a’u rolau newydd mewn perthynas â’r BBC a’u rôl yma yng Nghymru yn y dyfodol.

Thank you very much to the Members who have been part of this debate. I hope that we can have more debate in future.

I’m going to disappoint you there, Bethan—I’m not going to start off talking about Ofcom. I won’t have time in my short submission, I’m afraid. I did want to stress, actually, to start with—while thanking the committee and the staff for their work on this—that it is a very innovative committee, the one that we are sitting on now. I just wanted to, as I said, talk about that for a moment. This report, as you heard, is a report of initial views. It’s the beginning of a series in which we’ll interrogate the story of broadcast media in a way that we can actually measure our influence on the progress of that story over the next—well, it will be four years now, but five in total. Because it is easy for us, as Members, to fall into a pattern of short-term scrutiny because we are so small in number. There will always be new and compelling work to be done, and assessing our legacy as a committee—any committee, really—as parliamentarians isn’t something to which we can devote as much time as we might need to. It limits our ability to prove to the people of Wales that we, the Assembly, have the ability to make representation an active tool. Representing constituents isn’t just about name checks here in the Chamber or using some particular issue as a political baseball. Yet, in the small media country it is difficult to try and build up any kind of momentum of understanding of what this Assembly can achieve on our constituents’ behalf—whether that is improving Government policy and legislation, yes, but by actually getting our public, private and third sectors, as well as everybody in Wales as individuals, to consider our behaviour, our rights, our responsibilities—indeed, their power, if you like. So, I genuinely commend this committee. I know I am a part of it, but I think that this is such a good lead for taking the long view and starting a much longer piece of work in this case on the—[Interruption.] Well, only the best are on this committee.

Now, when this report—this initial report, remember—was published, it did ruffle a few feathers, and I think that's a good thing. None of us wishes to be adversarial in committee; we value the evidence that witnesses give us. But our public service media in Wales has so few players in it that the expectations of each of them will be that much higher. We acknowledge completely that the funding cuts have consequences, and this report doesn't just shy away from the role of a UK Government in that, but we also recognise that the BBC has direct responsibility for the decisions that affect both BBC Cymru Wales and S4C, and a number of our recommendations, as you will see, are directly for the BBC’s attention nationally. And I think it will be interesting to see how this Assembly can influence a body that is not actually accountable to us or Welsh Government.

Now, this report gives early pointers towards certain expectations of the BBC in terms of Wales's portrayal and, more importantly, the reach of that portrayal into network. It also points to the BBC's spend in Wales, both on, primarily, but not exclusively, the likes of Roath Lock—you know, the national drama production base—and the news there, of course, is undeniably quite good. I mean, the money that’s spent there is higher than some notional Barnett formula equivalent, if you like. But the spend at the time on English language drama that was in some overt way about Wales was not so good. That was certainly a worry, and the charter review was of course imminent at that point, and good news was promised. Now, we know the outcome of the charter review, and Bethan has mentioned it. Our wider response to that will be one of the next chapters in this ongoing series, and, as we heard, we're taking evidence from Tony Hall in about a fortnight, I think.

Now, Bethan, you've done the main spoilers, but I just wanted to mention that that extra £8.5 million for English language drama came with an aim that half of any new programmes grown from this would be broadcast across the UK, i.e. network, not just here in Wales. And when you bear in mind that the sum is the same as, or actually even slightly less than, BBC Cymru Wales is likely to be asked to save in view of the BBC's cash-flat settlement from the UK Government, it really doesn't look like extra money, does it? It looks like recycled money, but with some instructions on how to spend it attached. We've heard that the investment in Scotland is about four times higher, and I think it will be interesting to see how the BBC itself can be sure that its charter commitment to better balance representation, including portrayal of the nations and regions, and what that actually ends up looking like when some nations, shall I say, and regions do considerably better financially than others, notwithstanding a funding floor built into the charter.

