.........
The
proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken
in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous
interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied
corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the
transcript.
|
Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 09:33.
The meeting began at 09:33.
|
|
Cyflwyniad,
Ymddiheuriadau, Dirprwyon a Datgan Buddiannau
Introductions, Apologies, Substitutions and Declarations of
Interest
|
|
[1]
Bethan Jenkins:
Croeso i’r cyfarfod ffurfiol.
Eitem 1 yw’r cyflwyniad, ymddiheuriadau a dirprwyon. Croeso
i’r Aelodau. Os bydd
larwm tân, dylai pawb adael yr ystafell drwy’r
allanfeydd tân penodol a dilyn cyfarwyddiadau’r
tywyswyr a’r staff. Ni ddisgwylir prawf heddiw. Dylai pawb
droi eu ffonau symudol i fod yn dawel. Rydym ni’n
gweithredu’n ddwyieithog, ac mae clustffonau ar gael i glywed
y cyfieithiad ar y pryd ac i addasu’r sain ar gyfer pobl
sy’n drwm eu clyw. Mae’r cyfieithu ar y pryd ar gael ar
sianel 1, a gellir chwyddo’r sain ar sianel 0. Nid oes angen
cyffwrdd â’r botymau ar y meicroffonau gan y gall hyn
amharu ar y system, a gofalwch fod y golau coch ymlaen cyn dechrau
siarad. A oes gan Aelodau unrhyw fuddiant i’w ddatgan? Na.
Mae Dai Lloyd wedi cynnig ymddiheuriadau ar gyfer yn hwyrach ymlaen
yn y sesiwn, rydw i ar ddeall, ond nid oes dirprwy ar ei
gyfer.
|
Bethan Jenkins: Welcome to our formal session. Item 1 is
introductions, apologies and substitutions. Welcome to Members. In
the event of a fire alarm, everyone should leave the room by the
fire exits and follow instructions from the ushers and staff.
We’re not expecting a test today. Everyone should switch
their mobile phones to silent. We operate bilingually, and
headphones are available for interpretation and for amplification.
Interpretation is available on channel 1 and amplification on
channel 0. You don’t need to touch the microphones as this
can interfere with the system. Please ensure that the red light is
on before you speak. Does any Member have any interests to declare?
No. Dai Lloyd will have to leave later and has apologised, but
there is no substitute.
|
|
09:33
|
|
Sesiwn Dystiolaeth ynghylch Cymru
Hanesyddol
Evidence Session on Historic Wales
|
|
[2]
Bethan Jenkins:
Eitem 2 yw’r sesiwn dystiolaeth
ynghylch Cymru Hanesyddol, a chroeso i Ken Skates, Ysgrifennydd y
Cabinet dros yr Economi a’r Seilwaith. Jason Thomas, nid wyf
i’n siŵr o’ch teitl chi, felly, os medrwch chi
ddweud eich teitl—
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Item 2 is an evidence session on Historic Wales. A
warm welcome to Ken Skates, the Cabinet Secretary for the Economy
and Infrastructure. Jason Thomas, I’m not exactly sure of
your title, so if you could tell us what that title is—
|
|
[3]
Ken Skates: Jason, Chair, was promoted just earlier this
week to director of culture, sport and tourism. He was formerly the
deputy director of commercial and property operations, but has
risen up the ranks.
|
|
[4]
Bethan Jenkins: Grêt. Diolch yn
fawr iawn am yr esboniad hynny a da iawn am gael y swydd. Gareth
Howells, croeso hefyd, fel aelod o grŵp llywio Cymru
Hanesyddol.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Great. Thank you very much for that clarification and
congratulations on your promotion. Gareth Howells, welcome to you
too, as a member of the Historic Wales steering group.
|
|
[5]
Felly, diolch am ddod i mewn atom
heddiw. Rwy’n credu bod Aelodau’r Cynulliad wedi dangos
cryn ddiddordeb yn y maes yma. Rŷch chi wedi bod yn edrych ar drafodaethau yn y
gorffennol. Felly, rydym ni eisiau gofyn cwestiwn cychwynnol: fel
rŷch chi wedi deall, rydym wedi cael cyfarwyddwr cyffredinol
yr amgueddfa genedlaethol i mewn i drafod Cymru Hanesyddol, yn y
gorffennol. Roedd e’n dweud bod llunio adroddiad PwC
yn broblematig iawn. Nid oedd dim
agenda na chofnodion ar gyfer y cyfarfodydd yn gyffredinol, ac nid
oedd digon o gyfle i gyfrannu at y strwythur hwnnw. A ydy
hynny’n rhywbeth yr ydych chi fel Ysgrifennydd Cabinet yn ei
gydnabod, neu a ydych chi’n gallu rhoi esboniad i ni
o’r broses er mwyn inni ddeall pam yr oedd gan David Anderson
y farn honno ar y pryd pan ddaeth i mewn i roi tystiolaeth ger ein
bron?
|
So, thank you for joining us
today. I think that Assembly Members have been very interested in
this area. You have been looking at discussions in the past. We
want to ask an initial question: as you will be aware, we’ve
had the director-general of the national museum in in the past to
discuss Historic Wales. He said that drawing up the PwC report was very problematic. There was
often no agenda or minutes for the meetings, and there wasn’t
sufficient opportunity for stakeholders to contribute. Is that
something that you, as a Cabinet Secretary, recognise, or can you
give some explanation of the process so that we can understand why
David Anderson expressed those concerns when he gave evidence
before us?
|
|
[6]
Ken Skates: Thank you, Chair. I’m delighted to be able
to join you today for an update on progress that’s been made
in the heritage sector.
|
|
[7]
Can I just clarify what particular piece of work you’re
referring to? Is it the PwC—[Interruption.] Right.
Okay, the PwC piece of work. I know that Baroness Randerson
operates in a collegiate manner, and I don’t recognise those
concerns that were expressed. The PwC work was carried out by
experts. There were a number of people who formed the stakeholder
group. A large number of organisations were engaged with during the
course of the report, and everybody concerned with the report had
an opportunity to comment on the recommendations and the content of
it. So, I don’t necessarily recognise those concerns that
were expressed. Indeed, I’d like to put on record my thanks
to Baroness Randerson for the collegiate manner in which she
conducted the work that led to the publication of that particular
report.
|
|
[8]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ocê. A ydych chi fel
Ysgrifennydd Cabinet, felly, wedi cwrdd â chyfarwyddwr yr
amgueddfa i drafod y materion yma? Oherwydd, yn sicr, nid yw
amdanaf i’n cytuno â beth yr oedd e’n ei ddweud;
fe oedd yn dweud bod y problemau yma wedi dod gerbron, a fe a oedd
wedi dweud hynny wrthym ni fel pwyllgor. Felly, a ydych chi wedi
trafod y materion hynny i geisio mynd i’r afael
â’r sefyllfa?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Have you, as Cabinet Secretary, met with the
director of the national museum to discuss these issues? Because
it’s not a matter for me to agree or disagree with what he
said, but he did identify these problems and he told us that as a
committee. So, have you discussed those concerns and tried to get
to grips with that situation?
|
|
[9]
Ken Skates: I should just point out as well that the report
was endorsed by every member of the stakeholder group, which
included David Anderson from National Museum Wales. So, the report
and its contents and recommendations were endorsed by the director
general. I meet regularly with the president and the director
general of the museum. We discuss a various range of concerns.
It’s my belief that this matter has been resolved. I’ll
ask Jason to come in to talk about communications at an executive
level, but we’re at the position now where we have a
strategic partnership formed, making good progress off the back of
what has been an extensive amount of work and research and
engagement. And I’m confident that we are now in a far
stronger position to build a heritage sector that is resilient,
that is sustainable, that is building a wider range of
opportunities to lever in income to ensure that more can be
reinvested back into the sector. But these concerns that have been
expressed, as I say, have, I believe, been resolved, been dealt
with. But, ultimately, every person on that stakeholder group
endorsed that report. But I’ll bring in Jason to talk about
communications at an executive level.
|
|
[10]
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. We meet regularly
at an executive level. Obviously, myself, with the new role, but,
obviously, previously, with my role as deputy director of Cadw. For
the museums and libraries division, I meet with David on a very
regular basis, and, indeed, with the president at the museum. There
are also formal six-monthly meetings between the president and the
Cabinet Secretary.
|
|
[11]
I think the points that you raised in your question, they do revert
back to a sort of different period, when we were working on the
Randerson report, and maybe there was perhaps a case where David
was concerned about the pace at which that steering group
progressed. When we moved to the next stage, when the Cabinet
Secretary announced the steering group to implement the findings of
the PwC report, I did discuss with David on a regular basis perhaps
where his concerns were about that pace, and then the way the
steering group was then assembled for the next phase, we took on
board perhaps some of his concerns and you’ll see from the
next phase about how that operated.
|
|
[12]
Ken Skates: And as far as I’m aware, minutes were
taken and there were agendas. I think I’m correct in saying
that. I wasn’t part of the stakeholder group, but PwC and
Baroness Randerson conducted themselves exceptionally well, in my
understanding.
|
|
[13]
Bethan Jenkins: That would have been the—. Through
Baroness Randerson would have been the only way by which people
would have been able to engage. What I understood was, obviously,
the PricewaterhouseCoopers’ report was a report in and of
itself, and then Jenny Randerson had her own group. So, I think
there’s been a misunderstanding, potentially. I think lots of
people think—the public—that it was her report. I just
need that clarified.
|
|
[14]
Ken Skates: Well, all of the work was peer reviewed by
Baroness Randerson, who engaged with the stakeholder group and
ensured that members of that stakeholder group were content with
the report. As I’ve already said, all members of that
stakeholder group endorsed the report. I think it’s also fair
to say that, as a consequence of that report, the steering group
that was put together shortly afterwards was done in an inclusive,
open and transparent way, with an independent chair, with all notes
circulated for approval, all minutes taken, and that steering group
has also produced an outstanding piece of work.
|
|
[15]
Bethan Jenkins: Okay, thanks. Dawn Bowden.
|
|
[16]
Dawn Bowden: Yes, thank you, Chair. I think, Ken,
you’ve probably answered the question, but what I was trying
to establish really was how the stakeholder views were actually
incorporated into the PwC report and the subsequent work that
you’ve done. You’ve explained a process that is perhaps
a little bit different from some of the evidence that we’ve
had previously, but I take your word for what you’re saying.
But it’s just really how the stakeholders’ views were
taken on board: have they been incorporated, and where they
haven’t been, have those stakeholders been notified that they
haven’t been?
|
|
[17]
Ken Skates: Essentially, it goes back to the very point that
all stakeholders endorsed the report—
|
|
[18]
Dawn Bowden: They endorsed it, yes.
|
|
[19]
Ken Skates:—and Baroness Randerson worked tirelessly
to peer review that report and to engage with stakeholders. So,
I’m content that all stakeholders were engaged with properly.
PwC carried out numerous interviews with stakeholders—not
just with those who formally sit on the group, but with other
stakeholders, which included representatives from the Welsh Local
Government Association, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media
and Sport, Historic Scotland, and numerous other organisations
outside of Wales as well as inside Wales. So, that piece of work
was absolutely thorough and peer reviewed by Baroness Randerson in
a very, very comprehensive way and endorsed by every member of that
stakeholder group.
|
|
[20]
Dawn Bowden: Can I move you on then to the future of
Cadw?
|
|
[21]
Ken Skates: Yes.
|
|
[22]
Dawn Bowden: We’ve seen your preferred option for the
future of Cadw, and you’re going to be looking at bringing
that forward by September this year. So, are you on track to do
that? Perhaps you can tell us a bit about the work that
you’ve done since the recommendations were published in
February up to now—where you’re at with that.
|
|
[23]
Ken Skates: Okay. I think it’s fair to say one of the
reasons that Jason was promoted was his outstanding work in driving
up income numbers and visitor numbers at Cadw sites. Last year was
a record year, again capitalising on the Year of Adventure. This
year being the Year of Legends, there are huge opportunities for
the historic environment as well.
|
|
[24]
We’ve seen a record number of members join Cadw and I think
it’s something in the region of 43 per cent of schools that
now visit Cadw sites are from deprived areas. That demonstrates how
Cadw has reached out in a way that is admirable. I think that
showcases the fantastic historic assets that we’ve got around
Wales, not just for people who have visited in the past, but for
people who have never visited before.
|
|
[25]
So, Cadw is in a strong position now, but I wish to see its
performance improve still further. I wish to see it generate more
income from sales of goods and from membership and from entry
charges. Yes, we put up entry charges at a number of the sites this
year. Some people believed that that would impact adversely on
visitor numbers—it didn’t. Visitor numbers still went
up further and, at the same time, we were able to offer more
opportunities for free entry through schemes such as Open
Doors.
|
|
[26]
An extensive amount of work has been carried out within Government.
A project team has been formed to bring together a business case
that looks at all options, and I’m confident that they will
bring that work to me by September of this year.
|
|
[27]
Dawn Bowden: You’re still moving towards Cadw becoming
either a charitable body or something that sits slightly outside of
Government.
|
|
[28]
Ken Skates: The business case will, based on best practice,
offer up an analysis, an appraisal, of all options available, and
then what I’ll do is take it to Cabinet for determination.
What I’m determined to do is to make sure that Cadw has
sufficient freedom and flexibility to be able to operate as we know
it truly can.
|
|
09:45
|
|
[29]
Perhaps if I can give an example of some of the constraints on Cadw
at the moment; it might serve to highlight why I think this work is
absolutely necessary. In this age of social media, I think
it’s important that you can tweet innocent things. But, with
it being in the position it is, if we wish to tweet about something
from the Cadw Twitter account, it has to come to me for approval.
Now, that does not really play to the way that people operate in
the modern world. There are constraints and limitations in other
ways as well with, for example, procurement and so forth. I think
there are huge opportunities to do more for the people of Wales;
more opportunities for Cadw and the experts who are there to work
with experts in other national institutions for the benefit of all;
and, crucially, more opportunities to better promote the historic
environment as a whole.
|
|
[30]
Chair, it concerns me that a considerable number of Members are new
to the Assembly in this fifth Assembly, and I’m not sure
whether they have had an opportunity yet to look at the work that
was conducted in the fourth Assembly by the committee that was
succeeded by this. That seminal report on the historic environment
is incredibly important. It provides, if you like, the landscape
against which a huge amount of work has been carried out. I do have
a copy here, and I can actually point to the recommendations in it,
which are very important. This was an extensive piece of work. It
was agreed by all parties. Some of the recommendations include,
recommendation 10:
|
|
[31]
‘The Welsh Government should put in place mechanisms to
ensure better collaboration in promoting the historic
environment.’
|
|
[32]
Recommendation 11:
|
|
[33]
‘The Welsh Government should explore options to transfer the
responsibility for promoting local authority sites to
Cadw.’
|
|
[34]
That was a pretty major recommendation—an extraordinary
recommendation—but you can see the ambition that was present
in that committee at the time, and the determination to see
everyone in the historic environment sector work more closely and
collaboratively. Recommendation 12:
|
|
[35]
‘The Welsh Government should explore the possibility of
establishing a national membership-based heritage organisation, in
order to promote historic sites.’
|
|
[36]
Again, it is the idea of bringing all in the historic environment
together to better promote the historic environment and drive up
visitor numbers and to drive up active participation. Finally,
recommendation 14:
|
|
[37]
‘The Welsh Government should explore the possibility of
establishing a representative umbrella body, such as English
heritage, to represent non-Government organisations in the third
and private sectors.’
|
|
[38]
Again, I think Members can appreciate how the work that has been
carried out subsequently refers back to this committee report,
which, as I said, was agreed by all members of that committee.
Often, Ministers are criticised for not taking forward committee
recommendations and for not paying due regard to the work of
Assembly committees. I think that what we have done demonstrates
that we have given considerable energy to this particular area of
work, and that we are determined, where we can, to meet those
recommendations.
|
|
[39]
Bethan Jenkins: Okay, moving swiftly on: Lee Waters.
|
|
[40]
Lee Waters: You’ve spoken approvingly a number of
times about Cadw’s performance—the Twitter matter
notwithstanding. Is one of the options that you are considering
keeping Cadw within Government in some way?
|
|
[41]
Ken Skates: There would have to be significant reshaping of
Cadw, I think, in order to ensure that it can operate to the best
of its ability if it was to stay in Government, but that will be
captured within the work that’s being undertaken by the
project team, and it will be captured in the business case as well.
We will be informed by what’s best for Cadw and what’s
best for the historic environment as a whole.
|
|
[42]
Lee Waters: So, what’s going to be your benchmark?
