The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Julie James and amendments 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the name of Paul Davies. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected.

We therefore come to the Plaid Cymru debate on broadcasting, and I call on Siân Gwenllian to move the motion.

Motion NDM6669  Rhun ap Iorwerth

To propose that the National Assembly for Wales:

1. Recognises the importance of broadcasting to the sustainability of viable democracy in Wales;

2. Is concerned by the significant decline in ITV Wales's broadcasting hours, and significant cuts to S4C and its current uncertain financial position;

3. Is also concerned about the position of Welsh-language and Welsh broadcasting on commercial radio and local television, along with the impact of the UK Government's proposals to further regulate the radio market;

4. Notes that Wales needs to be at the forefront of the development of media technologies and that Welsh-language and Welsh broadcasting needs to be on a broader number of platforms and modes of producing, publishing and distributing content;

5. Agrees that full consideration needs to be given to the devolution of responsibilities for broadcasting to Wales;

6. Calls on the Welsh Government to investigate the feasibility of devolving powers over broadcasting to Wales and to report back to the Assembly within one year.

Motion moved.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. Our motion today is one that would begin the journey towards devolving broadcasting, and all we are asking for, if truth be told, is a commitment to looking to the practicalities of devolving broadcasting to Wales and reporting back to the Assembly within a year. So, as the Labour amendments delete that simple request, we will be voting against them.

Plaid Cymru is highly ambitious for Wales and believes that decisions about Wales should be made in Wales—broadcasting, in the case before us today. But, of course, we recognise that not everyone is convinced by this, so today we are seeking consensus to at least consider these issues further over a period of 12 months. And I personally would be very disappointed if we didn't achieve that today. A vote against our motion would suggest that everything is fine in broadcasting in Wales. Well, that simply isn't the case.

In a period of uncertainty and dispute because of Brexit, the devolution of broadcasting is more important than ever in order to ensure that Wales has a voice. A combination of lack of plurality in Welsh media and decline in broadcast hours is a barrier to political debate, and therefore a barrier to democracy itself. The fact that the majority of people receive their news from providers in England hinders political education, with those providers focusing entirely on London, and showing a complete lack of understanding of devolution. It's no surprise, therefore, that a third of people who were questioned in a survey last year believe that the UK Government still runs the health service in Wales.

There have been a few positive developments, with the BBC and S4C starting to provide new content on new platforms that appeal to new and younger audiences. Golwg360 and nation.cymru do offer valuable provision online. But many broadcasters have cut their broadcast hours for Wales. In 2015-16, the English-language output on the BBC was 641 hours, which was a reduction of 21 per cent from 814 hours in previous years. There were cuts of 30 per cent in ITV programming, and that was more than in any other area of the United Kingdom.

Another concern is the London Government's plans on the regulation of commercial radio. That could lead to even less variety, and although the UK Government does accept that we must ensure that news continues to be provided on commercial radio, they make no mention of Welsh news.

If I turn now to S4C, certainly we need to secure stable and adequate funding for our only Welsh-language channel in order to secure a viable, relevant and successful future for future generations. Almost four years ago the Silk commission recommended the devolution of powers to fund S4C to Wales. In the meantime, a month from the new financial year, we are still awaiting the Euryn Ogwen Williams review of S4C. It is encouraging that S4C is working on improving content and providing content on new platforms, but the fact that the channel has been through a period of financial uncertainty over a period of many years makes planning for the future very difficult and extremely challenging.

Now, no-one doubts that funding of S4C post devolution will be challenging, because so much of this is subsidised by the licence fee. But what we're asking for today is an inquiry into that, to look into the possibilities around this, to look into the feasibility of devolving powers over broadcasting and to look at the various options, including the funding options. We must also bear in mind that S4C is crucially important in economic terms, as well as culturally, with every £1 invested by the channel in creative industries in Wales worth £2.09 to the economy. According to the Hargreaves review of the creative industries in Wales, without S4C Wales may not have had any independent television companies at all.

I conclude with the words of Elfed Wyn Jones, who has just completed a week's hunger strike for the devolution of broadcasting. I do believe that Elfed has summarised very well, in these words, the situation that we're currently facing. Elfed says this: 'I hope that my actions will demonstrate how grave the need is to have control in Wales of broadcasting. It's going to be difficult, but in thinking about what this will deliver for the people of Wales—better democracy, clearer information and a strengthening of the position of the Welsh language—that would give me the strength to battle until I achieve my objectives. I accept my responsibility to take action, and I hope our politicians will take their responsibilities just as seriously.'

