Seòmar agus comataidhean

Sure.

I do not just respect those people’s empathy; I respect their expertise and knowledge of the sector, too.

Yes. The issue is not just that cast and crew were misled at the meeting that has been mentioned. There was no consultation with the union or the workers at “River City” before the decision was made; the press release went out at the same time as the meeting took place. The workers have every right to feel angry and betrayed, and they certainly feel angry and betrayed. Given the answers on those points this morning, they will not feel that any less.

It is not just the cast and the crew that have serious concerns about the ending of “River City”. We have also seen letters signed by Ewan McGregor, Brian Cox, Blythe Duff, Lorraine McIntosh, Richard E Grant, Irvine Welsh and hundreds of members of Scotland’s and the UK’s cultural sector who are calling on the BBC to reconsider the decision to end “River City”, particularly because of the impact that it will have on training opportunities that are important to Scotland’s film and TV industry going forward. Do you think that those people, with their wealth of expertise and experience in the creative sector, are wrong to tell you to think again? Given their representations, will you reconsider?

I have said before that it is not for politicians to make editorial decisions at the BBC, either at a UK or at a Scotland level, but we have questions on value for money, about the BBC meeting its objectives, about fair work and about ensuring Scotland’s TV and film sector is properly invested in.

On the issue of value for money, you mentioned “River City” has an annual budget of £9 million. I understand £1 million of that goes back into BBC Scotland as charges for the production being on the site and for using the studios. It produces 66 30-minute episodes a year with the remaining £8 million, which works out at around £122,000 for each episode. All that is spent in Scotland. “River City”, therefore, costs significantly less to produce than the vast majority of TV dramas. Is that correct?

I am not sure that I have seen as much of the marketing as has been suggested.

Ms Valentine, you said that you do not just make programmes for yourself; you make them for the audience. You will be aware that the BBC charter talks about the need

“to reflect, represent and serve the diverse communities of all of the United Kingdom’s nations and regions and, in doing so, support the creative economy across the United Kingdom.”

In the earlier evidence session, we heard from Ofcom about the need for the BBC to do more to engage with working-class audiences. How does scrapping a working-class drama and working-class voices help build support and audience reach for working-class people?

I accept that different people will watch different programmes, but this is a soap about a working-class community with working-class voices. I very much welcome more investment in production in Scotland in different areas, but I find it hard to see how that will replicate what exists with “River City”.

In terms of the fair work agenda, you mentioned, Ms Valentine, making sure that the BBC was the best possible place to work. There has been a lot of anger from the cast and crew about the BBC’s decisions around the ending of “River City”. You mentioned that it was an editorial decision, but the cast and crew were told that there was no option to renew the lease for the site and that that was instrumental in ending “River City”.

There have been consistent calls on Ofcom and the BBC from the Scottish screen sector to increase the share of production in Scotland. Mr Stewart earlier said that the BBC’s change of tack, announced last week, maybe suggested that it was not adhering to the spirit of Ofcom’s guidance. That is one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it would be that the BBC’s decision suggests that Ofcom’s rules on Scottish qualification have been, to quote you, too flexible to ensure that the projects that the BBC commissions deliver value for money in Scotland. Is that right? Could “too flexible” mean too weak?

You mentioned the importance of audiences seeing themselves on screen. In response to Mr Kerr, you talked about the BBC needing to do more to build support among audiences with above-average economic and social needs. Presumably, BBC Scotland cutting a drama like “River City”, which is about a working-class community and voices, will make the situation worse. Have you or will you be looking at that decision?

If the blockade is lifted, you can immediately provide supplies and support—food and medicine—to the people who need them?

Good morning. We have heard about the impact of the blockade, which has been in place for about 11 weeks, and the horrific circumstances in Gaza right now. Jayne Crow talked about the importance of working with local partners and about food and medicine being priorities, and we have heard that stocks need to be replenished. If the blockade was lifted and more food and medicine got in—we want that to happen immediately, and I am pleased that the UK Government has joined Canada and France in calling for that—what is the estimated time that it would take, working with partners, for food and medicine to reach the people who need it? I know that it is very difficult to make an estimate, but there is a difference between lifting the blockade and ensuring that food and medicine get to where they are needed in Gaza.