What criteria are you going to use to judge the best way
forward?
|
|
[43]
Ken Skates: We are going to look at best practice and judge
from examples elsewhere what would be best for Wales. I would like
a unique Welsh solution. However, I think we do need to ensure that
we pay due regard to the successes and failures in other parts of
the UK and beyond. Jason can probably give an indication of the
work that’s taken place thus far in bringing together the
various options into a business case.
|
|
[44]
Mr Thomas: Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. There has been a
project board that’s been set up within the department to
take all this work forward. I think it’s worth giving, if
possible, a little bit of context, as well, over the last two
years, which is going to inform the work of the project board now
up until the end of September. Cadw is performing extremely well
now in terms of the income that it’s generating, but I do
believe there are limitations to what we can achieve, necessarily,
within Government. The work of the project board’s going to
look in and test that as far as it could possibly go. We have
explored as many freedoms that could possibly exist within
Government to operate, but ultimately, and I can say this with a
lot of experience now, it’s like running a business from
within Government, and that does create some tensions. So, this is
the work of the project board now to see whether or not those
tensions can be resolved to allow the organisation to grow even
further within Government or if a different model is more
appropriate to go forward.
|
|
[45]
Ken Skates: I think it’s worth saying as well that if
we look right across the UK there has been reorganisation and
reform in England and in Scotland that we can learn from. There has
been no such reform in Wales to date and I think the time has come
to ensure that we have a greater degree of collaboration across the
sector and to do more to raise income from other sources, other
than Government. I think many institutions in Wales rely more
heavily on Government money than elsewhere in the UK.
|
|
[46]
Lee Waters: I understand that, but the steering committee
report set out a couple of options: a charitable body or an
executive agency. You’ve just said that remaining within
Government in some form is also an option. I’m still not very
clear on the basis on which you’re going to make the judgment
of the best way forward.
|
|
[47]
Ken Skates: On what would work best, and that will be
determined by best practice.
|
|
[48]
Lee Waters: What works best in what way?
|
|
[49]
Ken Skates: In terms of being able to run a sustainable
operation, increase visitor numbers, increase income.
|
|
[50]
Lee Waters: The current model’s done that.
|
|
[51]
Ken Skates: The current model is doing that but it could do
better. It could do far better, and I think, again, it’s
probably worth looking back at the previous Assembly and the work
of a previous committee to assess and to compare visitor numbers
and income levels across the heritage sector—sites across the
heritage sector against similar sites elsewhere in the UK. What
it’ll show, what it’ll demonstrate, is that whilst Cadw
is performing well, whilst figures are rising, they could and
should be further improved and the question for us in Government
is: how can we raise aspirations and improve performance still
further? So, that business plan will take account of best practice
elsewhere, and our decision will be based on what is best for Cadw
in terms of improving income generation, improving visitor numbers
and also reaching out to as many people as possible. But that issue
can be dealt with as well through other interventions, such as the
Fusion programme.
|
|
[52]
Lee Waters: So, the primary benchmarks are the commercial
ones, are they?
|
|
[53]
Ken Skates: Visitor numbers and commercial.
|
|
[54]
Lee Waters: Right, so those are the two keystones
you’re looking at to judge what the model is.
|
|
[55]
Ken Skates: And sustainability as well, because I think
it’s also important to look at where reform has taken place
and hasn’t produced what was desired. But you’re right,
on the primary benchmarks we’ll be looking at commercial
potential, we’ll be looking at engagement, visitor numbers
and membership numbers and sustainability as well.
|
|
[56]
Lee Waters: Right, and you’re clear, are you, that a
model of governance has a direct correlation to achievement in
those three areas, are you?
|
|
[57]
Ken Skates: It largely does, but there are other initiatives
and interventions that can enhance performance as well. I’ve
already mentioned the Fusion programme. The ability of
organisations and institutions to take advantage of other funding
opportunities such as trusts, foundations—commercial
activities are not alone but trusts and foundations—but the
issue there is that you have to have the capacity within an
organisation to be able to draw down, often, the large sums from
trusts and foundations that have been drawn down elsewhere. In
order to get to that level of capacity you have to be able to pay
your way, and that often means that you have to generate income in
order to build up the expertise to become more sustainable.
|
|
[58]
Lee Waters: As part of your assessment, are you considering
potential mergers with other heritage bodies?
|
|
[59]
Ken Skates: I think we’re in a good place right now
with the progress that’s being made in terms of
collaboration, but if progress stalls, we need to keep all options
on the table, including a merger. I think it’s essential that
we do not take our foot off the gas as far as this area of work is
concerned. We need, also, to reflect on the fact that,
unfortunately, it looks like we will have a continued period of
austerity, and, I’m sure as all Members are aware, there are
calls for increased funding for all public and third sector
organisations, set against a backdrop of diminishing public
resource. It’s very difficult to say when we would be in a
position as a Government to increase considerably, because a lot of
the organisations that we’re talking about require
considerable increases in resource in order to get them through
what is a difficult period. And so, I’d be failing in my duty
if I didn’t take forward work that would ultimately lead to
sustainability rather than hope for an end to austerity and
for—
|
|
[60]
Lee Waters: We’re expecting this decision within the
next two months, aren’t we? Do you have a clear view, now,
whether or not Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical
Monuments of Wales, for example, would be a potential merger for
Cadw by the time you make that decision?
|
|
[61]
Ken Skates: I think that question has been dealt with on
numerous occasions, where we said the question of merger with Cadw
is not one that we’re going to revisit.
|
|
[62]
Lee Waters: Okay. All right, thank you.
|
|
[63]
Bethan Jenkins:
Byddai jest yn ddiddorol i glywed
barn Gareth Howells yn hynny o beth, o ran eich barn chi
ynglŷn â’r hyn sydd yn digwydd nawr gyda’r
Llywodraeth o ran datblygu’r gwaith busnes, a sylwad yn
benodol gan y Gweinidog sydd yn dweud, ‘Wel, mae’r
merger dal ar y bwrdd.’ Beth yw barn y grŵp
llywio yn hynny o beth?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: It would be interesting to hear Gareth Howells’s
view in that regard, in terms of your view on what’s
happening now with Government, in terms of developing the business
case and the particular comment from the Minister saying that the
merger is still on the table. What’s the view of the steering
group on that?
|
|
[64]
Mr Howells: Wel, o ran yr
undebau, roedd yr undebau yn anhapus ynglŷn â’r
syniad bod y cyrff yn mynd i fod yn rhan o un corff ar draws y
sector, so fe wnaethom ni esbonio’n glir, ac roedd staff yr
undebau â’r rheolwyr yn y cyrff yn unfrydol nad oedden
nhw eisiau hynny i ddigwydd. Dyna beth oedd yn bwysig, ac fe gawsom
ni gyfarfod efo’r Ysgrifennydd Cabinet, ac fe wnaeth e gytuno
bod angen teimladau’r staff, so rwy’n credu roedd hynny
yn bwysig.
|
Mr Howells: Well, in terms of the
unions, the unions were not content with the idea of merger across
the sector, so we clearly explained that position, and the staff,
the unions and the managers within the organisations were unanimous
that they didn’t want to see that happening. We did have a
meeting with the Cabinet Secretary, and he agreed that staff
feelings needed to be taken into account.
|
|
[65]
Bethan Jenkins: Ond rydych chi
newydd glywed nad yw uno off y bwrdd, felly beth yw eich
barn chi o glywed hynny y bore yma?
|
Bethan Jenkins: But
you’ve just heard that merger is not off the table, so
what’s your view in hearing that this morning?
|
|
[66]
Mr Howells: Wel, fe wnâi droi i’r Saesneg, os yw
hynny’n gyfleus, jest i esbonio’n fwy eglur.
|
Mr Howells: Well, I’ll turn to
English, if that’s okay
by you, just to explain that.
|
|
[67]
We accept that we’re in a difficult financial position. There
have been issues in the organisations where I think there have been
issues around capacity and capability. I think, from our point of
view, where there’s an option of strategic partnerships,
where there’s an option of collaboration—. I’ll
give you an example that was brought to my attention yesterday, for
example. You’re aware that the royal commission is co-located
with the National Library in Aberystwyth, and I was with some
colleagues yesterday, and they are now working together in
developing a programme for the commission’s staff to learn
Welsh. Now, that’s one example. We are looking at other areas
of collaboration, but the issue is if we cannot collaborate—.
Well, I can understand we’re in a challenging environment; we
don’t want a merger—let’s be quite
clear—but I think if I was sitting where the Cabinet
Secretary is, with the challenges, I can well understand that
he’s not going to rule that out as an option. But I think
from the staff’s point of view, and the organisation’s,
our preferred option is retained independence, and I
think—
|
|
[68]
Bethan Jenkins: But at what point would you say—sorry,
I’ll come to Suzy—at what point would you say that that
would be an acceptable change of direction, therefore? So,
you’re saying collaboration on some things is working now. At
what point would it take for that collaboration to say,
‘Well, actually, it’s gone as far as it can and we need
to consider merger.’
|
|
[69]
Mr Howells: If there was a failure. If the collaborative
approach we’re trying to develop through the new strategic
partnership group—if that failed to deliver, well, I think if
I was sitting where the Cabinet Secretary was, I’d be quite
clearly asking the questions, ‘Well, this clearly isn’t
working and we have to look at other options.’ And I can
understand that, but I think the important point from our point of
view, and what, I think, has been a lesson when we developed the
Historic Wales road map, I think what was interesting was there was
a clear—. Initially, there were some reservations, worrying
what the final agenda was, but there was a clear understanding by
the four bodies involved—Cadw, the national library, museum
and commission, as well as the trade unions recognising the
staff—that there was a golden opportunity to develop a joint
approach that would benefit not just the institutions,
but—the important one for the trade unions—the staff
who actually make up the institutions and are the people who
actually deliver. Because I’ve always made the point in these
institutions that the staff who are working there—they
don’t see it as a job, it’s a vocation. If we see the
commitment and the passion they’ve got, and the difficult and
challenging times there have been over the last number of years,
these people are still committed to the organisations continuing in
existence, to delivering in the sector in Wales, and they’re
passionate about it. They will not be looking to see this support
failing. I am confident that this is the way forward. If I
didn’t think it was the way forward, I wouldn’t be here
articulating that as a way forward because—I think anybody
why knows me—I’m not someone to nod my head in
agreement to anything if I think it’s not the right thing
forward.
|
|
10:00
|
|
[70]
Ken Skates: Absolutely. And collaboration has been talked of
for years. You only need to go through the evidence that was given
in the last inquiry. It was talked of for years, wasn’t
delivered, we need the courage to see it through this time. And
where we are right now, it’s positive, it’s good. We
cannot take our foot off the gas.
|
|
[71]
Bethan Jenkins: Okay, thanks.
|
|
[72]
Suzy Davies: At the risk of sounding like this is repeated
questioning, can you just clarify this for me? You said, in
response to Lee’s question, that merger of the commission and
other bodies isn’t off the table for the reasons you’ve
articulated. But did you also say that merging with Cadw is
something that you’re not going to revisit?
|
|
[73]
Ken Skates: I think we have to keep that option on the
table—
|
|
[74]
Suzy Davies: Right, okay. I misheard you.
|
|
[75]
Ken Skates: Okay, yes.
|
|
[76]
Suzy Davies: All right, that’s fine. I just wanted to
ask you about the strategic partnership group now. It’s been
going since April. What’s it done?
|
|
[77]
Ken Skates: Gareth can—[Inaudible.]
|
|
[78]
Suzy Davies: Apart from ‘extensive’ and
‘engage’, can you tell me exactly what it’s
done?
|
|
[79]
Ken Skates: Yes, it’s met, it’s engaging
with stakeholders—
|
|
[80]
Mr Howells: Yes. We had our first meeting on 25 May. What
happened was that the decision was made that there would be joint
chairs: myself and Christopher Catling from the royal commission.
It’s the heads of the institutions, so it’s obviously
Chris from the commission, there was David Anderson from the
museum, Linda Tomos from the library, myself, my colleague Shavanah
Taj from Public and Commercial Services Union and Paul Neilson from
the Association of FDA, and Jason, then, was leading from Cadw.
What we’ve decided—. The way we’re going to
approach it is that we said that we had terms of reference, which
was that we were looking to work collaboratively, and the words
that we used were that, ‘The terms of reference were drafted
in the spirit of a voluntary coming together of partners on issues
they wanted to work on collaboratively.’ So, that was the
approach.
|
|
[81]
What we’re looking to do, based on the recommendations in
Justin Albert’s group—that was the predecessor
group—what was agreed was that we would take the principles
there about how we were going to move forward and we were going to
set up sub-groups. So, for example, Chris Catling and I are
actually meeting tomorrow to look at developing a strategy on
skills. Because obviously we’ve had issues where we’ve
had cuts in the organisations, we’ve had a number of skill
areas that have disappeared, and the concern is that we need to
look at what are the options available for trying to redress that
skill gap that’s in the organisation. So, we’re looking
at that, and we’re actually, in the process, working across
the sector—there’s a questionnaire, which we’d be
happy to share with you, which is asking the institutions,
‘What are the issues around skills?’, ‘Why have
you lost the skills?’, ‘Why is it that you are unable
to replace the skills? Is it, for example, an issue around the
skills not being available, or you cannot recruit, or is it an
issue that the terms and conditions that have been offered
aren’t attractive to draw people in?’ So, we were
looking at things there. That’s one example that I’m
specifically developing.
|
|
[82]
Suzy Davies: Okay, well can I ask you, just on that skills
thing, without going on a tangent too much? I mean, one of the
reasons this is on the table at all is for more visitors to walk
through doors, from different backgrounds, and for more money to be
made. So, what skills are you looking at? Is it about commercial
development or is it about conservation, preservation and so
on?
|
|
[83]
Mr Howells: Yes, for example, there’s an issue
around—. We’re developing a food strategy—. The
museum has put forward an idea about working on a food strategy.
That’s one example. So, there will be areas there where
they’ll be looking to see what skills can be utilised
there—of course, marketing, et cetera. I’m specifically
talking about areas where you’ve got archivists, curators and
specialist skills in these areas, which, you know, we need to
retain and we need to develop, because that’s the problem. A
lot of the arguments that the staff are saying is that the
exhibitions that are produced and that people attend aren’t
just magicked out of the air; you’ve got to do the
research.
|
|
[84]
Suzy Davies: No, I understand that.
|
|
[85]
Mr Howells: I don’t need to tell you that, but I think
there’s a perception—. I don’t think we want to
turn these institutions into Welsh Disneyland. We want something a
bit more valuable that recognises the importance of the sector. I
think that’s what we’re looking at. We want to work
with the institutions—with the management of the
institutions. The relationship in the past has been challenging.
Now, I think, there’s a recognition that we’re all in
this together, so to speak, and we’ve got to survive
together.
|
|
[86]
Suzy Davies: Okay—
|
|
[87]
Bethan Jenkins: Sorry, Suzy, Jason Thomas wanted
to—
|
|
[88]
Suzy Davies: Okay, because I want to get to the nub of this,
if I can.
|
|
[89]
Mr Thomas: Just to say there’s so much commonality
between the institutions on a number of different skill fronts.
Just one example: within Cadw, we’ve got an in-house
conservation team who are just absolutely renowned, top of their
craft—take stonemasons, for example—but we’ve got
an ageing workforce. We’ve got a team of around 30 there, and
we’re looking at succession planning now. The benefit of this
partnership is, when we’re talking through these issues and
similar issues in the museum, rather than just do our own thing, we
can look at whether there is a shared apprenticeship programme that
we can do via the partnership. There are really exciting things
that we can do on that. That’s just a benefit—one
benefit immediately from coming together and talking about it.
|
|
[90]
Suzy Davies: Okay. Well, let me be a bit more to the point,
then. By December, what is it that you will have achieved that will
persuade the Cabinet Secretary that you’ve done enough on the
collaboration agenda to at least knock into the long grass
questions of a merger?
|
|
[91]
Ken Skates: I think the progress that’s being made at
the moment is good. I am content with the progress that’s
been made in this very short time, but I want to make sure that the
pace of the progress is maintained so that, on the skills front,
for example, we do move to a position where we can identify
opportunities, fill gaps and actually make sure that there is a
succession plan in place. On the food strategy, I’d like to
see Cadw take advantage of the expertise within the national
museum, and likewise the library too. Then I’d like to move
on to other areas of collaboration in terms of promotion, in terms
of being able to promote one another’s assets across all of
the heritage sites, and also to determine how we can reach out to
more people. I’d like an action plan of sorts for how we can
reach out to people who have not been engaged in the heritage
sector to date. To do that—to really reach out and to bring
in people who have never visited a castle, never visited a museum,
or have rarely done so—requires concerted effort and a
collaborative approach, and I think that will be a key piece of
work for the strategic partnership to take forward.
|
|
[92]
Suzy Davies: Okay. Well, I think we all accept the
collaborative approach argument is just exactly what that
report’s going to look like in December. But before that, I
want to know what it’s going to look like at an interim stage
in September as well because, by then, you’ll have to make a
decision on whether Cadw is coming out of the Government.
Obviously, there will be an extra impetus on Cadw coming out of the
Government to have the freedom to merge in the future. If, by
September, you haven’t had a really good steer from the
strategic partnership that they can get the collaborative agenda
together, if you like, what will you be expecting from them by
September?
|
|
[93]
Ken Skates: That’s a really good question, because the
timings don’t match up perfectly here, given that the
strategic partnership has only been in operation for a short period
of time, and that the business plan will be brought to me in
September. What I’m looking for is a genuine and demonstrable
commitment to take forward collaboration, and I’d like to
see, from the strategic partnership, that commitment—which is
undeniable, which is led over the course of the next two months or
so—to change being implemented and with a plan for taking
forward further work at pace in the autumn. I think that will be
able to contribute to the decision that we make on the future of
Cadw.
|
|
[94]
Suzy Davies: Okay. Just finally, if that’s okay, Mr
Thomas, you’re obviously on the strategic partnership and
also on the project board for Cadw. Are you wearing two hats in
these meetings? I’m just wondering if you’re the voice
between the two organisations. Otherwise I’d like to know how
often those two boards have met.
|
|
[95]
Mr Thomas: Well, with the promotion on Monday, I’ve
got to work—
|
|
[96]
Suzy Davies: Oh, apologies—it’s that fast.
|
|
[97]
Mr Thomas: No, that’s okay. Yes, we work pretty
quickly. I’ll now become the chair of the project board for
Cadw because the person who was doing it on an interim basis has
now moved on, obviously. Personally, I think there’s enormous
value in me continuing to be the representative of the Welsh
Government on the strategic partnership, going forward. Could I
just add one bit of context? Lee mentioned this earlier on about
the metrics for looking at what’s going to be successful in
all of this. I just want to give you a flavour for the numbers in
Cadw, because they’re really stark to me. I come with a bit
of a commercial background, and what’s going to judge whether
this is going to work or not—. To run Cadw is around the
£20 million, and that’s everything from the
conservation side and the historic environment side to managing all
the monuments, and we manage 129 monuments. If you go back three
years ago, and then for a period of 10 years before that, the
income of Cadw was pretty flat. It was generally around £5
million a year income. Then the net position, the remaining
£15 million—because the conservation requirement
hasn’t really changed over hundreds of years and some of our
buildings have been there 900 years—the net position on
Government was to fund that £15 million. So, what we’ve
had to do over the last couple of years because of austerity and
because revenue budgets have been so challenging is: by raising the
income level, the net position of the Government is reduced, and as
the Cabinet Secretary outlines, that position—we’ve
just got to keep going with that. The more we can increase income
for Cadw, the better the net position the Government has to put in
to run it. And it’s similar for the other
institutions—
|
|
[98]
Suzy Davies: Yes, well, I’m not the one you need to persuade
on that. But the same will apply to the other organisations,
and it’s—
|
|
[99]
Mr Thomas: That’s it, and—
|
|
[100]
Suzy Davies: It’s spreading culture, rather than a taking
over completely.
|
|
[101]
Mr Thomas: Yes. It’s not the only metric for the other
institutions, because there are four work streams at the
partnership: commercial is one; skills; we’ve talked about
back office functions—but purely on the income side, we have
to demonstrate that we’re improving the net position as a
result of the partnership.
|
|
[102]
Suzy Davies: I understand that. Thank you.
|
|
[103]
Bethan Jenkins:
Okay. We have to move on. Neil
Hamilton.
|
|
[104]
Neil Hamilton: In answer to Lee Waters earlier on you made what I
thought was a bold assertion that visitor numbers and commercial
success are directly related to proposals for governance of these
institutions, and you compared the experience in England with what
we’ve had in Wales. Last September, at the time of your
announcement, you said that the proposals that you had in mind were
broadly comparable to what had happened in England and Scotland.