It's time Wales had a voice, and for us, as people, to have the national conversations to improve the way our country is governed. I look forward to other contributions in the Chamber this afternoon, but I urge you all to support our motion so that we can have this important debate that is so necessary in Wales today.

I have selected the six amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendment 2 will be deselected. I call on the Minister for Culture, Tourism and Sport to move formally amendment 1, tabled in the name of Julie James.

Amendment 1. Julie James

Delete Points 5 and 6 and replace with:

Notes that the publication by Departure of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of the independent review of S4C being undertaken by Euryn Ogwen Williams is still awaited.

Calls on the UK Government and broadcasters to ensure that both Welsh and English language broadcasting in Wales is funded adequately.

Recognises that the public service broadcasters should be fully accountable to all national parliaments of the United Kingdom, as appropriate to their remit.

Amendment 1 moved.

Formally. Thank you, Llywydd.

I call on Suzy Davies to move amendments 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Amendment 2. Paul Davies

Delete point 6 and replace with:

Calls on the Welsh Government to investigate the viability of devolving powers over broadcasting to Wales and to report back to the Assembly within one year.

Amendment 3. Paul Davies

Add as new point at end of motion:

Notes the statutory obligation on the UK Government to provide S4C with sufficient funds to carry out its purposes.

Amendment 4. Paul Davies

Add as new point at end of motion:

Calls on the Welsh Government and the Assembly to press for the retention of the statutory obligation on the UK Government to provide S4C with sufficient funds to carry out its purposes to fund any expanded purposes that S4C may acquire following the Ogwen review.

Amendment 5. Paul Davies

Add as new point at end of motion:

Notes the increased obligations imposed on the BBC regarding portrayal and commissioning in the nations and regions in its renewed charter.

Amendment 6. Paul Davies

Add as a new point at the end of the motion:

Notes that a UK national broadcasting system is better placed to reach all nations and regions to promote understanding of devolution, notwithstanding that it has failed to do so to date.

Amendments 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 moved.

Thank you very much, Llywydd. I move the amendments. It's a shame, in a way, that we're not waiting to have this debate until the middle of the year. I understand why—because of the decision of Elfed Wyn Jones—but it would have been useful to have considered the Euryn Ogwen Williams review on the future of S4C, and to have a period of observation of the BBC's delivery of its portrayal obligations—

I wonder whether the Member will take an intervention for one moment.

Certainly.

Just to give you an assurance, from the Government's point of view, we will be tabling a general debate on communications, with a particular view on the report on S4C, when that is timely, once we've received a copy of that report that we're still awaiting.

Well, we look forward to that because I'm sure there will be an opportunity to re-consider these issues at that time.

Maybe you could respond to this. Would you agree that it's a good idea to have a period where we can observe the BBC's delivery of its commitments on the portrayal of Wales? Because I believe that these proposals, and the proposals at a UK level for the regulation of the radio market, need to be scrutinised to some extent before we look again at the devolution of broadcasting. Because it is a matter of discussing these issues once again, isn't it? I have no problem with the content of the Government amendment, but if it's passed, then it will replace our amendment 2. That amendment, like point 6 in the original motion, talks about time frames. In reality, I'm not too concerned about a particular time frame, but there is virtue in nailing the Welsh Government to a timetable to formulate a report so that we can resolve this question. I remain to be convinced that devolution will resolve the problems with public service broadcasting, as some people would hope it would. That's why amendment 2 talks about 'viability', rather than the 'feasibility' in the original motion.

We have discussed the financial implications many times before. The complaint is that the UK Government underspends on public service broadcasting in Wales, particularly S4C. The Welsh Government, who also complain that it's being underfunded, will somehow find enough money to put this right. I don't think that transferring the statutory functions from DCMS to the Welsh Government will make a significant difference, and we will see nothing more than a different Government saying that their proposals are sufficient. We agree with the Minister's views, as set out in amendment 4.

In terms of ITV Cymru Wales, I'm not criticising the quality of their work in saying this, but it appears to me that the Wales-only licence has done nothing at all to deal with the issue of the reduction in hours. In a multiplatform world, there's a question as to whether these well-known private companies will be seeking licences with public service obligations if Welsh Governments of the future are too directive in their approach. Should we be concerned about that? Well, that's a question we need to consider.