Just to finish, I think we ought to say as well that we did not shy away from trying to find out whether those broadcasters in Wales were basically just going to cry about dealing with the terrible lot that they had, or whether, indeed, despite the severe cuts, they were up for the challenge of meeting those cuts. And I think it was fair to say that, yes, they have. And I think it might also be fair to say that there are still some reassurances that we are looking for. As we sought better network coverage of BBC Wales productions on the BBC network, we also sought it of ITV Wales on the ITV network, and we know that, in both cases, the pitch and quality of programmes is critical. I think it's fair to say—sorry, I know I'm running out of time—ITV did step up to the plate; their ‘The Aberfan Young Wives’ Club’ won an award on national network TV, so I don't want to hear any backsliding from ITV Wales on this. And I think I will leave it there. I have got similar things to say, but I appreciate that I'm running a risk with you. [Laughter.]Thank you.

Wise indeed. Dai Lloyd.

Thank you very much, Llywydd, and I’m pleased to contribute to this important debate on this wonderful document, ‘The Big Picture: the Committee’s Initial Views on Broadcasting in Wales’. As our wise, firm, and mature Chair, Bethan, has already mentioned, we are starting the journey here, because—. The background to this, naturally, is the portrayal of Wales on our networks, such as the BBC and ITV and so forth. And of course, the background is that we don’t believe that there is much portrayal of Wales at all—there is room for considerable improvement. People always tell you on the doorstep, given that we have been on a few doorsteps recently—they complain about the lack of coverage for Wales generally. Wales is always ignored. I heard that just last week. Of course, part of that is related to the lack of coverage specific to Wales on the BBC and so on, but also the fact that our print media and newspapers are so appallingly weak here in Wales, too. There’s virtually nobody left still reading the ‘Western Mail’ and so on.

Now, in terms of—. As we are noting this report in the motion this afternoon, I will adhere to it and focus on recommendations 1, 2 and 3. Bethan has already referred to the need to spend more money here in terms of the BBC. We all visited the BBC studios just over the road here, and it was wonderful to see all the money spent on ‘Casualty’ and ‘Doctor Who’, but it’s not always clear from those programmes that they reflect Welsh life in any way whatsoever. I’ve made this point before: I’m not asking for bilingual daleks, but perhaps, from time to time, those programmes should actually reveal the fact that they’re made here in Wales. Every hospital in Wales has bilingual signs, for example; the hospital in ‘Casualty’ should perhaps reflect the nation where it’s produced. That’s an important point because we are losing money, as Suzy has just said, in terms of the portrayal of Wales through the medium of English, perhaps because it is spent here. We need more emphasis on portraying Wales in English-medium productions, and I will return to that point if time permits.

Essentially, we need more emphasis on the portrayal of Wales or there will be outcomes to that. We have seen the result of that in the Brexit referendum last year, in that virtually none of our people realised that Wales benefited from its membership of the European Union. A smarter, truer portrayal of what happens here in Wales would have made it clear that the best idea would be to vote to remain in Europe. Most of our people were following the print media and mass media emerging from London. And of course, as the Chair’s already said, more people listen to Radio 1 and Radio 2 in Wales then unfortunately listen to Radio Cymru and Radio Wales. It would be an idea if Radio 1 and Radio 2, in their news slots, mentioned Wales from time to time. A slot would be nice, rather than ignoring us outright. That is a challenge for the BBC there. The last time the junior doctors were on strike—and they were on strike a few times last year—people who don’t habitually listen to our media here in Wales, such as some of our junior doctors in Morriston Hospital, thought that they were on strike too. But, of course, we are in a different country here, and our junior doctors weren’t on strike. That is why we need to provide accurate information or people will misunderstand the situation.

We celebrate the existence of S4C, naturally. We support their intention to develop into a multiplatform broadcaster. It does reflect Wales through the medium of Welsh. That’s why it’s important that we have some sort of platform that reflects Wales through the medium of English too. That is still deficient.

In terms of time, I will conclude with the intentions of the BBC in scrapping ‘The Wales Report’. How is that going to improve the portrayal of Wales, what happens in this place, our politics and the issues that we discuss, and when people say, ‘Well, we don’t know who’s in the Senedd. Are you a Member of the Assembly? We simply don’t know’? What’s the reaction? Scrapping ‘The Wales Report’. That is disgraceful. They need to revisit that decision. People out there are complaining that they don’t know what we do. And what happens? We’re scrapping the one programme that actually tells people what we do here.