Could you actually tell us what changes have taken place in England
and Scotland that have motivated you to—?
|
|
[105]
Ken Skates: I think I said that change is needed in Wales in a
similar way that we’ve seen in Scotland and England, and that
change has been for the benefit of the entire heritage sector in
Scotland and England. The changes are actually captured in the PwC
report, and it’s worth the committee taking a close look at
them because they have helped to inform the work that we’ve
done. But, as I said earlier, I’d like a solution
that’s based on the current situation in Wales, rather than
just adopting a change programme from Scotland, from England or,
for that matter, from anywhere else. But the changes that have
taken place in Scotland and England have seen, to some degree,
mergers, and in other areas we’ve seen responsibilities
shifted to a new organisation. And that’s precisely what we
are, with the work that Jason is leading on, reviewing at the
moment.
|
|
[106]
Neil Hamilton: I can see that there are opportunities for
administrative cost savings and so on, but fundamentally,
doesn’t the success of any organisation ultimately depend
upon the qualities of leadership of those who are driving
it?
|
|
[107]
Ken Skates: You’re absolutely right. It’s about
getting the right people on the bus, so to speak. It’s about
knowing your hedgehog, that what you offer is unique, and
it’s also about facing the brutal facts. The brutal fact for
the historic environment sector is that in an age of austerity you
cannot continue to rely on increasing public money—you have
to find another way of generating revenue. Income is crucial, and
therefore getting the right leadership with the determination to
generate greater income is absolutely crucial. That can require a
governance change, and that’s why I said to Lee Waters that,
in the case of the heritage sector, and specifically Cadw, I think
we do need to consider governance against the potential to raise
income levels.
|
|
[108]
Neil Hamilton: And you said in that statement last September that
you wanted to bring together the commercial functions of Cadw and
Amgueddfa Cymru. Do you think that the steering committee’s
proposal for a steering partnership is consistent with what you
were expecting to bring about?
|
|
[109]
Ken Skates: I think so,
yes, but it’s going to
depend on what the outcomes are. So far we’ve heard about a
food strategy that could be developed. Now, that’s really
exciting. I’ll give credit to the museum—I think their
food and drinks offer is superb. What they do on that front, if we
could replicate that across other institutions and across Cadw
sites, I think that would have huge benefit for the sector. So,
I’m pretty satisfied with the work that’s being taken
forward. What I’d wish to see in the coming months is some
implementation of the aspirations and the plans, because as
I’ve said repeatedly now, I really do feel that we have to
move at pace in terms of collaboration. There have been too many
instances in the past where collaborative efforts have ground to a
halt because there hasn’t been the energy to maintain
them.
|
|
10:15
|
|
[110]
Neil Hamilton: Okay.
|
|
[111]
Bethan Jenkins:
Are you done?
|
|
[112]
Neil Hamilton: Yes.
|
|
[113]
Bethan Jenkins:
Okay. Diolch yn fawr iawn. Jeremy
Miles.
|
|
[114] Jeremy
Miles: Thank you. There’s a bit of a risk, as with all
things, that there’s an institutional solution to what is a
behavioural challenge, if you like.
|
|
[115] Ken
Skates: Yes.
|
|
[116] Jeremy
Miles: Can I just stay on the point that Neil Hamilton was
raising about the issue of commercial functions? It seems to me
that there’s a range of things that the strategic partnership
is seeking to do, and you’ve described, Mr Howells, some of
them, which are around skills and effectively operational issues,
if you like. What assurance can you give that the right level of
focus will be given to what is quite a separate issue, really,
which is the generation of revenue? Because we have a mammoth
funding issue coming down the path. It’s important that
that’s in the mix as well. Are you comfortable that
there’s appropriate focus being given on that aspect?
|
|
[117] Ken
Skates: Well, that’s one of the work streams of the
strategic partnership. Gareth can probably highlight with greater
insight than me the degree to which the focus has been on that, but
my impression is that raising commercial income is a priority for
the strategic partnership and for everybody involved in it.
|
|
[118] Mr
Howells: Yes, it is, and just to hark back to one of the
earlier points that were made, when you were asking about how we
were looking to demonstrate that things are going forward, I think
one of the key points that we all made in the first meeting was
that we’d try to have some quick wins. Because if we were
going to demonstrate that this was going to work, we had to show
there were going to be quick wins, right? So, for example, with the
food strategy, there’s a group that’s going to get
together between the museum and Cadw, and they’re looking at
it there. There will obviously be some work streams that
will—. You know, we’re strategic; we’re
over—
|
|
[119] Jeremy
Miles: Can I just pause you on that? Because that’s one
of the issues, really, isn’t it? You’ve described the
composition of the board, which has the senior leaders of each
organisation, but on some of these issues, really, the people on
the front line are probably the right mix of people to be having
the discussion with.
|
|
[120] Mr
Howells: We are setting up work streams, and it’s been
made clear that the work streams that are being set up must involve
the people who are actually delivering on these functions. Because
at the end of the day, I am not an IT expert. I’m not an
expert on finance or food strategy. There are people in each of the
organisations that have those skills.
|
|
[121] Ken
Skates: Absolutely.
|
|
[122] Jeremy
Miles: So, just in terms of giving more
description—because you’ve said there’ll be a
review of the performance of the strategic partnership after two
years, I think—within that period, is it intended, or does it
currently have a budget that the individual organisations are
committing to the work of the partnership?
|
|
[123] Ken
Skates: I don’t believe that there is a budget
that’s committed by each of the organisations. This is being
carried out on a project-by-project basis, and any budget
that’s required, I’d imagine, would be found by those
individual institutions. It’s worth just adding to the points
that Gareth made that it’s actually already happening in
terms of engagement. I think I was keen that we all learnt from the
unfortunate industrial action that took place and how we reach
resolution, and resolution was reached by engaging better with
front of house staff in particular, and engaging with the workforce
and the experts who keep these institutions alive.
|
|
[124] Jeremy
Miles: And if one of the things that we’ll be doing is
looking for commercial opportunities for the four institutions or
organisations, there’ll be an element of decision making
around what to do in simple terms—what to back, how to
structure deals, how to contract, whether to do it, how the revenue
is apportioned from any individual deal between the four
organisations that may be contributing different levels of assets
or intellectual property or whatever it is. Has any of that been
worked out at this point in the agreement that set up the
partnership?
|
|
[125] Ken
Skates: I think it’s too early to have determined how
revenue is going to be shared out, but I’m sure that’s
something that can be determined once projects are brought
forward.
|
|
[126] Mr
Howells: We’re at an early stage on some of these things.
If I said we had, I’d be dishonest.
|
|
[127] Jeremy
Miles: I’m just exploring what the—. Because there
are many ways of structuring the kind of commercial arm of these
organisations, and I just want to get a sense of what thinking has
happened to date, really.
|
|
[128] Ken
Skates: I don’t think we can overstate the importance of
marketing, either, and joint marketing efforts. This was something
that was raised repeatedly back in, I think it was, 2013, when the
previous inquiry took place, and there was considerable criticism
of everybody for failing to market the heritage sector in a
joined-up and coherent way, and this criticism came from the
private sector, it came—well, it came from all sectors, and
it’s something that we’re really keen to find solutions
for.
|
|
[129] Jeremy
Miles: So, will you expect to see a plan on issues of budget,
you know, decision-making processes, contracting parties, revenue
portion, by September or December?
|
|
[130] Ken
Skates: Not necessarily by September, I wouldn’t have
thought.
|
|
[131] Jeremy
Miles: Or December, perhaps.
|
|
[132] Ken
Skates: Hopefully, by December, we’d have agreements in
place and budgets and so forth, and actual implementation. As I
said to Suzy Davies, I wish to see implementation take place at
pace, and therefore I’d expect those plans to be developed in
the autumn.
|
|
[133] Jeremy
Miles: Okay. Thank you.
|
|
[134] Bethan
Jenkins: Dai Lloyd.
|
|
[135]
Dai Lloyd: Diolch, Cadeirydd. Wel, ymhellach i hynny, yn
naturiol, rydym ni wedi clywed cryn dipyn o dystiolaeth dros y
misoedd diwethaf, yn sylfaenol bod pawb yn cytuno bod rhagor o
gydweithio ac ati yn mynd i fod o fudd, ac mae pawb yn mynd i
weithio’n galetach er mwyn cyrraedd y nod yna, er bod yna
bethau heb ddigwydd yn y gorffennol, ond gobeithio y bydd pethau yn
newid i’r dyfodol. Ond, wrth gwrs, erys gofid am annibyniaeth
rhai o’r sefydliadau yma, fel yr amgueddfa
genedlaethol—byddwch chi wedi clywed y dadleuon o’r
blaen. Yn y bôn, mae yna gyfraniad unigryw gan Amgueddfa
Genedlaethol Cymru i’n diwylliant ni wedi bod yn hanesyddol.
Nawr, sut y mae hynny’n eistedd efo chi, Ysgrifennydd
Cabinet? Hynny yw, ydy annibyniaeth yr amgueddfa genedlaethol yn
dal i fynd i fod allweddol bwysig, o ystyried ei chyfraniad
hanesyddol i’n cenedl ni dros y blynyddoedd, ac ers lot cyn
i’r Cynulliad yma ddechrau, neu a ydy ystyriaeth ariannol yn
unig yn mynd i feddwl bod y sefydliadau, fel yr amgueddfa
genedlaethol, yn mynd i golli annibyniaeth a bod materion
diwylliannol yn eilradd i faterion ariannol?
|
Dai
Lloyd: Thank you, Chair. And further to that, naturally, we've
heard a great deal of evidence over the past few months, basically
that everyone seems to be agreed that more collaboration will be
beneficial and that everyone will work harder to reach that aim,
although certain things haven’t happened in the past, but
hopefully things will change for the future. But, of course, the
concern remains in terms of the independence of some of these
institutions, such as the national museum—you will have heard
these arguments before. Now, essentially, National Museum Wales
makes a unique contribution to our culture and has done so
historically. So, how does that sit with you, Cabinet Secretary?
That is, is the independence of the national museum still going to
be crucially important, given its historic contribution to our
nation over the years, way before the establishment of this
Assembly, or are financial considerations alone going to mean that
institutions such as the national museum are going to lose that
independence and that cultural issues are secondary to financial
issues?
|
|
[136] Ken
Skates: Can I assure committee that there is no intention to
bring the national museum into Government? There is no intention to
weaken the independence of the museum. There is no attempt to take
control by Government of institutions. On the contrary, all of the
indications that I have given suggest that I’d rather hand
away responsibility and empower our national institutions to become
more effective and to become more sustainable. I don’t think
there is a question, concerning particularly commercial activity,
over whether that would impede the independence of the museum. On
the contrary, the museum has come forward, I understand, with the
food strategy suggestion, and that demonstrates to me a new
determination to collaborate in an area of great importance for the
whole heritage sector.
|
|
[137] Bethan
Jenkins: Lee Waters.
|
|
[138] Lee
Waters: Can I just try and clarify, for my own purposes, the
direction of travel here? Because, on the one hand, you quote
approvingly the report of the former committee on the need for far
greater collaboration. You’ve said we need to move at pace,
and it does seem to me that your personal view is impatient with
the pace of change and the refusal to see the benefits of the
synergies, especially in the age of austerity. On the other hand,
you talk about the importance of independence, and there does seem
to me an unresolved tension between these two sets of ideas. The
report of the steering group talks about developing a joint brand
of Historic Wales. I wonder if you can just tell us your thoughts
about that, because I’m not entirely clear that—. If
this is simply a commercial, back-of-office bringing together of
common activities under one roof to strengthen all the independent
institutions, you don’t need a common brand to do that. But
the common brand is needed if you are going to create a new
organisation that tries to do what the ones currently are.
So—
|
|
[139] Ken
Skates: Or—. Sorry. I think—. If I could take the
question there—. Or if you were going to develop new and
innovative ways of attracting more people to sites. So, for
example, a shared membership system might require a brand that
captures all. What would that brand be? Well, I very much doubt
that the museum would relinquish its brand, and I very much doubt
that Cadw would do so as well without an agreed central brand that
everybody could buy into. So, there is the potential to utilise the
Historic Wales brand or a brand that can be given full
evaluation.
|
|
[140] Lee
Waters: But the report talks about cultural tourism, so
potentially
|
|
[141] ‘Joint
marketing of national campaigns and events, possibly through an
“Historic Wales” brand, working within and as part of a
wider “Visit Wales” brand’.
|
|
[142] Now, the brand
of Visit Wales has had multiple millions of pounds invested over
many years to build it up, and it’s recognised
internationally. Similarly, the national museum and Cadw are
recognised brands. Is it really the best use of resource to start
building up a new brand from scratch when actually what
you’re trying to do is sensible back-of-house synergies? Do
you need a brand to do that when there are much stronger existing
brands?
|
|
[143] Ken
Skates: We may do, and this is what the strategic partnership
is going to look at. We may need a brand, because you say that
those brands of Cadw and the national museum are
well-renowned—actually, in this age where we are constantly
bombarded every moment of the day with a plethora of messages, you
need single, strong messages and brands to cut through and
it’s my belief that we should keep on the table the option of
a single brand that all can contribute to and benefit from.
I’m not entirely convinced that the Cadw brand is well-known.
I’ll be perfectly honest, I am not, and that’s in spite
of all the work that we’ve done. Would it be better known if
the national library, the national museum, the National Trust,
local government-run historic environment sites, could promote Cadw
sites as well? Yes, possibly so. But the ordinary person out
there—do they know that Cardiff castle is run by Cardiff
council? Do they know that St Fagans is run by the national museum,
that Castell Coch is run by Cadw? I’m not entirely sure that
most people do appreciate that, and it just becomes a confusion for
many people when they are seeing lots of different brands presented
to them, and there are huge opportunities from bringing together
shared membership systems and shared marketing programmes as well.
The historic environment is one of the primary draws for visitors
to Wales. Now, when I go to trade shows to showcase Wales,
it’s very difficult, in all fairness, to take with us every
organisation representing every part of the historic environment,
and, with them, every organisation representing every part of
industrial heritage, and every organisation representing adventure
tourism—the areas that we sell best. Instead, we need really
strong messages. We need a really strong brand to capture all.
|
|
[144] Lee
Waters: Isn’t the logic of that that it’d be better
to have one merged organisation, in that case?
|
|
[145] Ken
Skates: Not necessarily. Not necessarily. A brand that captures
all—it’s the same in the private sector—can
sometimes then cascade down through the relevant companies that are
captured by a broader overarching brand, and I think we need to
assess the work that’s been carried out by the strategic
partnership in terms of marketing and in terms of commercial
activities and then judge whether the Historic Wales brand would
add value or, as perhaps you pointed out or raised in the
introduction to your question, whether, actually, it is
unnecessary, starting from scratch with a brand. But I don’t
think it’s right to rule out the option at this stage.
|
|
[146] Lee
Waters: Okay. Thank you.
|
|
[147] Bethan
Jenkins: Couldn’t they just become part of the Visit
Wales brand? Why do you need to create the Visit Wales, as Lee
Waters has said?
|
|
[148] Ken
Skates: So, it could. It could. But this is—sorry,
Chair—this is part of my point, that it could become, if you
like, a Visit Wales brand and then, as we go around the world, as
we promote Wales around the world, having a Historic Wales brand
that captures Cadw sites, the national museum, the national
library, and local authority-run assets, would become a really,
really powerful way of promoting them.
|
|
[149] Bethan
Jenkins: Neil Hamilton.
|
|
[150] Neil
Hamilton: Well, people don’t visit brands, though, do
they?
|
|
[151] Ken
Skates: They don’t, no, so why have so many—so why
have so many?
|
|
10:30
|
|
[152] Neil
Hamilton: What I’m saying is that the brand itself is of
secondary importance here. What is of primary importance is the
offer that you make to the public to attract them through the
doors, and I think we’re confusing here the importance of
branding with the more important issue of how do people work
together collaboratively to produce a product that is going to be
mutually beneficial in terms of selling the totality of things that
we want to market. So, I can see the advantages of collaboration
and for particular marketing campaigns, and they may differ
internationally from the kind of marketing approach you want to
take internally in Wales or in the United Kingdom, but I think
it’s a mistake to get hooked up too much upon having a new
logo, for example, or a new title. It’s horses for courses.
Any food company knows that there are different brands within its
corporate offer and you design your brand for the market that
you’re targeting. So, I wonder whether we’re engaging
here in an enormous exercise to solve a problem that is much
smaller than it appears.
|
|
[153] Ken
Skates: It’s about making sure that there is a
consistency of message with the offer and that the message in the
brand matches the offer so that experiences are as good as
expectations. That’s what it’s about. So, there is work
that needs to be done on the offer as well.
|
|
[154] Bethan
Jenkins: Sorry for having to cut you short. Jason wanted to
come in quickly, and then we have a few more questions. So,
we’ll try and get through—
|
|
[155] Mr
Thomas: It was on the same—
|
|
[156] Bethan
Jenkins: It was the same thing.
|
|
[157] Mr
Thomas: It was this brand thing—it has an opportunity for
everybody in the sector to raise their game. The Cabinet Secretary
mentioned Cardiff Castle; we’ve got Pembroke Castle. Surely,
if we can brand together, everybody can benefit on the back of
it.
|
|
[158] Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Thanks. Suzy.
|
|
[159] Suzy
Davies: Yes. Half of my question has been answered, but, on the
bit to do with collaboration, you’ve already said that
Historic Wales could be used to help market local authority or even
privately-owned heritage.
|
|
[160] Ken
Skates: Yes, absolutely.
|
|
[161] Suzy Davies: I don’t hear them being
mentioned in the collaboration agenda, though, which is very much
about our national institutions. At what point are you planning to
bring in the rest of the sector?
|
|
[162] Ken
Skates: I think the sector at the moment is quite disparate
because it’s—
|
|
[163] Suzy
Davies: Yes.
|
|
[164] Ken
Skates: Yes, it covers so many local authorities and private
sector operators. During the course of our inquiry in 2013 we found
that the lack of capacity, particularly within the private sector
and local government, was preventing full opportunity being taken
of the assets that were in their hands. I think it’s going to
be important that the strategic partnership first of all resolves
to work together in terms of marketing and promotion, and reaches
out afterwards to local authorities in the private sector.