The situation is different with the BBC, of course. It is funded through the taxpayer and everyone can be sure that this Parliament will be scrutinising the BBC and its new commitments for the nations and regions. The Welsh Conservatives have regularly asked for joint accountability as referred to in the Government amendment, and the culture committee has already taken full advantage of this situation, despite our lack of financial responsibility over that particular organisation.

Would devolving broadcasting help us to understand our devolved nation better? Well, I'm not sure. From what I see at the moment, Wales still doesn't fully understand devolution after 19 years. Is that because our broadcasters in Wales are misleading or misrepresenting what is happening here? I don't believe so. The heart of the problem is that people in Wales choose to receive their news and current affairs from media from outwith Wales, over many platforms. This is where they don't hear about Wales, they don't see Wales being represented and enjoyed—with the usual exceptions of Doctor Who, and so on—and they don't enjoy programmes produced in Wales.

Would devolution change that situation? I'm not sure. It's already a multiplatform world, and my fear is that devolution would give an excuse to the media in London to ignore us entirely in all forms. That will do nothing to help the rest of the UK to understand devolution. It will do nothing to inform the many people in Wales who don't choose Welsh media to receive information. I'm not sure that this would lead to an improvement of the situation under the devolution of broadcasting. That's my view. Thank you.

It's my pleasure to take part in this very important debate, and I thank Siân Gwenllian for her clear leadership at the outset. Of course, the Plaid Cymru motion calls for investigating the feasibility of devolution of broadcasting to Wales. I said that slowly because that is quite a simple motion. It's not the most radical idea that has been proposed here—just investigating the feasibility of devolving broadcasting in Wales.

Like Siân, I congratulate Elfed Wyn Jones, who was here on the steps of the Senedd yesterday, who had been on a hunger strike for a week to call for the devolution of broadcasting. He reflects increasing demands for this to happen. The Brexit vote showed how little Welsh people know about current affairs in their own country. Wales does benefit from being in the European Union, and it accepts more money into Wales than goes out. But there wasn't much talk of that during the Brexit referendum campaign, or the fact that 200,000 jobs in Wales depend on our membership of the single market. London news: that's what the majority of people in Wales receive. We have to investigate, with great effort sometimes, to find anything out about Wales, and important details such as those I've just mentioned.

Our Welsh newspapers, our local papers, are contracting, as newspapers are everywhere. There's no mention of Wales on the BBC Radio 2 service, which is the radio station that has the most listeners here in Wales. No mention of Wales. S4C was established and that was a great boost, naturally, back in 1982. That was a great boost to our nation, to our identity, and to our culture. But we need much more. Wales is here for everyone, whether they speak Welsh or not. S4C is superb, but we need more to promote the self-respect of 3 million people, and to promote the development of an entire nation.

Because on daily matters, not just such as Brexit, but the health service, for example—as Siân has said—a third of Welsh people don't know that health has been devolved to this place for nearly 20 years. I remember that during the strike of doctors in hospitals in England last year doctors in Morriston Hospital in Swansea also thought that they were on strike, and were looking for the closest barricades. Now, often, I am one to look for a barricade, but it was inappropriate in that case, because there were no strikes in Wales, but many people didn't realise that at all. There are many other examples of publications in London creating a story in Wales even though they're not relevant to us at all, not just in health, but in education and all kinds of other areas that have been devolved. People should know that by having their news here in Wales, broadcast here from Wales.

So, to close, we insist that we hear the truth about our country. We insist that we at least investigate the feasibility of devolving broadcasting. It has happened in other countries—in the Basque Country, for example, it's happening very successfully. It's happened with S4C—we need to develop that. We need to devolve broadcasting fully.

There is a story to be told of our nation. We suffer—as we heard in the earlier debate—with the governance of the UK, relating to Brexit, the lack of respect that there is for our nation and the lack of respect that there is for our Government here in those negotiations. We want to build on the success of the existence of S4C in a political climate that is very fragile, where the survival of our nation itself is under threat. Ultimately, we insist that broadcasting is devolved. Thank you very much.