So, support the motion. Thank you.

Well, Llywydd, I was intending to begin my remarks by saying that I agree with everything that’s been said hitherto, but I’m afraid that Dai Lloyd’s lapse into European controversy just a couple of minutes ago precludes me from doing that, sadly. It’s one of the very few disagreements that we have on the committee. Bethan Jenkins began her speech earlier on, on autism, by making an encomium to Mark Isherwood for his role in running the cross-party group, and I would like to begin my speech by issuing an encomium to her for the exemplary way in which she has chaired the committee. We are indeed, as Suzy said, a happy and naturally consensual band, at least in the narrow confines of the subjects that we have discussed. There is broad agreement in the committee on the approach that we take to the issues that we discussed.

This report is very largely about public service broadcasting, and this is an important element in the debate about the educative role of both the broadcasting institutions and, indeed, the print media and their online versions. Dai referred a moment ago to the fact that very little of what we do in this place is reported, and there is very little real debate about serious issues. I don’t actually agree with what he said also about people following what’s said in the newspapers to make decisions on, for example, whether they’re pro or anti-Brexit. People generally tend to buy newspapers, I think, to reinforce their prejudices rather than to have them confronted. So, I don’t think there’s much scope for newspapers to change people’s opinions. But I do feel—and this is not a criticism that I level at Wales as opposed to any other part of the United Kingdom—that we’re really failed by our media institutions, which don’t actually have much serious political reporting at all. Unless I’m called to order by the Llywydd in this place, it’s very difficult to get reported at all, and certainly not for anything sensible that I might say. [Laughter.] Not that I’m inviting the Llywydd to do so yet again, but that seems to be the fact of the matter, that the media tend to concentrate on the trivialities rather than the important issues, so there’s no depth to reporting at all, which is a great shame.

I think, for our public service broadcasters, there is a positive duty upon them to raise the level of debate and to perform that educative function. As regards the role of the BBC, I’d just like to make what I think is a simple point, that we’re classed as part of the nations and regions of the UK, but I do think that nations ought to be treated as more important than regions, and the cultural dimension of a nation is much more important. I know that Yorkshiremen would probably disagree with this and they regard themselves as God’s own country, but, nevertheless, we have the four nations and they ought, I think, to have a disproportionate share of the resources. It shouldn’t just be based on population or anything of that kind.

Suzy referred in her speech, as indeed did Bethan, to the disparity of funding between Wales and Scotland. I don’t particularly want to deprive Scotland of anything that it has at the moment, but I do think that, as with the Barnett formula in general, Wales does have the thin end of the wedge and that does need to be addressed. I know this is happening to an extent with the latest funding decisions of the BBC, but there does still remain—and the figures have already been stated in this debate—a significant difference between what’s available to Wales and what’s available to Scotland. I also want to say, in the context of that remark, that S4C is a vital part of the strategy of increasing the number of Welsh speakers in Wales. It has an indispensable role to play and, therefore, should get the funding commensurate with the importance of that. It has suffered in recent years from staggering cuts, which amount to about 36 per cent in real terms, and I do believe that we ought to give greater priority to the needs of S4C. They’ve achieved, actually, a minor miracle on a much smaller budget in maintaining the standards of programmes and the breadth of them. There’s been a very substantial reduction in staff, from 220 to 130. Their overheads are a very lean 4 per cent of the total and I think, all told, it’s a very considerable success story and Huw and Ian Jones, in particular, have made an enormous contribution to the future of Welsh language broadcasting, not just in Wales, because they see their role as being broadcasters to Welsh speakers wherever they are in the world. And that’s a very important part of S4C, which I think ought to be underlined.

I see that the red light has come on and I haven’t got time to say the many other things that I did intend to say, but I do believe that this is, for an initial report, a very good piece of work and it’s a good foundation upon which we can build a much bigger picture in due course.