It’s something that I think would be of huge benefit to the
entire sector and something that should be done.
|
|
[165] Suzy
Davies: Okay. Mainly because local authorities—to
reinforce Mr Thomas’s point about the net reduction of the
cost to the public purse will affect local authorities as well.
|
|
[166] Ken
Skates: Absolutely. Yes.
|
|
[167] Suzy
Davies: Okay. Thank you.
|
|
[168] Bethan
Jenkins: Finally, Gareth Howells.
|
|
[169] Mr
Howells: Can I just say something quickly on that? That issue
about the wider effect of collaboration has actually been discussed
within the group and in the previous group with Justin Albert and
there was an acceptance there that that was something that needed
to be looked at. For example, we know that the national museum
works closely with local museums in supporting them; we know the
same thing happens with the national library—they’ve
got the outsourcing, well, not outsourcing, but the outreach area
in Merthyr and that. So, that is going on, but I think it is,
you’re quite right, something that is agreed between the
group that that is something that needs to be looked at going
forward, but I think it’s basically that we’re moving
in that direction, but we’ve got to get the initial stages
sorted out first before we can go in that direction.
|
|
[170] Suzy
Davies: That’s fair enough. Thank you.
|
|
[171] Bethan
Jenkins: Hannah.
|
|
[172] Hannah
Blythyn: Thank you.
|
|
[173] Bethan
Jenkins: Yes, we got to you in the end. [Laughter.]
|
|
[174] Hannah
Blythyn: I just want to turn more to the idea of how the
strategic partnership would better enable the national institutions
to reach out, particularly in respect of the whole tackling poverty
through culture agenda, because I think you referenced the Fusion
project as an example in response to, I think, my colleague Lee
Waters. So, how will, in your view, the strategic partnership
enable that, and to what extent will that be a focus of the
partnership?
|
|
[175] Ken
Skates: I think it’s fair to say that it is the very
heart of the strategic partnership’s work. The Fusion
programme has been incredibly important. It’s been very
successful in drawing together institutions and communities.
We’ve rolled out further pioneer areas, so I expect that work
to be maintained, and it will form a good basis of the
considerations that are taken forward by the strategic
partnership.
|
|
[176] Hannah
Blythyn: And, just finally, to return to the concerns that
we’ve heard expressed to this committee before about the
independence of the national museum. I don’t know whether
you’re aware, Cabinet Secretary, that we heard concerns that
the Welsh Government had sought to perhaps influence some of the
activity of the national museum, in terms of the pricing structure
and signage. So, I was wondering if you recognise those concerns
and you’re able to address those today.
|
|
[177] Ken
Skates: I know exactly what that relates to, then, if it was
pricing. That has to be the exhibition that took place; the
adventures in treasures exhibition, I imagine. Okay, so we operate
thematic years—this year is the Year of Legends—and, in
order to get best value from the themed years, we support with
money our partners out there to promote the themed year by
developing new and innovative and creative products and events. The
idea of an adventures in treasures exhibition was developed between
us and the museum, and the museum did a great job in getting an
agreement from the George Lucas museum out in the United States to
get Indiana Jones memorabilia—superb—and in order to
make the exhibition a reality, we provided capital funding for a
paid exhibition. But, as with any other organisation that gets
public money from the Government as part of the themed years, it
has to be aligned with the theme. So, in terms of the branding, it
was clear that that should be aligned with the Year of Adventure,
and hence it became, I think, Adventures in Archaeology—the
exhibition.
|
|
[178] Bethan
Jenkins: So, you put the pricing commitment as part of that
package, because, really, we have to finish this session now.
|
|
[179] Ken
Skates: Sorry—pricing commitment. The pricing commitment
I’m not entirely sure of. I think what happened there was
they didn’t benchmark against other paid-for exhibitions, and
I think that’s a pretty big omission, actually, in the way
that you develop a business. You should benchmark prices, and it
was something that we suggested they did.
|
|
[180] Bethan
Jenkins: Okay, thank you. If we need clarification on that
we’ll write to you, but I’m sure
that’s—
|
|
[181] Mr
Howells: Can I just make one quick point—
|
|
[182] Bethan
Jenkins: Only if it’s micro.
|
|
[183] Mr
Howells: It will be. On this issue of independence, let’s
be clear—we are signed up to retaining independence for the
organisations. The reality of the situation is that all the
organisations signed up to be part of this. So, I think the issue
about independence may have been an issue with some institutions at
the beginning, but the fact that they’ve signed up now, I
would hope, would be clear that they accept that that isn’t
an issue and we’re trying to work together.
|
|
[184] Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Thank you for that positive ending.
|
|
[185]
Rydym ni’n symud ymlaen yn
syth. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi am ddod i mewn yma heddiw. Rydw
i’n siŵr y byddwn ni’n cyfathrebu yn y dyfodol.
Rydym ni’n gorfod symud ymlaen yn syth i’r sesiwn
nesaf, ac wedyn byddwn ni’n cymryd seibiant byr ar ôl y
sesiwn yma. Felly, eitem 3 yw newyddiaduraeth newyddion yng
Nghymru, a byddwn ni’n cymryd tystiolaeth gan S4C mewn dwy
funud. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi am ddod i mewn.
|
We’ll move immediately on, but I would like to
thank you for joining us today and I’m sure we will be in
touch in future. But we do have to move on immediately to our next
session, and then we'll take a brief break after this session. So,
item 3 is our investigation into news journalism in Wales, where we
will take evidence from S4C in two minutes’ time. Thank you
very much for your attendance.
|
|
Newyddiaduraeth Newyddion yng Nghymru:
Sesiwn dystiolaeth 7
News Journalism in Wales: Evidence Session 7
|
|
[186]
Bethan Jenkins:
Diolch yn fawr. Rydym ni’n
croesawu yn awr, yn rhan o sesiwn dystiolaeth 7, Llion Iwan,
pennaeth cynnwys a dosbarthu S4C. Diolch i chi am ddod. Sori, rydym
ni’n symud ymlaen yn gyflym gan ein bod ni wedi mynd dros
amser yn barod ar y sesiwn ddiwethaf.
|
Bethan Jenkins: Thank you very much. We now welcome as part of
evidence session 7, Llion Iwan, head of content and distribution
for S4C. So, thank you for joining us. We are moving swiftly along
because we are already over time following our previous
session.
|
|
[187]
Yn amlwg, o sesiynau yn y gorffennol,
rydych chi wedi gweld, efallai, ein bod ni’n edrych mewn i
sefyllfa’r newyddion yng Nghymru. Ond, o ran y sefyllfa
newyddion Cymraeg, a ydych chi’n credu bod y sefyllfa yn
wahanol i newyddion drwy gyfrwng y Saesneg? Yn ôl Ifan Morgan
Jones o Brifysgol Bangor, roedd e’n dweud mod newyddiaduraeth
y Gymraeg yn profi rhyw fath o ‘oes aur’ yn sgil y
cyllid cyhoeddus sydd wedi dod gan y Llywodraeth i bapurau bro, i
Golwg 360 ac yn y blaen. A
ydych chi’n cytuno â hynny, neu a ydych chi’n
credu bod yna’n dal lle i fynd gyda newyddiaduriaeth
Gymraeg?
|
Clearly, from previous sessions, you may have seen
that we are looking into the situation of news journalism in Wales.
But, in terms of Welsh news journalism, do you think that the
situation is different as compared to the situation through the
medium of English? According to Ifan Morgan Jones from Bangor
University, he said that Welsh journalism was experiencing some
sort of golden age given the public funding provided by Government
to the papurau bro, Golwg 360 and so on. Do you agree
with that, or do you think that there is still room for improvement
with Welsh-language journalism?
|
|
[188]
Mr Iwan: Mae yna’n dal lle i fynd. Mae yna’n
dal lle i fynd gyda phob math o newyddiaduriaeth, ym mha bynnag
iaith ydy hi. Rydym ni mewn oes lle mae’n hawdd cael
gwybodaeth, ac yn hawdd rhannu gwybodaeth, ond eto mae
newyddiaduriaeth brint yn crebachu, ac rydych chi’n gallu
gweld bod y swyddfeydd lleol i gyd yn cau, felly mae’n amlwg
bod yna rywbeth yn mynd i gael ei golli yn y fan yna.
|
Mr
Iwan: There is still room for improvement. There is room for
improvement in all sorts of journalism, in whatever language it is.
We’re in an age where it is easy to access information and to
share information, but print journalism is shrinking, and you see
the local offices closing, so clearly something is going to be lost
there from our perspective.
|
|
[189]
O’n rhan ni, beth rydym
ni’n gwneud efo darlledu, ac yn benodol y rhaglen newyddion
gan y BBC, yw ein bod ni wedi gosod briff annibynnol i’r
rhaglen yna. Maen nhw o fewn ystafell y BBC, ond maen nhw’n
gweithio efo ein briff golygyddol ni, ac yn canolbwyntio yn y fan
yna ar straeon lleol yn Gymraeg ac yn Gymreig. Felly, pan fyddan
nhw’n darlledu am 9 o’r gloch, mae’r gwylwyr yn
cael rhywbeth gwahanol i beth sy’n cael ei drafod ar y
cyfryngau eraill yn ystod y dydd.
|
What
we’re doing with broadcasting and specifically the BBC news
programme, is that we have set an independent brief for that
programme. So, they’re working within the BBC newsroom but
with our editorial brief, where they’re focusing on local
stories in Welsh and in Wales. So, when they broadcast at 9
o’clock, the viewers get something that’s different to
what’s been broadcast on other media during the day.
|
|
[190]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ocê. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
Jeremy.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Thank you very much. Jeremy.
|
|
[191]
Jeremy Miles:
A ydych chi’n cytuno â
barn Ifan Morgan Jones yn ei asesiad ef bod newyddiaduriaeth yn y
Gymraeg yn dioddef diffyg plwraliaeth achos nad oes adnoddau ar
gael i chwilio am ffynonellau gwahanol?
|
Jeremy Miles: Do you agree with the view of Ifan Morgan
Jones and his assessment that Welsh-language journalism suffers
from a lack of plurality because the resources aren’t
available to look for different sources?
|
|
[192]
Mr Iwan: Wel, mae’n amlwg pwy ydy’r darparwyr
newyddion yng Nghymru. Mae gennych chi’r BBC ar sawl
lefel—y radio, teledu a’r ochr ddigidol. Mae gennym ni
ITV, ac mae gennym ni wahanol bapurau newydd, ond, wrth gwrs,
crebachu a cyfyngu y mae’r rhain yn bennaf.
Efallai—
|
Mr Iwan:
Well, it’s clear who the news providers in Wales are. You
have the BBC on radio, television and on digital. We have ITV, and
then we have various newspapers, but, of course they are in
decline.
|
|
[193]
Jeremy Miles:
Fe fyddech chi’n cytuno
gyda’r datganiad yna, felly.
|
Jeremy
Miles: So, you would agree with his statement, then.
|
|
[194]
Mr Iwan: Ydw. Mae hynny’n amlwg, rydw i’n
meddwl, ac mae o’n rhywbeth i’w resynu. Mae wedi newid
lot o pan wnes i gychwyn gweithio ar bapur newydd. Ond o ran beth
rydym ni’n gwneud, rydym ni’n gyrru’r briff yna,
sef bod y gohebwyr yn eu patches ac nad ydyn nhw’n
gweithio o’r swyddfa fawr a chanolog yng Nghaerdydd—eu
bod nhw’n edrych dros Gymru i gyd, bob rhan ohoni.
|
Mr Iwan:
Well, yes. I think that’s clear, and it’s regrettable.
It’s changed a great deal since I started working on a
newspaper. But, from the point of view of what we do, we do have
that brief that the correspondents work on their patches and do not
work centrally from Cardiff—that they are covering the whole
of Wales, all parts of Wales.
|
|
[195]
Jeremy Miles:
A ydych chi’n credu bod ffordd
i allu delio â hynny o fewn cyfrwng print, er enghraifft,
gyda threfniadau gyda’r Western Mail ac ati? A fyddai
rhywbeth creadigol yn y maes hynny yn gallu cywiro hynny
rhywfaint?
|
Jeremy
Miles: And do you believe that that can be dealt with within
the print media through arrangements with the Western Mail
and so on? Would something creative in that area be able to correct
that to some extent?
|
|
[196]
Mr Iwan: Mae hwnnw’n dipyn o gwestiwn. Na, disgyn
mae’r niferoedd sy’n prynu papurau newydd yn Brydeinig
ac yn genedlaethol, ac nid ydw i’n gweld dim byd yn mynd i
newid hynny. Nid ydy print wedi dod i ben, a fydd o ddim yn dod i
ben. Mae’n newid, mae’n esblygu, fel y mae’r
diwydiant wedi erioed.
|
Mr Iwan:
Well, that’s quite a question. No, the numbers buying
newspapers are falling on a UK level and a Welsh level, and I
don’t see that changing. Print hasn’t come to an end,
and it won’t come to an end, but it is changing and evolving,
as the industry always has.
|
|
[197]
Jeremy Miles:
Rydw i’n jest trio gweld a oes
dimensiwn sy’n specific i’r iaith Gymraeg yn y
fan hyn, neu a ydy e, fel rydych chi’n awgrymu, rydw
i’n credu, yn rhywbeth sy’n broblem gyffredinol. A oes
dimensiwn penodol Gymraeg i’r broblem hon, neu a ydyw e jest
yn rhan o’r darlun ehangach lle mae diffyg plwraliaeth am
resymau yr ydym ni’n eu deall?
|
Jeremy Miles: Well, I’m just trying to see whether
there is a specific Welsh-language dimension here, or, as
you’re perhaps suggesting, something that is a more general
problem. Is there a specifically Welsh dimension to this problem or
is it just part of the bigger picture where there is lack of
plurality for reasons that we all understand?
|
|
[198]
Mr Iwan: Mae’n rhan o’r darlun ehangach, ond
mae yna elfen benodol Gymreig. Oherwydd ein hen hanes ni, nid ydym
ni wedi cael gwasg genedlaethol cyn gryfed â’r Alban,
efallai. Ond eto, o ran y darlledu, rydym ni mewn sefyllfa lle
rydym ni’n gallu gofyn i’r BBC ac maen nhw yn
gweithredu’r polisi yna. Rydym ni yn cael lot o straeon
gwreiddiol yn cael eu torri yn y Gymraeg, sydd yn cyfrannu wedyn,
wrth gwrs, at newyddiaduriaeth ehangach, achos maen nhw’n
cael eu rhoi yn Saesneg y noson yna neu’r bore
wedyn.
|
Mr
Iwan: Well, it is certainly part of the bigger picture, but
there is a specifically Welsh element. Because of our history,
we’ve not had a national press that has been as strong as it
is in Scotland, for example. But, in terms of broadcasting, we are
in a position where we can ask the BBC and they do implement that
policy. We do have a great deal of regional stories broken in
Welsh, and that contributes to wider journalism then, because they
are then provided through the medium of English that night or the
following day.
|
|
[199]
Jeremy Miles:
Ocê, diolch.
|
Jeremy
Miles: Okay, thanks.
|
|
[200]
Bethan Jenkins:
A ydych chi’n teimlo bod pobl
yn cydnabod y ffaith eu bod nhw wedi torri ar newyddion Cymraeg?
Achos weithiau nid ydych chi’n gweld o ble mae gwraidd y
stori wedi dod—source y stori. A ydych chi’n
credu bod hynny’n digwydd, neu a ydy hynny efallai ddim yn
cael ei gydnabod digon, sef bod stori wedi cael ei thorri trwy
cyfrwng y Gymraeg?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Do you feel that people recognise the fact that news
stories were broken via Welsh-language output? Because sometimes
you don’t see where the source of the story is. Do you think
hat that is a problem, or that that is perhaps recognised
enough—that a story was originally broken through the medium
of Welsh?
|
|
[201]
Mr Iwan: Sori, a allech chi ofyn y cwestiwn
eto?
|
Mr Iwan:
Would you mind repeating that question?
|
|
[202]
Bethan Jenkins:
Fel roeddech chi’n dweud wrth
Jeremy, rydych chi’n torri stori a wedyn mae’n cael ei
drawsnewid i stori yn y Saesneg ar blatfform gwahanol. A ydych
chi’n credu bod yna ddigon o gydnabyddiaeth bod y stori hynny
wedi dod o system cyfrwng Cymraeg, neu a ydy hynny ddim o bwys, neu
a ydy hynny ddim yn digwydd o gwbl?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Well, as you explained to Jeremy, you are bringing
news forward and then that may be reported in English on a
different platform. Do you think that there is sufficient
recognition that that story was originally emerging through the
Welsh-medium system, or does that not matter, or doesn’t it
happen at all?
|
|
[203]
Mr Iwan: Nid yw’n digwydd. Nid ydw i’n meddwl
ei fod o bwys achos cyfrannu at newyddiaduriaeth ydym ni. Rydym
ni’n rhan o’r gwead sy’n darparu gwybodaeth i
bobl yng Nghymru.
|
Mr Iwan:
It doesn’t happen. I don’t think it’s important
because we are contributing to journalism. We are part of that
wider network providing information to people in Wales.
|
|
[204]
Bethan Jenkins:
Suzy
Davies.
|
|
[205] Suzy
Davies: What would you say is the impact of broadcast
journalism on the contraction of the printed media?
|
|
[206] Mr Iwan:
I think there’s been a greater drive then on broadcast
journalists to be out in areas looking for stories, and for the
producers, in whatever central location they have, to also be
generating their own stories. I mentioned how, in print journalism,
when the offices close papers, whereas before you were having all
these stories flowing in, up into the pyramid, if you will, now we
have to push the journalists to do that. The BBC are doing it on
our behalf, and then also for the greater spread of stories and
journalism in Wales.
|
|
10:45
|
|
[207] Suzy
Davies: Do think when BBC—BBC local, I think it’s
called— comes in and you’ve got journalists going and
taking more interest in local democracy, that’s going to be a
useful source of information for you, or is it going to be tackling
deficits in the, you know, reporting on local democracy, where
there are currently gaps? ‘Is that going to be of interest to
you?’, I think is what I’m coming to. If the new BBC
journalists are going out and looking at what councils do, how
often do you expect them to bring a story that will be of interest
to you?
|
|
[208] Mr Iwan:
Yes, there are two events: the scrutiny of public bodies, whatever
form they take—
|
|
[209] Suzy
Davies: Sorry, yes, that.
|
|
[210] Mr Iwan:
But also, just finding good stories, and then also to have the
ability to convey those stories in a meaningful, interesting way
and not just sort of regurgitating minutes. So, there are two
elements: the journalists must be experienced to do that; and also,
then, that scrutiny on public bodies, and not to forget that. You
know, it’s the staple of journalism and always has been.
|
|
[211] Suzy
Davies: The chances are it’s going to be hyperlocals that
will pick up on very localised stories around democracy. It’s
inconceivable that you’d be competing with hyperlocals for
stories, but will you be working with them in any important way?