Thanks to Plaid for bringing today's debate. We in UKIP agree with many of Plaid's points today. We lament the cuts to the budget of S4C and also the cuts to ITV Wales's broadcasting hours—both English language and Welsh language broadcasting in Wales need adequate provision—but we don't go along with Plaid in their demand for the devolution of broadcasting.

We feel that there have been a lot of successes in film and tv production in Wales in recent years. I believe that two of the most successful BBC productions in terms of export markets currently are Doctor Who and Sherlock, both made in Wales—I think Doctor Who was mentioned earlier in the debate. For economic reasons, we—

Gareth, would you take an intervention?

Yes, sure.

We're all pleased that Doctor Who is produced here in Wales, but, actually, looking at the content, it could be produced anywhere. I'm not asking for bilingual Daleks or anything, but just a mention of Wales would be handy.

That's an interesting intervention, Dai. I refer in the speech to what you said last time we debated these subjects, which was a debate brought by the culture committee, and I do actually return to the points you just made, so I'll expand on them a little bit later.

I think, for economic reasons, we do need to get as much production as we can located in Wales, and as many jobs in film and production created here as we possibly can. We don't want to jeopardise those aims by going towards the devolution of broadcasting, which could ultimately lead to less production being carried out here. That is the possible problem with going down the devolution route.

I mentioned just now that we debated these issues a year ago, when the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee brought a similar debate, and Dai made some interesting points. He complained that there was no real portrayal of Wales in the broadcast media. He talked about what he just mentioned again: having production of Casualty and Doctor Who here in Wales is all well and good, but these programmes don't actually attempt to provide us with a picture of Wales. He memorably summarised on that occasion by saying that he didn't want bilingual Daleks, but he did feel that the hospital in Casualty should have bilingual signs. The problem is that Cardiff and BBC Wales—we successfully lobbied for the production of Casualty to come from Bristol, which is where it was being made originally. Casualty had already been going for more than 20 years before it switched to Wales. It's actually set in the fictional city of Holby, in the fictional county of Wyvern, which is supposed to be in the west country of England, so it would be a bit odd if they now started to feature a lot of Welsh speakers or if they had bilingual signs on their walls.

As for Doctor Who, we could have bilingual road signs now and then in Doctor Who, but the trouble—

Will you take an intervention?

Sure.

Thank you for taking an intervention. I think we're getting off the point here. [Laughter.] I'm not sure I agree with Dai about the bilingual signs in Casualty either, and I'm delighted that we have a strong broadcasting sector in terms of its economic potential, but what about the potential for strengthening the way that we talk about ourselves as a nation and generate through broadcasting that debate on our future as a nation?

Well, I suppose the point that I've raised, or I've tried to raise, is, 'Does one thing impinge on the other?', so that may be what we need to consider. 

Now, we do have this—. Right, Doctor Who, we could have bilingual road signs in Doctor Who, but, obviously, we're not going to go there. They go to planet Mars. It's clearly not supposed to be set in Wales. 

So, we have this perceived problem of programmes being made in Wales not being specifically about Wales, which is what we've been talking about, but it is questionable, I think, if a massive percentage of people in Wales will be really interested in watching programmes made about Wales, which is a point that Suzy Davies touched on earlier. After all, since the 1970s we have had things like Radio Wales and Radio Cymru, but it's still a fact that today more people in Wales listen to Radio 1 and Radio 2 than they do to Radio Wales and Radio Cymru. There is an old saying that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. You can provide these services, but you can't force your listeners to listen to them. 

Now, these issues are not new by any means. In the 1970s we had issues where people in south-east Wales had to choose whether to tune their tv sets into the Mendips transmitter or to Wenvoe. I grew up in a household in Cardiff where we were tuned into the Mendips, so that the Welsh channels were all fuzzy and we didn't really watch them. So, we had BBC West instead of BBC Wales, meaning that we watched Points West from Bristol as our evening news programme, rather than Wales Today, which sounds ludicrous today, but that's what we did and that's what many other people did, too. 

So, the thing is that you have your Welsh-speaking areas in the west of Wales. [Interruption.] Yes, you have Welsh speakers in Cardiff, too. But the point is that east Wales is culturally not too dissimilar from England. Culturally speaking, people in south-east Wales and north-east Wales have virtually no separation from people in north-west England and south-west England. Now, with the advent of devolution, as well as digital tv, you might have thought there would be more of a Welsh cultural focus in Wales. But digital tv means you're not restricted to just a handful of channels, so people are watching all sorts of things. It's not just that more people in Wales are watching Eastenders and Coronation Street instead of Pobol y Cwm; you've probably got more people in Wales watching The Walking Dead than Pobol y Cwm, so we may slowly be becoming a cultural colony of the USA. 