Diolch, Llywydd, and I shan’t follow the example of my colleagues in heaping praise upon the work of our own committee—that’s for others to form an opinion. It’s worth reminding ourselves why we set about this piece of work and the rather dismal backdrop when we began our work. There’s been, over the last 10 years, a 22 per cent cut in the number of hours of English language programming broadcast by BBC Wales, a 24 per cent cut in the funding of S4C and a 40 per cent cut in ITV Wales output in 2009. Throw in the turmoil and the changing landscape in the print and online media and, as many others have commented, Wales is not well served. Even though broadcasting is not a devolved subject, it profoundly impacts, not only in allowing people to make informed decisions about how our nation is run, but also telling stories to ourselves about our own communities and to the wider world, which is essential, I think, for any country’s cultural fabric.

My colleagues have commented deftly on the main thrust of the report, so I shan’t dwell on that. I wanted to focus primarily on one area. We do rather well at kicking the BBC and holding them to account, which I think is entirely right, but one of the things that was important about this report was that it put the spotlight on the other public service broadcasters too, who I think for too long have gotten away with too little scrutiny of Welsh politics, and that needs to change. And this report, I hope, sends a signal that it will do.

Channel 5, for example, a public service broadcaster that benefits from the airwaves granted by the people of this country: we could find no discernible content about Wales. Channel 4, just 2 per cent—2 per cent—of their first-run programming originated in Wales. And ITV. I should declare an interest as a former employee of ITV, and someone with a great fondness for the organisation and respect for the work they should do. This is not a criticism of ITV Wales, but it is a challenge to ITV plc, who cried wolf, I think, back in 2007 when advertising revenues did look perilous. It is fair to say that the impact that the Ofcom regulations had on them meant that were they not lessened, they would walk away from broadcasting public service programmes in Wales, but that call was listened to by politicians and regulators, and their requirements were dramatically reduced—as I mentioned earlier, a 40 per cent reduction. They’re now only required to broadcast four hours of news every week, and 90 minutes of non-news. The amount of money they spend is about £7 million a year—even though they don’t publish these figures, that’s what they confirmed to the committee was broadly right—a figure that has been, as they put it, broadly flat since 2008. So, since they’ve had their obligations cut by 40 per cent, they’ve spent no extra money on Wales, although they have been able to release some funding from technological advances. But I don’t think this is good enough.

When you look at the profit of ITV plc, in 2007 it stood at £137 million, and last year it stood at £448 million. So, a staggering rise in profits by the parent company in exchange for a sharply reduced commitment to Wales. They told us that there’s no surplus value in the public service broadcasting licences, which again is the same tactic they tried in 2007—not a terribly subtle hint that if we asked them to do too much, they would simply walk away and we’d be left the poorer for it. And we would be the poorer without the presence of ITV Wales, because they do bring a plurality to the coverage in Wales. They bring a different tone and a different focus to BBC Wales, and we value that, but I think we are entitled to ask more of them in the way that they cover Wales.

Now, they do point to their BAFTA success this year, and we congratulate them for their excellent programme on Aberfan. But beyond that, ITV as a network—and, again, I must make a distinction between ITV Wales and ITV as a network—pays very little attention to Wales. There is very little programming for the whole of the UK about Wales. The last example they would give us was in 2014 when the programme about Dylan Thomas was aired, and they’re going to struggle in the future because we don’t have many significant anniversaries coming up. They do really need to broaden their imagination. They’ve said that there are no barriers per se; it is a meritocracy, they suggested—there aren’t good enough ideas coming from Welsh commissioners. Well, this argument has been proven to be bogus with the BBC, where they failed to deliver for Wales for a long time, and we’ve now, through the new licence, required them to do more. And I think we need to require ITV to do more too, because clearly left to themselves we’ll get more of the same. So, the committee has recommended that Ofcom review the ITV licence at the mid-point to ask them to deliver more for Wales. That’s our message, Llywydd, to all the public service broadcasters, not just the BBC—we’ll be coming back to them shortly: we expect better. Diolch.

I call upon the Minister for Lifelong Learning and Welsh Language, Alun Davies.

Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and I would like to join members of the committee in congratulating themselves on the work that they’ve carried out over the last few months. [Laughter.] They haven’t sold themselves short this afternoon, and they certainly don’t in the report that they’ve written, which I think Members across the whole Chamber will agree is a real tour de force, looking at all broadcasters and the structures of broadcasting and the structures of accountability. I can see that Members have had a great deal to do, and they’ve produced a report that, in many ways, is a blueprint for the sort of debate that we need to have about broadcasting in this country, as we move forward.