Will you be looking to what they’re doing, effectively, as
well as your BBC Local lot?
|
|
[212] Mr Iwan:
Well, as a broadcaster, we’re looking for any opportunities
to work with bodies or societies through Wales. On the journalism
side and with works that we provide, we discuss with the BBC, they
have their brief, and then they go out and work on that, and I
discuss more or less weekly, but we meet them monthly as well to
discuss how that’s working and how it can evolve, because
it’s always evolving.
|
|
[213] Suzy
Davies: I’ve also noticed, as well, that Welsh-medium
news coverage can be different from what goes out on the English
language channels. Very often, it’s better. What influence
have you been able to bring to bear, then, to get the better
stories? Is it because your Welsh language journalists have just
got more experience? What is it?
|
|
[214] Mr Iwan:
It’s that drive we began. In discussion with the BBC about
four years ago, we relaunched our main news programme. We moved it
from 7.30pm to 9 o’clock and called it Newyddion 9,
and then rebranded our bulletins Newyddion S4C, and giving
that specific brief to go—. Because people are given the
information by so many other means these days throughout the day,
we needed to have something different then at 9 o’clock. So,
you know, we do report politics and wider international affairs,
but the priority is local stories—the local stories that are
relevant to everybody throughout Wales. So, it might be a fatal car
crash in a particular part of Wales, but then that can illustrate
the problem, possibly, of drink-driving or speeding and the deaths
that happen among young people because of that.
|
|
[215] Suzy
Davies: Just finally, as a matter of curiosity as much as
anything else, do you find that some of the younger journalists
coming through with the streams that bring you news now have got a
sense—? Are they coming from a hyperlocal background, or do
they have an awareness of how hyperlocals are working these days?
I’m just curious to see how journalist training has changed
as much as anything.
|
|
[216] Mr Iwan:
Giving myself as an example, I did the traditional route. I went
into local papers and did my apprenticeship there and then went to
work for the BBC radio and onwards to television. There are courses
these days with the CGS—so, very, very respected. We fund one
scholarship there per year for broadcast journalists. It’s a
combination. There are many more courses available these days for
young people to study, and not just the theory, but the practical
elements of it as well. So, we’re seeing journalists—.
And we talk about journalism; I think we should expand it just a
little bit, because I commission documentaries, and, for me,
that’s long-form journalism where you can get to grips with
the story and you have 40 to 50 minutes to really get under the
skin of a story. We had a series on iechyd meddwl recently,
and we had many, many stories there, and they were long-form
journalism, but dealing with issues that affect us today, and
stories that cannot be told in three or four minutes, which is
usual in a news programme. So, I see ourselves as a broadcaster. We
have news programmes and news bulletins, but also we have our
current affairs provision. But, also, beyond that are our
documentary films. We made a documentary film last year about the
abuse in care homes in Wrexham, and, for me, it was a privilege to
be able to commission that, and it took three and a half years,
because of various court cases, and that could only be sustained
because we supported it. Again, that’s a form of
commissioning and getting under the skin of a story and being able
then to broadcast it. Not many papers would have the resources to
do that. I think it was a very important story to tell and
that’s—
|
|
[217] Suzy
Davies: That’s an important point, actually. At least you
had the money for it. Thank you. Diolch.
|
|
[218] Bethan
Jenkins: Neil Hamilton.
|
|
[219] Neil
Hamilton: Well, that was very interesting, and there is a
significant difference in Welsh language journalism in Wales
between television and the print media and commercial radio
because, obviously, because of BBC funding, you have a financial
foundation that the other parts of the news sector don’t have
to anything like the same extent. We’ve seen, and will
continue to see, the decline of news media, I think, in the UK.
Wales starts off from a worse position than the UK generally was
in, for the reasons you yourself referred to earlier on, but I
wonder if you could give us your view on the impact of the decline
of news media generally in the UK, whether there are any
specifically Welsh elements to this that we ought to be
particularly aware of.
|
|
[220] Mr Iwan:
It is to be lamented, the decline of print journalism, but I think
that’s something that’s much wider than Wales and has
an impact on journalism. But then, I mentioned journalism is
evolving—the methods that we use to collect stories and also
be able to find stories. If we talk about our provision, I have
discussions with the BBC about the agenda—the story
order—because I think they should be able to have the freedom
and independence to operate within the BBC there to follow the
brief that we set them for Wales. So, as a contribution, then,
towards setting the agenda, it’s a different agenda to what
the BBC has for their local programme or national programme, but
it’s for us. It’s relevant to Wales. It’s in
Welsh, but it’s for Wales.
|
|
[221] Neil
Hamilton: Ifan Morgan Jones said that Welsh language journalism
is enjoying something of a golden age as a result of public
funding. I don’t know whether you’d agree with that,
but Welsh language journalism, in the last 10 years or so, has been
supported by public funding in a way that English language
journalism hasn’t, in terms of relativities between the size
of the sector and the amount of public funding that goes into it.
So, I wonder whether you think that more public funding is the
answer to what otherwise is going to be an inexorable decline.
|
|
[222] Mr Iwan:
Well, our national paper in Welsh, Y Cymro, possibly the
last edition was put to bed last week. There is a campaign to keep
it going, but if it is the last edition, that’s terrible, and
that’s for journalism generally, not just through the medium
of Welsh, because they work side by side. They feed into each
other, they take from each other, they can both learn from each
other. It’s all contributory journalism. So, yes, there is an
element there, then, to be made. Remember that they’re all
part of one network: the print, the broadcast, the radio, the
digital. They all provide the environment for providing information
for the people of Wales. So, if there are elements that are to be
supported, possibly. What we do then is make sure that
journalism—. We have bulletins throughout the day, at 1, 2,
3, 5, 6 and 9 o’clock. Then we contribute to our current
affairs programmes and also to the other long-form journalism
mentioned, our documentary films, which actually can be very, very,
very popular, and can be some form of Trojan horse. They appear to
be this story, but actually they’re discussing other issues.
There might be a personalised story, but they’re talking
about wider issues and disseminating that information.
|
|
[223] Bethan
Jenkins: Dawn Bowden.
|
|
[224] Dawn
Bowden: Thank you, Chair. Can I ask you, on current provision
around news and current affairs, are you happy with the quality of
the news and current affairs programmes that you get through the
BBC?
|
|
[225] Mr Iwan:
Yes. As I mentioned, this is a dialogue that we have often about
the editorial brief, then the provision. So, we have the news
programmes themselves. What we find is that the audience is
changing and they’re not sitting and watching throughout the
day, but they know that the bulletins are there. For example, with
Grenfell Tower, on the day that happened our youth news programme,
Ffeil, at 5 o’clock had huge spike in response because
they knew it was there. That day they wanted that information and
they turned to it. The way that they cover stories is remarkable.
The big tragic events of this year have been covered in depth. They
have reporters on location within hours and are finding
contributors to speak, and then previous to that, the incidents in
Paris and the refugee crisis, again. We’ve had programmes out
on location, and that shows the benefits of working with a news
provider such as the BBC.
|
|
[226] Dawn
Bowden: What’s the proportion of news and current affairs
programmes that you get through BBC and ITV then? What’s the
relative proportion?
|
|
[227] Mr Iwan:
The BBC provide all our news programmes.
|
|
[228] Dawn
Bowden: Right.
|
|
[229] Mr Iwan:
And then there’s a portion then that—. The BBC also
provide current affairs and also documentary films and that
depends, then, on the subject. It might be an extreme weather event
such as the heavy snowstorms of 2013. And ITV, then, they have the
current affairs flagship programme Y Byd ar Bedwar, and also
provision within that budget to make the special documentary films
as well.
|
|
[230] Dawn
Bowden: So, do you think the news and current affairs market is
sufficiently competitive in the Welsh language?
|
|
[231] Mr Iawn:
It is, because, again, going back to my—. I’m not a
commissioning editor as such, but I see myself as an editor because
we have the BBC, we have ITV, but also the independent sector, and
these are staffed very often by people who have come through news
and gone on to make documentary films. Between the three, and the
independent sector is a crucial part of our news provision—.
When I talk about ‘news’, I talk about disseminating,
collecting information. So, I think we are fortunate for having
such a pool of talent to be able to collect stories across Wales.
But it’s constantly evolving, remember.
|
|
[232] Dawn
Bowden: Sure, and from your point of view, it’s good
value for money—what you get from that.
|
|
[233] Mr Iwan:
Yes.
|
|
[234] Dawn
Bowden: Okay.
|
|
[235] Mr Iwan:
And it’s a very healthy relationship. We discuss often about
the provision. We also have Pawb a’i Farn—a
version of Question Time.
|
|
[236] Dawn
Bowden: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair
|
|
[237] Bethan
Jenkins: Hannah.
|
|
[238] Hannah
Blythyn: Thanks, Chair. Looking forward to any potential new
future models that address the challenges we face in the
ever-evolving way that we consume our news and media, the committee
received a suggestion that non-BBC Welsh language publications
supported by the Welsh Books Council should be able to publish
their content on a single news hub. Would that have any
effect—negative or positive—on S4C?
|
|
[239] Mr Iwan:
I’m not sure how to answer that question, to be honest,
because what I see is there’s a whole news-collecting
environment, and whatever form that supports, then it will feed
into the broadcast, which is what we’re concerned with. What
I see is there’s a steady stream of young talented and
trained journalists coming though, filmmakers then, through Wales,
and they all get the information and experience from different
sectors. So, whatever form, you know, what you’ve referred
to, will be funded, I think it will eventually, in some way,
support that network.
|
|
[240] Hannah
Blythyn: It could create a new platform for that talent to come
through, then.
|
|
[241] Mr Iwan:
Yes.
|
|
[242] Bethan
Jenkins: Jest o ran y
cysyniad, rwy’n
credu bod Suzy wedi cyffwrdd
arno fe yn gynharach, ynglŷn â’r cysyniad yma gan
y BBC o roi pool o newyddiadurwyr newydd i mewn i gyfryngau
lleol, ac mae yna broses bidio, rydw i’n credu, yn digwydd,
ac roedd Rhodri Talfan Davies yr wythnos diwethaf yma yn dweud bod
yna botensial i bobl ddefnyddio’r broses honno i gael
newyddiadurwyr yn fwy lleol, efallai. A ydy hynny’n rhywbeth
rydych chi wedi bod yn trafod gyda’r BBC, ac os felly, a
ydych chi’n mynd i fod yn ‘iwtileiddio’ y
cysyniad yma? Beth yw eich barn chi ynglŷn â hynny?
Oherwydd byddai rhai pobl yn meddwl efallai gallai hynny arwain at
y cwmnïau eu hunain yn dirywio yn yr hyn y maen nhw’n ei
wneud, oherwydd bod y BBC yn dod i mewn i lenwi gagendor newyddion
yn y sector. Beth yw eich barn chi yn hynny o beth?
|
Bethan Jenkins: Just in terms of the
concept, I think that Suzy Davies touched on it earlier, about this
idea of the BBC providing a pool of new news journalists into local
media, and I think there’s a bidding process ongoing, and
Rhodri Talfan Davies told us last week that there’s a
potential for people to use that process to have more locally based
news journalists. Is that something that you’ve been
discussing with the BBC, and if so, are you going to be utilising
this concept? What’s your opinion about that? Because some
people would think, well, perhaps it could lead to the companies
themselves declining with regard to what they’re doing,
because the BBC is encroaching and filling the news gap in the
sector. What’s your opinion on that?
|
|
[243]
Mr Iwan: Nid ydym ni wedi trafod hynny efo nhw, ond rydw
i’n ymwybodol o’u cynlluniau nhw. Os ydy o’n
gallu cyfrannu at newyddiaduraeth mewn rhyw ffordd, rydw i’n
meddwl bod hynny ond yn beth iach, eto, i newyddiaduraeth yn
gyffredinol. Ac nid ydw i’n meddwl y byddai’n cymryd
lle beth sy’n digwydd o ran casglu newyddion, achos gall ond
gyfrannu. Nid oes ganddyn nhw, hyd yn oedd, ddim mo’r
adnoddau i fod yn gwneud mwy na hynny. Ac wedyn o’n hochr ni
wedyn, beth rydw i’n gyson yn cadw golwg arni hi ydy’r
ddarpariaeth leol. A ydy’r rhwydwaith yna o ohebwyr allan
yno’n casglu’r newyddion, ac a ydym ni’n cael y
straeon yna? Mae hon yn sgwrs rydym ni’n ei chael yn aml. A
ydy’r cydbwysedd rhwng storis Cymraeg—Cymreig—yn
ddigon efo’r mathau eraill o storis? Felly o ran y pwynt yna, bydd o’n beth
iach os ydym yn gallu—neu os ydyn nhw’n
gallu—cyfrannu a chefnogi hynny, ond ni allaf ei weld o byth
yn cymryd lle y ddarpariaeth newyddion yna.
|
Mr Iwan:
We’ve not discussed that with them, but I am aware of their
plans. If it can contribute to journalism in any way, then I think
that can only be healthy for journalism more widely. And I
don’t think it will replace what’s happening in terms
of news gathering. It can only contribute. Even they don’t
have the resources to be doing more than that. So, from our
perspective, what I always keep a close eye on is local provision.
Is that network of correspondents out there gathering news, and are
we getting those stories reported? This is a conversation that we
have often. Is the balance between the Welsh stories correct in
terms of the other news output? So in terms of that point, it
would be healthy if we could—or if they
could—contribute and support that, but I can never see it
replacing what’s out there in the news provision that’s
already out there.
|
|
11:00
|
|
[244]
Bethan Jenkins:
A’r cwestiwn olaf sydd gen i
yw: yn amlwg, rydym ni wedi clywed eto gan y BBC wythnos diwethaf
fod yna gomisiynu newydd yn digwydd ar gyfer y Wales Report,
bod yna ddiwedd nawr i Week In Week Out a bod hynny’n
mynd i newid siâp a sgôp i Wales Investigates. A
oes yna unrhyw drafodaethau wedi bod gyda chi ynglŷn â
newid yr hyn rydych chi’n ei ddelifro gyda Y Byd ar
Bedwar ac yn y blaen? A oes yna asesiad wedi bod o’r
rhaglenni hynny i gyfiawnhau eu bod nhw’n parhau, neu a oes
trafodaethau wedi bod i feddwl efallai y gallwch chi wneud mwy neu
newid siâp yr hyn rydych chi’n ei gynnig? Jest er mwyn
i ni ddeall beth sydd yn digwydd gyda chi yng nghyd-destun yr hyn
sydd yn digwydd drwy gyfrwng yr iaith Saesneg.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: And the final question that I have: we’ve heard
from the BBC last week that there is a new commissioning round
happening now for the Wales Report, Week In Week Out
is coming to an end, and that that will change its shape and scope
to Wales Investigates. Have you had any discussions about
changing what you deliver with Y Byd ar Bedwar and so on?
Has there been an assessment of those programmes to justify their
continuation, or have you had discussions to think, well, perhaps
you could do more or change the format or shape of what
you’re providing? Just so that we can understand what’s
happening on your side in the context of what’s happening
through the medium of English.
|
|
[245]
Mr Iwan: Yn greiddiol, nid ydy’r ddarpariaeth ei
hun ddim yn newid; rydym ni’n cyfleu newyddion a materion
cyfoes. Mae’r ffyrdd rydym ni’n eu cyfleu nhw yn
esblygu, achos dyna ddiwydiant darlledu. Mae rhaglenni’n
gallu newid—weithiau newid teitl, newid cyflwynydd, efallai
newid yn gyfan gwbl fel rhai o’r enghreifftiau rydych chi
wedi eu dweud—ac rydym ni wedi newid yn y blynyddoedd
diwethaf ambell i raglen a chyfres hefyd, ond, yn y bôn,
mae’r un ddarpariaeth yna achos mae’n rhaid i ni asesu
trwy’r adeg a ydy’r rhaglen, a ydy’r ffurf yna yn
cysylltu efo’r gynulleidfa, ydy o’n boblogaidd, ydy
o’n denu’r gwylwyr? Achos os nad ydy o, mae’n
rhaid meddwl am ffyrdd eraill o rannu’r wybodaeth. Felly
rydym ni’n newid y ffurf o’i wneud o, ond yr un
ddarpariaeth, yr un—os ydych chi eisiau—nifer o oriau,
lefel o wybodaeth rydym ni’n ei wneud, ac yna mae
hynny’n newid trwy’r adeg. Gallai fod yn rhywbeth
eithaf cosmetig fel miwsig neu deitlau, ond gallai fod yn
rhywbeth—ein bod ni’n cychwyn cyfres, efallai,
o’r newydd. Ond mae o i gyd i’w wneud efo
casglu’r wybodaeth a rhannu’r wybodaeth. Rydw i’n
siŵr ei fod o beth mae’r gwylwyr eisiau. Felly, rydym ni
yn asesu’n gyson bob un o’n rhaglenni ac yn gwneud
penderfyniadau: a oes angen eu newid nhw neu eu dod â nhw i
ben er mwyn cael rhywbeth arall yn eu lle? Nid oes dim byd yn dod i
ben: mae’r rhaglenni’n newid, mae’r cyflwynwyr yn
newid, ond mae’r ddarpariaeth yn aros yr un fath.
|
Mr Iwan:
Well, at its heart, the provision isn’t going to change; we
convey news and current affairs. The form of that does evolve
because that’s the nature of broadcasting. Programmes can
change, titles can change, presenters can change, and there can be
a wholesale change in terms of some of the examples that
you’ve mentioned. We’ve made some changes in the past
in terms of programmes and series, but, ultimately, the provision
is the same because we have to consider whether the programme, the
format actually appeals to an audience. Is it popular? Does it
attract an audience? Because if it’s not, it has to be
reformatted. So, we do change the format, but the provision is the
same in terms of the number of hours and the level of information
that we provide, and then that does evolve, of course. It can be a
cosmetic change, such as titles or music, but it could be that we
would start a series from scratch. But it’s all about
gathering information and disseminating information, and ensuring
that it’s what our viewers want. So we do consistently assess
all of our output and then make decisions as to whether they need
to be adapted or whether they need to be wound up and replaced.