So, these are the problems we are having to grapple with in the modern world. I don't think you can hamper film and TV production by having greater Welsh Government involvement in broadcasting. There is a potential problem of too much state involvement in the media.      

You do need to bring your contribution to an end now. I've been very nice. 

We may ask for different portrayals of Wales, but an old adage is that no good art was ever created by committee. Thank you.

I call on the Minister for Culture, Tourism and Sport, Dafydd Elis-Thomas. 

Thank you very much, Llywydd. It's a pleasure to contribute to a debate on broadcasting, because it's been a pleasure of mine over many years to be responsible for legislating on broadcasting in Westminster. And I want to make it entirely clear that I remain of the view, personally, and as a Minister, given my experience over the past four or five months, that this isn't the time to start to talk about devolving broadcasting partially, or to consider devolution of any part of broadcasting, to Wales as part of the development of the devolution settlement, because the nature of the economy and culture of broadcasting and, more importantly, all of the digital communication platforms available, and much of that industry in the bay in Cardiff—that industry is of necessity one that has operated and developed not only through regulation within the UK, but also through regulation at an international level. 

The Government's made its position entirely clear in the amendments to the motion on what we want to secure in terms of broadcasting in Welsh and English being sufficiently funded, and concerns about cuts to S4C. But we are just as firm in the view that we need to be able to make the case about the economy and the effects of communications more generally, together, within the United Kingdom.

ITV Cymru Wales continues to play a crucial role as an effective alternative to the BBC, and we do believe that introducing an amendment that recognises that public service broadcasters should be more accountable to all Parliaments within the UK is a crucial part of our work. That’s what I have been pursuing as Minister with overview of broadcasting, which is non-devolved, and that, namely, is to increase the accountability of broadcasting and communication institutions of the UK to this Assembly and, through that, to the viewers and listeners of Wales.

We are working hard as a Government to ensure that the BBC’s new charter gives a mandate to the BBC to deliver far more to the people of Wales, and the BBC now has appropriate accountability to the National Assembly for Wales. As we as a Government prepare to appoint a member of the Ofcom board to represent Wales for the first time ever, we are aware that these arrangements pave the way for us to have a very real influence as a Welsh Government on the communications structure more generally in the UK.

Siân Gwenllian to reply to the debate.

Thank you very much. I have to say that the lack of ambition of the Minister is very disappointing. He doesn’t want to even have the discussion, not even wanting to see what’s possible, not even wanting to look at the options—

If I may respond, clearly, if opposition parties win this debate by rejecting the reasonable amendments today, the Government will consider how we respond to the Assembly’s decision. So, it’s not true to say that we wouldn’t consider any decisions to look at this further. But that isn’t the Government’s stance at the moment.

Exactly. That’s what I’m saying. The position of the Government is not wanting to have the discussion, not wanting to see what’s possible—[Interruption.] Yes, because those are the amendments that have been tabled. The amendments that you’ve tabled delete what we and the opposition party want, namely to have the debate, and that’s very disappointing. And I have to ask: where did the Dafydd Elis-Thomas that we remember—where has he gone?’

He's sitting here. [Laughter.]

I thank Suzy Davies for explaining the purpose of your amendment. I do see the sense of what you’re saying, and, even though it’s weaker than our motion, we are willing to support that if necessary, because you’re calling for the debate as well through your amendment.

The Minister has said that the Government does intend to hold a debate on broadcasting in the future. Well, well done. But, at that time, we will continue to press for the devolution of broadcasting, because, basing a debate around the Ogwen review, that’s neither here nor there. Guto Harri himself, one of the members of the board, has said that we shouldn’t expect too much from that, and has said that it’s nearly irrelevant now, anyway.

This morning—and I’m concluding now—I was in St Fagans with the Culture, Welsh Language and Communications Committee, and I saw the history of Wales being interpreted very skilfully there. It’s time for us now to interpret our contemporary life and our democracy ourselves, and it’s time for us to be leading our national conversation here in Wales. So, I hope that you can see your way to at least supporting the desire to have the debate. That’s all we’re asking for today.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.