Can I say this? At the heart of much of what we’re going to discuss and debate this afternoon and at other times is that issue of accountability and the issue of scrutiny. I absolutely believe that it’s right and proper—and the points that have been made by Members this afternoon demonstrate absolutely clearly that the current structures and frameworks of accountability, regulation, and scrutiny have failed. Wales has been failed by the existing structures and parliamentary scrutiny, because we have seen—and the report outlines very clearly—a diminution of coverage in Wales. We’ve seen reductions of hours of programming produced in Wales for Wales, and that has been done within a process of public scrutiny and public accountability. So, those structures, if they are to mean anything for this country, need to be reformed, and reformed fundamentally.

Now, many of us have spent time in this place over the past few years looking at how we create and we recreate different structures of inter-institutional accountability across the United Kingdom. Now, I do not and I have not made the case for the devolution of Executive responsibility for broadcasting to Wales. For me, I feel that Executive responsibility is something that should rest properly with Westminster and the United Kingdom Government. However—however—I do not believe that accountability is something that should be centralised, for the reasons we’ve already seen and the reasons we’ve already given. For me, it is important that accountability is something that is delivered and carried out across the democratic institutions of the United Kingdom and done collectively, ensuring that we do have a model of inter-institutional accountability that works for the whole of the United Kingdom, and, particularly here, for the people of Wales.

It is clear that all the issues of citizenship, which are absolutely fundamental to who we are as a country and who we want to be as a nation, are being failed at present. I hear what’s been said, and I’ve seen reports that ‘The Wales Report’ from the BBC is being scrapped—I hope that’s not true. I think the work that has been led by Huw Edwards over the past few years to inform and to establish a platform for debate and discussion about the public policy arena in Wales has been a success and is absolutely fundamental. It is not good enough for our most significant public service broadcaster not to have a serious programme about the politics of Wales run at prime time at some point in the week.

But we need to be careful as well in what we say and what we do. If we are serious about public accountability and public scrutiny being carried out—and I believe that it should be by the Welsh Parliament and not by the Welsh Government; I think it’s important that parliamentarians do this collectively, not Ministers—we need to be very, very clear that we understand the difference between democratic scrutiny and accountability and interference. It is not right that politicians seek to interfere in decisions that are right and properly decisions for editors and managers within any broadcaster, within any public broadcaster, and we, ourselves, need to exercise the discipline of ensuring accountability without crossing the line into interference in editorial decisions, and we need to be very, very clear that we understand that and I hope and I trust that people here do.

Will the Minister give way?

Yes, I will.

Given the distinction that he makes between the role of us as parliamentarians and the Government in the inter-institutional arrangements, as he puts it, does he have any reflections on the recommendation in the report that, before he gives the go-ahead for the approval of a BBC Wales appointee to the board, the Assembly’s culture committee has an opportunity to question that nominee?

Lee Waters—it’s now become a tradition in this place for him to intervene and ask that question. I think he’s done it on every occasion that there’s been a debate here. And he’s obviously not pleased with the answers I’ve tried to give him. Let me say—[Interruption.] Let me say this, let me say this: I agree with the principle that has been outlined by the committee in terms of confirmation hearings, or whatever term we wish to use. I do agree with that process. This is not a Welsh Government process, it’s a UK Government process, so we don’t have the power to deliver that at present.

But I would suggest to the committee that this is a matter they continue to pursue. They certainly could pursue this with their colleagues in other institutions of the United Kingdom, and I certainly, as the Minister in Wales, would be very happy to see that sort of system introduced here for that level of accountability and scrutiny. But, in terms of where we’re going, the Chair, in her introduction to this debate, did outline some of her concerns about decisions taken by the BBC in terms of resources and funding, and then she made a rather unhappy comparison with Scotland. Let me say this: what I want to do is to hold the BBC accountable for what it delivers. The decisions that they take about budgets and structures within the BBC are a matter for the BBC and not a matter for us. However, what is right and proper that we scrutinise is what they actually deliver and what they actually produce on our screens.