Nothing actually comes to an end totally: the programmes change,
and presenters change, but the provision is the same.
|
|
[246]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ocê. A oes unrhyw gwestiynau
eraill gan Aelodau? Na. Ocê. Wel, diolch yn fawr iawn am ddod
mewn yma heddiw. Mae’n siŵr y byddwn ni’n rhannu
unrhyw wybodaeth ychwanegol am yr ymchwiliad gyda chi. Ond diolch
yn fawr iawn am ddod mewn atom.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Thank you. Any other questions? No. Well, thank you
very much for joining us today. I’m sure we will be sharing
any additional information about the inquiry with you, but that you
very much for joining us.
|
|
[247]
Mr Iwan: Diolch.
|
Mr Iwan:
Thank you.
|
|
[248]
Bethan Jenkins:
Gwnawn ni gymryd seibiant
o—wel, nid wyf yn siŵr—jest seibiant, ar hyn o
bryd.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: We’ll take a short break. I’m not sure how
long—just a break for now.
|
|
Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 11:02 a 11:14.
The meeting adjourned
between 11:02 and 11:14.
|
|
Newyddiaduraeth Newyddion yng Nghymru—Sesiwn
Dystiolaeth 8
News Journalism in Wales—Evidence Session 8
|
|
[249]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ocê. Rydym ni’n symud
ymlaen yn awr at eitem 4—newyddiaduraeth newyddion yng
Nghymru a sesiwn dystiolaeth 8. Croeso i John Toner, trefnydd
cenedlaethol yr NUJ yng Nghymru a gweithiwr llawrydd; Nick Powell,
aelod o gyngor gweithredol yr NUJ yng Nghymru a chadeirydd cangen
ITV Wales; a Martin Shipton, aelod o gyngor gweithredol yr NUJ yng
Nghymru a chadeirydd cangen Trinity Mirror yr NUJ. Croeso i
chi’ch tri i mewn heddiw.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. We move on to item 4—news journalism in
Wales and evidence session No. 8. A warm welcome to John Toner, NUJ
national organiser for Wales and a freelancer; Nick Powell, member
of the NUJ’s Welsh executive council and NUJ father of chapel
of ITV Wales; and Martin Shipton, member of the NUJ’s Welsh
executive council and chair of the NUJ’s Trinity Mirror group
chapel. So, a warm welcome to you all here today.
|
|
[250]
Rwy’n siŵr eich bod chi
wedi bod yn gweld yr hyn yr ydym ni’n ei drafod ar y pwyllgor
yma o ran newyddiaduraeth leol. Y cwestiwn cyntaf sydd gen i yma
heddiw yw: rydych chi yn dweud bod argyfwng mewn darpariaeth
newyddion yng Nghymru a bod y ddarpariaeth newyddion yng Nghymru yn
cael ei tharo’n arbennig o galed gan y duedd hon. A allwch
chi esbonio a oes yna elfen unigryw i broblemau newyddiaduraeth
leol yma yng Nghymru?
|
I’m sure
that you will have followed our discussions as a committee in terms
of local journalism. The first question that I have today is: you
state that there is a crisis in news provision in Wales and that
Welsh news provision has been hit particularly hard by this trend.
Can you expand on that? Is there a distinctly Welsh element to that
crisis in journalism in Wales?
|
|
[251] Are you hearing
me okay or—?
|
|
[252] Mr
Shipton: I’ve got a bit of a problem with my translation
equipment. I’m just trying to sort it out. Let me have a
look.
|
|
[253] Bethan
Jenkins: We’ll send somebody to help you.
|
|
[254]
Bethan Jenkins:
Popeth yn iawn?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Testing. Everything okay?
|
|
[255] Mr
Shipton: Good. Let’s have a look. No, it’s not
functioning. [Interruption.] Yes, okay.
|
|
[256]
Bethan Jenkins:
A yw popeth yn iawn? A ydych
chi’n gallu clywed?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Is everything now working? Can you hear?
|
|
[257] Mr
Shipton: It is. Yes, that’s fine. Thank you very
much.
|
|
[258]
Bethan Jenkins:
Grêt, diolch. Jest yn dweud,
felly—rydych chi’n dweud, fel corff, fod yna argyfwng
mewn darpariaeth newyddion yng Nghymru. A allech chi esbonio a
ydych chi’n credu bod yr argyfwng yma yn unigryw i Gymru, neu
a ydyw e’n rhywbeth sydd yn fwy eang? Neu a allwch chi
esbonio’r hyn yr ydych chi wedi’i ddweud, fel yr NUJ,
yn hynny o beth?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Excellent, thank you very much. I was just saying,
therefore—you, as the NUJ, said that there is a crisis in
news provision in Wales. Can you explain whether that crisis is
unique to Wales, or is it a broader issue? Or can you explain what
you, as the NUJ, have said in this context?
|
|
[259] Mr
Shipton: Well, it’s obviously a crisis that isn’t
confined to Wales. It’s a crisis that tends to be prevalent
in the English-speaking world in particular, and that is because
perhaps they’ve been a bit smarter in some of the European
countries by not giving away their entire continent free of charge
on the internet. There are still, in countries like India, huge
numbers of newspapers that are sold on a daily basis because they,
as yet, haven’t really gone down the digital route to any
extent. So, it is a crisis that we, I think, are facing in the
United Kingdom, together with the United States, in particular. One
of the problems that we have in Wales is that the groups that are
predominant—and, of course, there’s just one group,
really, which is predominant in Wales, which has embarked on a
digital-first policy, and that has led to a situation where there
is a mismatch between the investment that has gone into digital and
the fact that still the great proportion of the revenue comes from
print.
|
|
[260] That’s
something that they are grappling with, which they find extremely
difficult to deal with because, at a time when print circulations
are declining, they’re hoping to get sufficient revenue from
digital advertising to make up for the loss of sales, revenue and
advertising revenue in print, but it’s just not happening,
and that has led to this downward spiral, if you like, where
constantly there are job cuts, and that is making things more and
more difficult. In local communities across Wales—and, of
course, one that has been focused on very greatly is Port Talbot,
in your particular patch, Chair—there has been an example of
a community that has effectively been abandoned by news
organisations to a very large extent. I know that Rachel Howells,
who is going to be giving evidence after us, has done a lot of work
on this, but I think that that is really quite a significant symbol
of what’s been happening in Wales.
|
|
[261]
Bethan Jenkins:
Diolch yn fawr iawn. A oes gennych
chi sylwadau, John Toner?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Thank you very much. John Toner, do you have any
comments?
|
|
[262] Mr Toner:
Yes. You’re asking if it’s a problem that’s
confined to Wales or is replicated elsewhere. It’s a problem
that’s probably been magnified in Wales because of the
concentration of ownership of local media that has been allowed to
develop, probably since the second world war, where you have now
five large conglomerates who own all the local, regional and
national newspapers in the country. Of course, I accept that they
are businesses, their motive is to make profit, but they’re
now only businesses. There was a time when local media were
businesses, but not only businesses but they were also regarded as
a service. So, when a business, which has only a profit motive,
needs to make cuts, then the least profitable parts are the parts
that are made redundant, if you like. I think that’s been
magnified in Wales more than in other parts of the country.
|
|
[263] Bethan
Jenkins: Nick.
|
|
[264] Mr
Powell: Well, as far as ITV goes, I suppose I should make the
point that, actually, whatever we feel about what’s happened
in Wales, the English regions have had an even rougher time of it.
In Wales we still at least have one dedicated complete news
programme and we have several other programmes, most of which are
journalistic efforts of various descriptions as well. So, if you
are to come on to the issue of what if Ofcom can get ITV to do a
bit more, I suspect that there are many people who would think that
the English regions will be at the front of the queue if that were
to come about.
|
|
[265] Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Diolch yn fawr. Dawn Bowden.
|
|
[266] Dawn
Bowden: Thank you, Chair. I’m just wondering to what
extent you think the growth of hyperlocal journalism has mitigated
the potential decline of commercial press. Has it, or not?
|
|
[267] Mr
Shipton: I think it’s been very patchy actually. There
are examples of hyperlocal journalism that have been successful,
but the difficulty is getting a workable business model. Because,
the Port Talbot Magnet, of course, was run by some
journalists who had been made redundant from the South Wales
Evening Post, and to a large extent it was a pro bono operation
because they weren’t making very much money out of it, so
these hyperlocal operations tend to rely on the goodwill of the
people who are working for them, and they can be extremely variable
in terms of quality. I know that there is, for example, at Cardiff
University, a centre for community journalism, which is trying to
nurture skills amongst people who are going to be running these
hyperlocal sites, and they are doing some good work. In fact, they
came and spoke to the Welsh executive council at the NUJ recently
and have been seeking our assistance. But they are very patchy and
they are not really getting any revenues to speak of, and therefore
they don’t really impinge on the so-called mainstream
media.
|
|
[268] Dawn
Bowden: Mainstream press, yes. So, that really encapsulates the
problem with it as well, then, doesn’t it? It’s not
impacting on the mainstream press, so it’s also not helping
to maintain some of the local media like the Port Talbot
Magnet. Is there anything else around hyperlocal or voluntary
journalism that you want to say?
|
|
[269] Mr Toner:
I think it’s still too early to say what effect and
mitigation that they will have. It’s very early days for
these hyperlocals, it takes time to build up circulation and
advertising support for a small publication. It may be that in time
we will see that they have more of an effect, but it’s still
very early days for them.
|
|
[270] Dawn
Bowden: Yes, and maybe its other organisations that need
convincing in terms of the commercial benefit, potentially.
|
|
[271] Mr Toner:
Yes.
|
|
[272] Dawn
Bowden: Okay, that’s fine.
|
|
[273] Bethan
Jenkins: Hannah.
|
|
[274] Hannah
Blythyn: On hyperlocal journalism still, I think you said a lot
of it is pro bono, it’s on a voluntary basis, and there are
people who are qualified professional journalists doing it, but
there also might be people who just want to have a go in their
community as well. So, if we are going along that route now, how do
we maintain professional standards? Because I know here people have
raised concerns, perhaps, in terms of people not having the legal
knowledge as well, with all the pitfalls that that could have. And
also, adding to that, too, you’ll know that getting into
journalism is quite difficult anyway, and to sustain a career is
difficult. So, how do we then build on this idea of the
professional standards and actually making it an attractive and
sustainable career option for young people now?
|
|
[275] Mr
Shipton: Well, I mean, that’s something that exercises us
at the NUJ a great deal, and, of course, there was a time when
people would perhaps go to university, then they might do the
postgraduate journalism course at Cardiff University, which is
something I did many years ago, for example. And I have always felt
very privileged to have had that opportunity. One of my passions in
the NUJ, really, is to try to create situations where the next
generation can have a proper career path, which is why I sometimes
get frustrated by the emphasis that is placed on hyperlocal
journalism without there being any kind of career structure or
opportunity for people to earn a living from it—you know,
just to put the food on the table for their families. So, clearly,
there is a need to develop people’s skills. I think
that’s very important.
|
|
[276] I do think that
the body that’s attached to Cardiff University is doing a lot
of good work in trying to nurture those skills, and I think there
would be the opportunity for more mentoring to take place, because
you can find yourself, if you are seeking to do a proper job,
getting into terrible legal trouble. I mean, I’m thinking,
for example, of a woman who runs a blog in Carmarthenshire with
whom you may well be acquainted. She has found herself in terrible
trouble as a consequence of libel actions that have been brought
against her, and she is now in a situation where she may find
herself evicted from her house. So, clearly, people who get
involved in journalism, at whatever level, and if it is a
hyperlocal level, they could conceivably be just as likely to get
into trouble with big organisations that may not like what
they’re writing about. And, of course, there are different
kinds of hyperlocal coverage. You can get the very local, quite
anodyne coverage of local events et cetera. But, sometimes, people
are a little more adventurous and want to hold to account the big
players in the community and people who are remote, who are making
decisions that affect people in the community. And it’s once
you get to that level that you need to have some kind of back-up.
Therefore, I think the Welsh Government, really, ought to give some
consideration to what assistance it can offer, because having a
vibrant media on a national level in Wales, but also at a local
level and, ultimately, to use the term, hyperlocal level is
extremely important, and the people who are going to participate
need to be properly equipped in order to deal with the challenges
that they may face.
|
|
[277] Hannah
Blythyn: So, assistance in what way? Financial assistance?
|
|
[278] Martin
Shipton: Or even having some kind of central organisation that
can provide them with help when the need arises.
|
|
[279] Mr Toner:
If I can just add to that, it’s a very interesting question
that you’ve just asked. We’ve got an emerging voluntary
workforce that does not have the requisite skills to do the work
that they’re trying to do. And we have a very
recently-made-redundant workforce that does have the skills and
experience. Year by year, journalists in Wales are losing their
jobs. Most recently, the subbing hub at Newport was closed down.
Now, I met journalists there who had 20, 30 years’ experience
and were extremely good at their jobs. There surely should be some
way to utilise those people’s skills in helping them to train
and mentor the new people who are coming into the industry and who
need the skills that they have.
|
|
11:30
|
|
[280] Bethan
Jenkins: Nick, did you want to add anything?
|
|
[281] Mr
Powell: One thought, of course, is building on the work that
NUJ Training Wales already does, which is in receipt of what is,
ultimately, Welsh Government money, because it does offer, at very
affordable rates, the chance for people to train in various skills
that they need. As John surely knows, the biggest sector of our
membership, the one that’s growing all the time, is freelance
members. Now, some journalists become freelancers because they
think that’s the way to prosper. A lot more, bluntly, are
involuntarily becoming freelancers and doing their best to stay in
the industry that way, and therefore obviously they’re not
getting the kind of support that traditionally people got from
their employers. As I say, in a, I think, significant way, NUJ
Training Wales has been helping with that.
|
|
[282]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rydw i jest eisiau gofyn yn fras, ar
sail beth yr oedd Hannah wedi ei ofyn, ynglŷn â beth
fyddai’r Llywodraeth yn gallu ei wneud. Beth fyddai adran o
fewn y Llywodraeth yn edrych fel os nad ydy hi’n mynd i roi
arian ar gyfer prosiectau unigol? Beth ydych chi’n credu,
mewn byd delfrydol, y byddai’r gefnogaeth honno’n
edrych fel petasai yna siawns inni argymell rhywbeth i’r
Llywodraeth yn hynny o beth?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: I just want to ask, on the basis of what Hannah asked,
what the Government could actually do. What would a department
within Government look like if it’s not going to provide
funding for individual projects? In an ideal world, what do you
think that support would look like if there were an opportunity for
us to recommend something to Government?
|
|
[283] Mr
Shipton: I’m not necessarily saying that they
shouldn’t provide direct funding. I’ve seen this week,
for example, that the Welsh-language newspaper Y Cymro is
asking for funding—further funding. Golwg, of course,
gets funding already, so I don’t think that that should be
ruled out. I think also that there could be scope for new ventures
to receive grant funding as job creation operations in the same way
as any other industry. But I do think that, because of the
importance of journalism and news provision to our democracy, it
would be worth the Welsh Government giving some thought to having
some kind of central advisory body that may be in a position to
offer assistance to organisations or to groups of people or
community-based individuals who were thinking of setting up a new
venture. It could be an extension, really, of the kind of business
advice that already exists, but tailored to the needs of an
organisation that was seeking to provide a news service.
|
|
[284] Bethan
Jenkins: Diolch. Suzy Davies.
|
|
[285] Suzy
Davies: Thank you. Actually, you’ve just answered my
first question, there, so that was very helpful. You mentioned that
the Welsh Government might have a role here in providing advice or
grants, but you’ve also said—the NUJ,
now—that:
|
|
[286] ‘The
Assembly should use its influence to see how Google and the like
can be persuaded to aid start-up ventures in Wales.’
|
|
[287] Now, were you
making a point there that Google already does this, it just
doesn’t happen to do it in Wales, or that Google
doesn’t do it all and it’s about time they started?
|
|
[288] Mr Toner:
To the best of my knowledge, Google doesn’t do this at all,
but we have worked with Google over the past couple of years. They
have provided free training for literally hundreds of journalists
on their own Google News Lab journalistic system. So, Google are
very interested in engaging with journalists, providing journalists
with training, and they have a not inconsiderable budget for doing
this—you can imagine what kind of budget they might have. So,
this might be something that Google is interested in.
|
|
[289] Suzy
Davies: All right. So, this is something that Google is sort of
doing, we just don’t know about it particularly. Because my
obvious question is: two of you here work for big private
companies, why aren’t your companies doing this? Or are
they?
|
|
[290] Mr Toner:
I think you have to contrast Trinity Mirror’s annual income
with Google’s annual income. There is quite a big
difference.
|
|
[291] Suzy
Davies: Its reach is also considerably different, so, if
we’re keeping this within Wales, or, I suppose, we could look
a little further, the same principle is there: why Google?
I’m glad that they’re doing something, but I
don’t know enough about what they’re doing, so perhaps
you can fill us in a bit on that.
|
|
[292] Mr Toner:
Google has a very bad reputation among journalists for reproducing
journalistic material without making any payment for it. I believe
that this was a public relations attempt, which we found useful and
we’re happy to collaborate with it.
|
|
[293] Suzy
Davies: Okay. Well, that’s quite helpful, but my wider
point on why Google, why not other private companies with great
influence—.
|
|
[294] Mr
Powell: Well, ITV has got involved, in recent years, in
apprenticeship schemes, in bursaries to go on the course at Cardiff
University, that kind of thing. I suppose you could turn that
question around and say, ‘Why are they suddenly finding the
money to do that when they’ve had a flat budget for all these
years and generally shown other signs of financial strain?’