I would counsel anybody who believes that establishing a standalone channel in English for Wales would succeed in garnering great audiences and would deliver a significant enhancement of our citizenship or democratic debate in this country—as somebody who has worked in broadcasting himself in terms of marketing and the rest of it, I would say to you it will be very, very difficult to grow significant audiences. Far better, I believe, is that the BBC network recognises the whole of its responsibilities to the whole of the United Kingdom, and the absolutely crucial thing for me is that we hold broadcasters to account for producing programming and reporting for the whole of the United Kingdom that represents the needs of the whole of the United Kingdom. Now, we haven’t seen that to date, we don’t see it at the moment, and I hope and believe that we should be able to ensure that we do have fair play when it comes to recognising the whole of the UK on our screens.

I’ll bring my comments to an end here, Presiding Officer, by saying this: I hope—and the point that was made by Lee Waters in terms of ITV and other public service broadcasters is well made—that, over the coming years, we can develop a culture of accountability that ensures that all broadcasters, all public service broadcasters, and all producers of news and entertainment produced in Wales for Wales are able to do so in a way that enhances not only our citizenship, but also our cultural and historical inheritance, and we create a country whereby we can have the debate that we need to have as a country, that platforms are created where people can talk and debate amongst ourselves, we can tell each other our stories, we can look at the world through our eyes, and we can, at the same time, be a part of a greater whole in the United Kingdom. To do that, we will need new structures of governance, new structures of regulation, and new structures of accountability. I hope, and I am confident, that the report that we’re debating this afternoon is a significant step forward to achieving that. Thank you very much.

I call on Bethan Jenkins to respond to the debate.

Thank you. I’m not going to speak for very long, but thank you all who have contributed and I’m sure this will—as Suzy captured quite well, I think, saying this is the first chapter of many that we will look into in relation to broadcasting, the newspaper industry, radio, and such, as part of this committee. Other committees of the Assembly have looked at it sporadically, but I think there has been a place here to have more focus, with communications being in the title of this committee. So, I’m hopeful that we can achieve what some of us have self-congratulated on already achieving, although I think we have much more to achieve. Let’s not sit on our laurels; we have much more to learn.

In relation to what the Minister says on pre-appointment hearings, what I tried to say in what I was saying earlier was that you could potentially not give consent until you were satisfied that we would be able to have that appointment hearing—I’m not sure if the Minister’s listening to me—and whether we could have a committee discussion before it would get to you as a Minister. If other legislatures are not doing it at the moment, we could show the way in that regard in having that appointment hearing. So, I’m not sure whether I agree that you don’t have the power, and I’m sure many of us will be pursuing this issue with you down the line.

I would agree with you that accountability should lie here also. I think the committee would diverge on where the power should lie. I’m sure everybody knows where my view stands on that. But, especially now we have this committee, accountability is clear, and, as Suzy said also, ruffling the feathers is something that we have done. I think, with Lee’s comments on ITV, that’s where some of the feathers were ruffled, I should say.

But I think, from taking all the comments together, this is a good start for us for the future, not only looking at BBC—I do believe that that comment was correct. We have focused quite a lot, but I think that’s because the charter renewal process was coming up, and we had that focus on the charter. It’s safe to say that everybody is within grasp for us to scrutinise and hold to account, and, hopefully, they will see it in a good light, that we want to scrutinise in the best possible way so that we can make portrayal as effective as possible in future here in Wales, and to ensure that the funding streams fall in line to make sure that that is a possibility. We don’t want to be here in 10 years’ time without bilingual daleks. We would like to see bilingual daleks in 10 years’ time. So, therefore, we need to have those programmes—we need to have ‘Casualty’ with bilingual signs, and then we know we will have achieved our aim as a committee. No, to be serious, we have lots more work to do.

Diolch yn fawr iawn i bawb ar y pwyllgor ac i’r clercod am fod mor drylwyr yn cefnogi’r pwyllgor, a gobeithio byddan nhw’n ein cefnogi ni yn y gwaith sydd yn dod ohono gydag S4C a gyda newyddiaduraeth leol. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

The proposal is to note the committee’s report. Does any Member object? The motion is therefore agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.

Motion agreed in accordance with Standing Order 12.36.