The answer partly lies—or largely lies, actually—in the
decline of local newspapers. Typically, people used to join HTV, as
it was, in their 30s, having spent a decade working in local
newspapers and building up their knowledge and training and skill
that way. Now, the recruitment is typically of people in their 20s,
who probably have got—well, certainly have got—a
qualification, but haven’t had much experience. And so,
essentially, what you’re seeing is money having to be spent
on managing that process as it were, bringing the right people
forward and trying to encourage a diverse range of recruits and so
on.
|
|
[295]
Suzy Davies: Can I ask very quickly on that? Sorry, Martin, I will
come back to you. You may not know the answer to this, but, of the
ITV apprenticeships across the whole of Britain, do those who go
through the process tend to stay in the organisation? They may move
within Britain, but, if it’s trained by ITV, do they stay
with ITV?
|
|
[296]
Mr Powell: I can really only answer for the people who’ve
come through ITV Wales in the last few years, and the answer is,
‘for the most part, yes’.
|
|
[297]
Suzy Davies: That’s good to hear. Sorry, thank
you.
|
|
[298]
Mr Shipton: Just re-emphasising the point that John was making,
Google and Facebook in particular are scooping up huge amounts of
revenue on a worldwide basis from journalism, and they’re not
paying for it, and therefore recently they have been involved in
something of a charm offensive, where they have been going out,
reaching out and having these Google labs. They’ve had a
couple of such sessions in Cardiff, actually. But, really, there is
a need, I think, to look at the revenues that these two
organisations get, and whether there would be any
possibility—it would have to be on an international
basis—of levying some kind of charge on them.
|
|
[299]
Suzy Davies: So, effectively, they’re stealing news at the
moment.
|
|
[300]
Mr Shipton: They are, yes.
|
|
[301]
Suzy Davies: That’s great, thank you.
|
|
[302]
Bethan Jenkins:
Jeremy Miles.
|
|
[303]
Jeremy Miles: Thank you. We were just discussing local papers, and
you helpfully drew out earlier the distinction between papers as
being a business and papers as being a service. In the note from
the NUJ, you talk about local papers being regarded as a community
asset, being treated in some way as a community asset. Can you just
elaborate on how that might look and what it might mean in terms of
support or a different, changed status, if you like?
|
|
[304]
Mr Shipton: Well, under the previous administration, when Eric
Pickles was the Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government, there was an Act that was passed that had a provision
for local community buildings to be safeguarded to a degree. So, if
there was a building in a particular community that was regarded as
providing a valuable service to the community, it wouldn’t be
possible for the owner of that building simply to shut it down
overnight and say, ‘That’s the end of it’. There
is a provision in the Act for there to be some kind of stay on the
closure of it, to give local people the opportunity to raise funds
in order to buy it for community use and for community ownership.
So, the NUJ has argued over recent years that, in the same way as
perhaps a local village hall is a community asset, so too is a
local newspaper. In many cases, these newspapers have been around
for a century and a half or more, and it seems unreasonable that
somebody sitting in a remote office, possibly in London, possibly
even further afield, sometimes in the United States, can suddenly
make a decision, ‘This newspaper isn’t making enough
money; we’re going to shut it down,’ and what they can
do at the moment is just shut it down overnight. So, there would be
no opportunity for anybody in the community to say, ‘Hold on
a minute. We would like the opportunity to be able to take this on
board.’ So, that’s essentially the core of the
proposal.
|
|
[305]
Jeremy Miles: That’s helpful. As it happens, I submitted a
community assets Bill into the backbench Members’ ballot. Not
successfully, but—.
|
|
[306] Mr Toner:
Can I say a bit more on that? If community newspapers are to
survive or to appear and then survive, we’re going to have to
look at a different model of ownership. A shareholder’s model
has not worked. The reason the industry is in crisis is because
newspapers became a vehicle for providing dividends to
shareholders, and for no other purpose. We need not just a
community service, but a community stake in the ownership of the
newspapers. Obviously, that type of model is up for discussion, but
I think that’s got to be the basis of any successful attempt
to revive and restore local newspapers as a service.
|
|
[307] Jeremy
Miles: Okay.
|
|
[308] Bethan
Jenkins: Sorry, did Lee want to come in particularly on this
community asset point?
|
|
[309] Lee
Waters: No, no. I can wait.
|
|
[310] Bethan
Jenkins: You’re okay.
|
|
[311] Jeremy
Miles: I don’t know if you saw the evidence that we had
from Cardiff University in the previous session. They were talking
about different ways of intervening, if you like, to support news
journalism, including hyperlocal journalism. They were suggesting,
for example, that hyperlocals should be entitled to publish
statutory notices and get the revenue stream that comes with that,
which is potentially significant. And also, I think your evidence
contained this sort of proposal as well, a sort of start-up fund
that would back the establishment of hyperlocal news outlets, if
you like. Do you think those are likely to be effective at turning
around what is a challenging situation?
|
|
[312] Mr
Shipton: I think it would certainly help; any measure of this
kind would help. It’s obviously got to be, if you like, a
package of assistance, and there isn’t a single silver
bullet, but a number of different initiatives, having as a backup
perhaps some kind of central resource that offers advice and that
these organisations can go to—because, clearly, they can
start off with enthusiasm and then sometimes they can get into some
difficulty, maybe because personnel have changed or whatever, and
they really need, I think, to be nurtured and sustained so that
they can become a continuing valued resource for local
communities.
|
|
[313] Jeremy
Miles: Yes. Cardiff University is developing a kind of network,
isn’t it, for that purpose?
|
|
[314] Mr
Shipton: It is, yes.
|
|
[315] Jeremy
Miles: That may offer one potential route. It’s something
you might want to look at around that.
|
|
[316] Mr
Shipton: Absolutely.
|
|
[317] Jeremy
Miles: Okay.
|
|
[318] Mr
Shipton: Yes.
|
|
[319] Bethan
Jenkins: Lee.
|
|
[320] Lee
Waters: I just wanted to put the alternative view that
we’ve heard from the management of ITV and Media Wales.
It’s that, clearly, the commercial—these are commercial
organisations—business model has been under considerable
strain through technological disruption, and, whilst print sales
have collapsed, online viewership, readership, is very, very
healthy. The nature of the journalism is changing, but that’s
analytics led: it’s responding to demand. Are we not in
danger of simply trying to maintain gas lighters or their modern
equivalent? The market is changing and consumers are
responding.
|
|
[321] Mr
Shipton: I think that the trouble with that analysis is that it
makes assumptions about the audience that it’s seeking to
reach. The danger of it is that it’s going to go for a kind
of lowest common denominator approach, where, in order to get more
views, we’re going to be seeking out, in what could arguably
be said to be quite a cynical fashion, the kind of things that
people might be interested in in their lives, like McDonalds or
Burger King or some other kind of food outlet, and I think that
there is evidence that this kind of thing is going on where they
are deliberately putting in time and effort in order to get clicks,
and sometimes the danger with that is that you put so much emphasis
on seeking just to get clicks that you forget the public interest
value of journalism and quality journalism, which can itself,
actually, also lead to clicks. One of the biggest stories this
week—and I’m not boasting about this, I’m just
saying that this happens to be the case—. One of the biggest
stories in terms of clicks this week on Wales Online has been our
revelation of the benefits that would have accrued, hopefully,
to—so far as they were concerned—the family behind the
Circuit of Wales project. So, there is an appetite for serious
journalism. Sometimes, I think that newspaper managers get it right
and are happy to go down that route. The easy route, though, is to
adopt a rather cynical policy of just trying to manipulate people
by writing non-stories about food outlets.
|
|
11:45
|
|
[322] Lee
Waters: Again, the counterargument is that Media Wales is not a
public service broadcaster. It’s a commercial operation
trying to make money. The advantage that analytics offers is that
we now know—and the editors now know—what people are
interested in. So, they’ve told us it’s definitely
within their commercial interest to continue to provide serious
political coverage because the ABC1s need that to attract the
advertisers, and their business needs that for the mix. So, is
there not a danger that we become rather old-fashioned in trying to
curate a sense of what the readers should read that they actually
aren’t interested in?
|
|
[323] Mr
Shipton: On that particular point, I think there is a danger in
disrespecting the experience and expertise of seasoned journalists
who know what it is important that their readers should know
about.
|
|
[324] Lee
Waters: They may not want to read it.
|
|
[325] Mr
Shipton: Hmm?
|
|
[326] Lee
Waters: They may not want to read it.
|
|
[327] Mr
Shipton: I think that if something is of sufficient
significance, they will want to read it, and I think the problem is
that, at the moment, we’ve got perhaps too many people in the
profession who are taking an un-serious view of what journalism is
about. It is not simply a commercial enterprise. It is, of course,
a commercial enterprise, but there is also, within
journalism—and there always has been within
journalism—a mission to inform people about important matters
in society.
|
|
[328] Lee
Waters: And you’ve quoted an example of where
that’s been done, and it’s been commercially successful
this week.
|
|
[329] Mr
Shipton: Exactly. So, that’s good.
|
|
[330] Lee
Waters: So, the model isn’t broken, then.
|
|
[331] Mr
Shipton: The model is broken because there is no correlation
between clicks on the website and revenue. That’s the problem
that they face: that they are concentrating on getting more and
more clicks. In order to achieve more and more clicks, they
sometimes resort to emphasising, shall we say, lighter, more
lifestyle-based material in order to get the clicks. But the
difficulty that the industry is in is that the magnitude of those
clicks—the quantum of those clicks—is not replicated in
the quantum of revenue.
|
|
[332] Lee
Waters: Okay. Can I move the questioning on?
|
|
[333] Bethan
Jenkins: [Inaudible.]—Neil Hamilton is going to
come in first, and then you can come back.
|
|
[334] Neil
Hamilton: I’d just like to follow on from that, actually,
because if we’re talking about public interest journalism,
can you really justify the proposition that your big story of the
week, you know, is journalistic sleuthing? That story must have
come from inside the Welsh Government, who are spoon-feeding you
something to deflect attention from the much bigger story that they
didn’t want uncovered, and on which no work has been done by
journalists in Wales.
|
|
[335] Mr
Shipton: Not even you, Neil, would expect me to reveal my
sources.
|
|
[336] Neil
Hamilton: Well, you don’t have to because only about a
handful of people had the document, the details of which you
published, and we know who they are, and we know that they’re
all inside the Welsh Government. So, it’s QED. But I
don’t object to you—
|
|
[337] Bethan
Jenkins: We’re not going to get into particular
stories.
|
|
[338] Neil
Hamilton: No, but it’s to follow up the general
point.
|
|
[339] Bethan
Jenkins: Yes. That’s fine.
|
|
[340] Neil
Hamilton: Yes, I’m all in favour of journalistic
sleuthing. I wish we actually saw more of it, but the problem with
public funding, of course, is that he who pays the piper tends to
call the tune. Yes, it would be great if we could go back to the
old days that you and I, and we all, remember, in the 1960s and
1970s, but the economic model that sustained that is not going to
return to us. So, I don’t know what we can do, ultimately,
because we can’t turn the clock back, much as UKIP would like
it. But it’s less clear how we can sustain careers.
It’s no good just training journalists for jobs that are
never going to exist.
|
|
[341] Mr
Shipton: Well, this is why it’s important to have
intervention of various kinds, which we’ve outlined in our
case.
|
|
[342] Mr Toner:
Can I just go back to Lee’s last point? I do fully understand
the argument that you’re making, and you’re making it
very well. Yes, you might compare us to fifteenth-century monks
sitting around, creating illustrated manuscripts and saying,
‘Ah, this bloke Caxton, with his printing press, that’s
rubbish. That will never catch on’. [Laughter.] Okay,
I understand that.
|
|
[343] Lee
Waters: Having worked with Martin and Nick, monks
wouldn’t be the parallel I would immediately draw.
[Laughter.]
|
|
[344] Mr Toner:
I also think—Martin mentioned McDonald’s. Okay,
it’s fortunate for McDonald’s that there’s no
such thing as a digital hamburger, otherwise they’d be giving
them away online. But, what we’re arguing is that there is
still a demand for print, simply not the print products that are
currently being offered, which are under-resourced and, of course,
are not providing the readers with the service that they were
getting 10 or 20 years ago. Circulation has fallen, I would argue,
because the product has worsened and people are not getting what
they used to get from it. Let me give you one example that we
haven’t mentioned yet, which is the Caerphilly
Observer. When that was being launched, it was being launched
as a digital publication—as a website—but the local
advertisers said, ‘No, we don’t want to advertise
online, but if you launch a print version, then we’d be happy
to give you advertising’, and that’s what happened. So,
although in many ways your argument is a very powerful one, what
I’m arguing is that there are still a place for print in our
society, and I think local newspapers is one of those places.
It’s also unsurprising that the print titles that are still
thriving have not changed their format. If you think of the
successful publications in print: the Financial Times;
The Economist. Private Eye put on 10 per cent
circulation last year, and it now sells almost twice as many copies
as The Guardian.
|
|
[345] Lee
Waters: These are niche publications though, aren’t they,
and there is a market for niche.
|
|
[346] Mr Toner:
Well, it’s niche, but it’s investigative journalism,
isn’t it? It’s what we would all like journalism to be
about.
|
|
[347] Lee
Waters: Sure.
|
|
[348] Mr Toner:
And that’s one of the reasons why people—
|
|
[349] Lee
Waters: Sorry, can I just move us on, because I want to be
persuaded by this idea, but one of the reasons we’ve held
this inquiry, rather than just bemoan the state of the industry, is
to try and see whether there is some kind of economic model that
would allow this kind of journalism to thrive again in Wales. Now,
the only answer that has been come up with so far is to try and
raid the BBC’s coffers to try and shore up journalism outside
of London. You are concerned in your evidence that this will simply
plug gaps that commercial organisation have created to maximise
their profit. I’m interested in the example that you gave
from 10 years ago in north Wales, where the BBC did set up the
‘where I live’ strand with producers and teams in both
Bangor and Wrexham, but, under pressure from the commercial sector,
were persuaded to scale those back. So, there are some grounds for
cynicism, I guess, about the motivations of the private sector
here, but is there a way, you think, of harnessing this funding
that is being released from the BBC to achieve the objectives that
you want to see?
|
|
[350] Mr Toner:
There must be, but we haven’t even thought about that yet.
We’d have to come back to you on that one. It’s not
something we’ve even considered.
|
|
[351] Lee
Waters: Okay. Thank you.
|
|
[352] Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Neil Hamilton.
|
|
[353] Neil
Hamilton: I don’t know whether you’re able to help
us in relation to Welsh language journalism in Wales, and what
assessment you might have made of the health of Welsh language
journalism vis-à-vis English language journalism.
We’ve had evidence from Bangor University that Welsh language
journalism’s been going through a golden age in comparison
with English language journalism, basically because of public
funding—you’ve already referred to Golwg—and
because the Welsh Government has this million Welsh speakers
objective and, obviously, publications and tv programmes in Welsh
are an essential part of achieving that objective. Are you able to
give us your view as a union on the state of Welsh language
journalism?
|
|
[354] Mr
Shipton: Well, clearly there are Welsh language communities
which, for many years, have valued their local publications. I
think there’s some irony in the fact that, while there is a
lot of hand-wringing, if you like, about the prospect of
subsidising English language publications, that doesn’t seem
to have entered people’s consciousness so far as the subsidy
of Welsh language publications in concerned, because it has been
going on, and there haven’t, so far as I’m aware, been
any conflict-of-interest
problems. It is quite easy to set up arm’s-length
funding operations to avoid the actuality or the perception that
Government is somehow controlling these publications. So, I
don’t really think that would be an issue.
|
|
[355] Clearly, a few
years ago, I know that there were quite a number of people who
contributed to a fund in order to try to get a Welsh language daily
newspaper going in Wales. It was going to be called Y Byd, I
think. Quite a few people lost their money as a consequence,
because the economics of it just didn’t stack up. So, that
would be extremely difficult, which is why, ultimately, Golwg360
came along. That’s a website that is funded via the Welsh
Books Council, and there was a competition that took place, and I
know that Trinity Mirror did make a bid at the time and lost out to
Golwg. That’s all very well, but it does show that it
is possible to have public funding for journalism. So, I think
that’s the example that Welsh language journalism in Wales
perhaps shows—that you can have public funding for journalism
and it doesn’t have to compromise the editorial integrity of
it.
|
|
[356] Neil
Hamilton: Have you got a view on that, Nick, at all?
|
|
[357] Mr
Powell: Well, absolutely. We, clearly, as a commercial
venture—. ITV Wales makes programmes for S4C and, clearly,
the money that is buying those programmes is overwhelmingly public
money. It’s no secret that S4C’s budgets have been
squeezed very hard in recent years, and I would certainly praise my
Welsh language colleagues for having kept standards so high despite
those problems.
|
|
[358] Neil
Hamilton: Obviously, the population that is potentially going
to be served by Welsh language journalism is relatively small,
whereas the English language is universal. Do you think that there
are different solutions that are applicable to Welsh language
journalism that won’t apply, for practical reasons, probably,
in relation to English language journalism? Is it easier,
therefore, to provide for Welsh language publications or
broadcasting output than to do what you want to do for the English
language media? In other words, you can’t really just
extrapolate from what happens for Welsh language journalism to
taking the much, much bigger market that is potentially available
for English language products.
|
|
[359] Mr
Shipton: I don’t think there are any hurdles in principle
that couldn’t be jumped. As I said, I think that the public
funding of Welsh language journalism shows that it can be done
without compromising editorial integrity, and, therefore, I
don’t see why it couldn’t work also in English language
communities.
|
|
[360] Neil
Hamilton: John, do you have a view?
|
|
[361] Mr Toner:
No, I agree with what Martin said.
|
|
[362] Neil
Hamilton: Okay, great.
|
|
[363] Bethan
Jenkins: Lee Waters.
|
|
[364] Lee
Waters: Can I just jump in on that example, because there is a
precedent in English language magazines that are funded via the
Welsh Books Council? And a number of publications are funded. The
trouble is nobody reads them. So, Planet, for example, gets,
I think, something in the realms of £80,000 a year of public
subsidy and they sell something around 200 copies. So, there is a
judgment about to what extent should the state be trying to
intervene to disrupt the market for something where there
isn’t much demand there, set against the need for plurality
and choice to keep culture alive and vibrant.
|
|
[365] Mr
Shipton: Planet, of course, is a niche cultural
publication that isn’t news focused. It has a lot of
high-powered, intellectual critiques within its pages.
[Laughter.]
|
|
[366] Lee
Waters: When was the last time you read it?
|
|
[367] Mr
Shipton: I get a free copy sent to me, so I do have the chance
to—
|
|
[368] Lee
Waters: Do you read it?
|
|
[369] Mr
Shipton: Not from cover to cover, I have to confess.
[Laughter.] But I think what we’re talking about is
more grass-roots journalism, for which I am certain that there
remains an appetite.
|
|
[370] Mr
Powell: It’s perhaps just worth reminding the committee
that Planet was revived with the aid of a Welsh Arts Council
grant because the Welsh Arts Council lost its nerve, bluntly, about
Arcade, which was a news magazine, not unlike Golwg,
which just very slightly rattled a few cages, and that was enough
for them to think, ‘We shouldn’t be subsidising this.
Let’s go back to Planet’, which they had
previously subsidised, and which doesn’t cause the same sort
of shivers down the spine.
|
|
[371] Lee
Waters: So, what’s the moral of that story? What do we
draw out of that?
|
|
12:00
|
|
[372]
Mr Powell: The moral of that story is that you’ve got to
be—as has successfully been done with
Golwg—you’ve got to learn to be arm’s
length and accept that sometimes that money you voted it is going
to say something about you that you would rather had not been
brought to public attention.
|
|
[373]
Bethan Jenkins:
Can I ask a question specifically for
Martin? We’re going to be getting Trinity Mirror from Wales
in. We’ve struggled—well, we’ve been told that UK
Trinity Mirror don’t need to come in because the Welsh arm
can answer the questions that we need. But I’m just wondering
whether you would agree with that, because a lot of the decisions,
as John Toner mentioned earlier, would be to do with the
shareholders, would be to do with that UK decision. I’ve
actually been told before that the Welsh arm can then only do what
they can with the budgets that they’ve got. So, what would
you say to that? Also, we touched on Port Talbot earlier, but we
haven’t touched on the Evening Post being subsumed
into Media Wales. Do you think that that plurality is being diluted
by that very action in and of itself?
|
|
[374]
Mr Shipton: Trinity Mirror is actually quite a centralised
organisation. In pay terms, for example, decisions are taken at the
centre. I’m afraid sometimes we go through this farce of
having meetings with local managers who then repeat to us what the
offer is, but the offer has been dictated to them by their bosses
in Canary Wharf. So the whole thing is a bit of a
charade.
|
|
[375]
While I personally have a lot of respect
for the managers of Media Wales—I’ve worked with them
for years and I know them; they are very well intentioned,
there’s no question about that—they have to operate
within the parameters that are set down for them on a policy basis,
again, from Canary Wharf. So, Trinity Mirror will have said to you
exactly the same as they say to us when we’re asking for pay
talks. They did in fact have a couple of years when we did have
national pay discussions, but they’ve decided to revert to
local pay discussions now, and you do go through the charade of
just being offered what everybody else is being offered, and the
local managers have no discretion. So, while obviously the local
managers will have discretion over particular stories and over how
stories should be presented, it all has to be done within the
overall context of the guidelines that are laid down by Trinity
Mirror.
|
|
[376]
One thing that I have noticed, actually,
since the South Wales Evening Post came into the stable is
that, for example, more of the stories from the South Wales
Evening Post are now appearing in the Western Mail,
which in a strange kind of way gives more of a national feel to the
Western Mail. Actually, also there are more stories from
north Wales appearing in the Western Mail than used to be
the case, and this is because there is a sort of copy-sharing
arrangement that takes place where material that is written for one
Trinity Mirror publication can be used by others,
and—
|
|
[377] Bethan Jenkins: But isn’t the
problem there, then, that people would be buying the Evening
Post and saying, ‘Well, there might not be any point in
my buying the Evening Post anymore because I can get the
story in the Western Mail’?
|
|
[378]
Mr Shipton: Indeed. That is the absolute problem. But of course
this all stems from the economic difficulties that they have.
Because the business model isn’t working, they’ve been
cutting back on the number of journalists they employ and this is
the way that they’re filling the papers.
|
|
[379]
Bethan Jenkins:
Any other comments?
|
|
[380]
Mr Toner: I think that goes back to the earlier point I made
about the concentration of media ownership. If Trinity Mirror
hadn’t be allowed to own everything we wouldn’t be
having this problem. That’s not your fault, by the
way.
|
|
[381]
Bethan Jenkins:
Thank you. I appreciate that. Other
things are. Any other questions? Okay. Well, we’ll be in
touch, I’m sure, with any more information on this inquiry.
If you have anything to add, then please do send it to us. But
thank you for coming in. Diolch yn fawr iawn.
|
|
[382]
Rydym ni’n mynd i gael seibiant
o bum munud. Diolch.
|
We will take a
five-minute break. Thank you.
|
|
Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 12:04 ac 12:16.
The meeting adjourned between 12:04 and 12:16.
|
|
Newyddiaduraeth
Newyddion yng Nghymru: Sesiwn Dystiolaeth 9
News Journalism in Wales: Evidence Session 9
|
|
[383]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rydym ni wedi mynd i sesiwn gyhoeddus
nawr.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: We are now back in public session.
|
|
[384]
I don’t know if you want
to—
|
|
[385]
Dr Howells: Na, mae’n iawn.
|
Dr
Howells: No, it’s okay.
|
|
[386]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rydym yn symud at eitem 5,
newyddiaduraeth newyddion yng Nghymru: sesiwn dystiolaeth 9. Yn
anffodus, rydym wedi cael ymddiheuriadau hwyr gan Thomas Sinclair,
golygydd y Pembrokeshire Herald, ond croeso i Rachel
Howells, golygydd y Port Talbot Magnet.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: We move to item 5, news journalism in Wales: evidence
session 9. Unfortunately, we have received late apologies from
Thomas Sinclair, editor of Pembrokeshire Herald, but I would
like to welcome Rachel Howells, editor of the Port Talbot
Magnet.
|
|
[387]
Dr Howells: Wel, cyn-olygydd, really.
|
Dr
Howells: Well, former editor, really.
|
|
[388]
Bethan Jenkins:
Cyn-olygydd. Wel, ie, yn anffodus.
Diolch am ddod i mewn heddiw. Rwy’n siŵr eich bod chi
wedi gweld y trafodaethau blaenorol. Y rheswm pam rydym ni’n
cynnal yr ymchwiliad yma yw trio edrych am atebion i’r
sefyllfa sydd ohoni ar hyn o bryd o ran dirywiad y newyddion. A
allwch chi jest esbonio i ni yn fras a ydych chi’n credu bod
yna argyfwng o ran newyddiaduraeth leol? A oes yna argyfwng sydd yn
benodol ac yn unigryw i Gymru, neu a ydy hynny’n rhywbeth mwy
eang yn eich barn chi?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Former editor. Well, yes, unfortunately so. Thank you
very much for joining us today. I’m sure you will have seen
our previous discussions. The reason we’re having this
inquiry is to seek solutions to the situation that currently exists
in terms of the decline of journalism. Can you just explain to us
briefly whether you think there is a crisis in terms of local
journalism, and is there a uniquely Welsh crisis, or is this a
broader issue in your view?
|
|
[389] Dr
Howells: I’m going to switch to English now, because all
of the research was done in English and all the writing has been
done in English.
|
|
[390] Bethan
Jenkins: That’s why I didn’t know you spoke
Welsh.
|
|
[391] Dr
Howells: This is true. I hide it very well. Repeat the question
to me again, please; I got distracted there.
|
|
[392]
Bethan Jenkins:
A ydych chi’n meddwl bod
argyfwng mewn newyddion lleol, ac os ydych chi’n credu bod
yna elfennau unigryw i Gymru, neu a yw’n rhywbeth sydd yn fwy
eang na Chymru yn unig.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: It was just whether you thought there was a crisis in
local news, and whether you think there are uniquely Welsh elements
to that, or if it’s something that is broader than just
applying to Wales alone.
|
|
[393] Dr
Howells: Yes, there is a crisis in local journalism,
unfortunately, and it’s been unfolding for decades.
It’s come about in lots of different ways and because of lots
of different reasons, but I would say it’s been accelerated
by the advent of the internet, by digital media and by newspapers
becoming excited about all of the opportunities that were offered
by the internet but unfortunately came jumping in, perhaps without
a clear model for getting revenue from digital. So, now we have an
audience that’s very used to and comfortable with receiving
free news and not paying for it. It’s expected, almost, that
that should arrive on your phone or in your home somehow without
any real understanding of how that’s paid for, who provides
it and with quite an animosity towards online advertising from the
audience side as well—ad blockers, for example, which has
made it very difficult for those newspapers to obtain the revenues.
While they’ve done incredibly well, and successfully in lots
of ways, at gaining audiences, and younger audiences, and
they’ve done some very exciting things with multimedia, those
audiences aren’t necessarily garnering the digital revenue.
Something that I found through the research—and you’ll
see it in my thesis, although it’s not in this
submission—was that Trinity Mirror, in gaining those digital
audiences, increased by something like 30 million in its
first—between a certain period. I can’t remember the
period; I think it is 2002 to 2009, something like that. So, it
went up by 30 million, and by anybody’s standards,
that’s a huge increase, and well done them for gaining that
digital audience, but meanwhile their print revenues went down by
something like £270 million. So, for every £1 they
gained online they lost £7.91. To stay in business, really,
and to maintain profit levels—and I hope you’ve heard
from others that the profit levels have been maintained at quite a
high level for a lot of these large media companies—the
owners have protected the bottom line by cutting staff. I’ve
been able to see in Wales some 60 per cent to 90 per cent staff
losses, just from looking at the annual reports of newspaper
companies.
|
|
[394] If you look
back, they were predicting that local newspapers would close and
that would be the end of local newspapers. That was happening 10
years ago. People were sort of saying, ‘This is the
end’. But what’s actually happened is we’ve got
zombie newspapers where what’s happened is all the cutting is
happening behind the scenes. So, you’ve got titles that once
had a full staff and editor, a photographer, three or four
reporters—through the Valleys, the Celtic weeklies are a good
example of this—a sub-editor overseeing all of that, a kind
of a machine, and each one of them had a district office and served
its community.
|
|
[395] What you now
have is a converged newsroom in Cardiff with communities that feel
quite remote from those journalists and perhaps the journalists are
quite unaccountable to those communities. That’s certainly
what I found in Port Talbot, anyway. Did that answer your—? I
didn’t address your ‘Is it different in Wales?’
point. I think—
|
|
[396] Bethan
Jenkins: Ofcom have said that we are served less well by other
forms—commercial radio and such—anyway, so that’s
really what I was trying to ask.
|
|
[397] Dr
Howells: Yes, and there’s not one large, single newspaper
that covers the whole of Wales either. Although the Western
Mail says it’s the newspaper of Wales, the penetration
and the readership of that in north Wales—you know, the
Daily Post is the favoured newspaper up there. So, there
isn’t really one single newspaper that I would say serves the
whole of Wales. Traditionally, the weeklies have performed a lot
better than the dailies in Wales, and they were more resilient for
longer when the circulation declines began to hit.
|
|
[398] Is it different?
It’s different because already there was a structural
weakness in Wales, so we were already a little bit behind the game.
If you look at it comparatively with Scotland, with the strength of
the daily newspapers up there, in terms of the political debate
that they have and calling people to account—you know, you
have lots of different voices. It’s a bit more homogenised in
Wales, and ownership underpins that. It’s more homogenised in
ownership structures as well.
|
|
[399]
Bethan Jenkins:
Diolch yn fawr iawn. Rydym yn symud
ymlaen at gwestiynau nawr gan Hannah.
|
Bethan Jenkins:
Thank you very much.
We’ll move on to questions from Hannah.
|
|
[400] Hannah
Blythyn: Diolch, Chair. At the same time as we’ve seen
this decline in the traditional commercial press in Wales,
we’ve obviously seen this increase in hyperlocal journalism,
volunteer journalism and online sites. To what extent do you
think—I know there’s obviously issues within that, but
to what extent do you think that has mitigated that gap in that
news deficit?
|
|
[401] Dr
Howells: I think it’s a good start. I don’t think
that it has the resources yet, or the skills underpinning it
either. I worry that perhaps, in Port Talbot, for example, we
missed the boat, in a way. One of the problems we had was
recruiting volunteers with the skills needed, and freelancers with
the skills we needed, because they’d sort of migrated into
other industries, or into communications and PR. So, a lot of the
journalists—and in my submission, you’ll see that even
the seven founding members of the board went off quite quickly when
there weren’t salaries involved. Of course, you’ve got
to pay your bills at the end of the day, haven’t you?
Journalists aren’t charities. This is a job, it’s a
profession.
|
|
[402] So, I think
that’s a problem in that the skills pool, the freelance pool,
perhaps isn’t there like it was, and that perhaps journalists
are finding it easier to find other jobs, rather than put
themselves on the line. It’s a big commitment to start a
hyperlocal. I can testify to this completely—it eats up your
life, it takes over your life. It’s a privilege to do it, but
it’s a huge commitment, and it’s not always financially
rewarding. In fact, it wasn’t at all for me really. It was an
experiment that we did with the Port Talbot Magnet, and it
was an experiment, ultimately, that unfortunately failed.
|
|
[403] Hannah
Blythyn: That actually leads me quite nicely to my next
question—if you want to expand on what were the major
challenges. I know, unfortunately, it’s folded now, but if
you could do it again, what are the learning points? What needs to
be done differently to make it more sustainable, and perhaps what
could we be recommending is the support needed to make that
possible?
|
|
[404] Dr
Howells: I’m sure you’ve heard elsewhere that the
Magnet did manage to gain £10,000 of funding, but we
were quite far into the project by that point. But it did enable
us—it sort of was a bridging grant really, to enable us to go
into print, and going into print helped us no end. It increased our
reach in the town. It got our name out there in a way that, even
though we had been there for three years, wasn’t out there in
the same way before we started turning up on their doorsteps every
month. The revenues, as well, that print allowed us to access were
so different, once we went into print. That meant we could start
paying people; although obviously the costs are higher, it also had
that little chunk of being able to pay freelancers as well. Does
that answer your question? I don’t know if I have gone far
enough.
|
|
[405] What were the
challenges? Well, there are so many, really: that skills pool;
that—. One of the big problems that we had was in recruiting
an advertising sales person, and to try and get them with enough
incentives to get out there and sell. We didn’t find there
was enough wealth or willingness, really, in the business community
to support us. What lessons could we have learned? Perhaps, as a
co-operative, I think we spread the load and spread the
responsibility and the duties. But, once everybody drifted off and
did other things, the co-operative model didn’t really do us
the favours that we would have liked it to have done, and I
don’t think that local people felt that they had that
ownership of the co-operative either. But, I don’t think that
co-operatives are necessarily a bad way of going forward in the
sector. I just don’t think that it particularly worked for
us.
|
|
[406] Hannah
Blythyn: Linked to the revenue, in your paper, you say
something about the fact that you had trouble accessing funds
because they weren’t set up in a way to serve what you were
doing.
|
|
[407] Dr
Howells: Yes. At the very beginning, when we first started out,
hyperlocal didn’t really exist. The word
‘hyperlocal’ didn’t really exist, so we had to go
to existing funds like the Big Lottery. They were really geared
around capital grants like furnishing community halls or, you know,
working with disadvantaged groups, basically. So, there was
nothing, really, that served us. Carnegie was the first one really
to catch up and say, ‘Well, here’s some dedicated money
just for fostering local news.’ As a community good, it is
something that is necessary—to have an informed, represented
community with access to scrutiny. So, to have that understanding
in the grant-giving community took a few years, to be honest,
before we were even able to access it. And then, once we did, that
money ran out, and then, of course, Port Talbot went into the
economic slump that it did around the steel crisis, which finished
off what was already quite precarious, really, and built on a lot
of volunteer time.
|
|
[408] Hannah
Blythyn: Okay, thanks.
|
|
[409] Bethan
Jenkins: Suzy has an—.
|
|
[410]
Suzy Davies: I just wanted to ask you: you mentioned earlier on
the difficulty in recruiting people of sufficient professional
standard to give any model the sort of sustainability it would
need. Yet we heard earlier that Cardiff University has got a
break-out group that is studying community journalism, and
community news journalism. So, there are people with an interest in
doing this and who are coming through the system, if you like. But,
where are they going to go after? Are they choosing a pointless
direction, in a sense?
|
|
[411]
Dr Howells: I don’t think they are because there are
successful examples of hyperlocal around the place. Look at
Caerphilly—that’s a great one. Around London there are
lots of successful ones; the Brixton Bugle is a great
example. So, there are successful ones—I think The
Lincolnite is another—where youngsters have come through
universities with those skills and with that entrepreneurial
mind-set, and all the digital know-how, and kind of wanting to
almost play in the sandpit and develop new ways of doing it. The
Lincolnite is a great example because it’s gone into
partnership with the traditional legacy media newspaper that is
there, and they are bringing in a younger audience to that
newspaper. So, they have worked out a really good partnership
between the two. So, I don’t think so at all. I think
it’s a burgeoning sector. I think that, in some ways, the
problem that we had was a geographical one and a community-based
one. But also, that community is almost in more
need.
|
|
[412]
If you look at Bristol, The Bristol
Cable is a co-operative with 400 members, operated by skilled
local people. There are graphic designers who are making these
amazing infographics. They have got an alternative journalism
style—so, they are going out and doing investigations. They
are doing some really interesting stuff. They are in print. They
are monthly. They have got this huge team. They send off teams of
reporters to do each story every month. But, Bristol is a huge city
with a bank of people who have passions and time on their hands to
do this, and who want to support something financially that they
feel is answering a need that isn’t being answered elsewhere.
So, I don’t ever see that being able to be replicated
somewhere like Port Talbot. Something different needs to be done
there, where—.
|
|
12:30
|
|
[413] I don’t
even see that advertising revenue is the answer in a place like
that. However, look how much it’s needed. There are
constantly stories. Tata is based there, for example, and I know
that there’s a story breaking there at the moment about
access to the beach behind the steelworks. So, constantly the
people are in need, those campaigns, those activists are in need of
a voice of a journalist, of an advocate, who can ask questions on
their behalf and gain answers and have an audience big enough to
broadcast those answers. That’s not happening at the moment,
and we need to make sure that it does. It’s really important
that it does.
|
|
[414] Suzy
Davies: Thank you.
|
|
[415] Bethan
Jenkins: Neil Hamilton.
|
|
[416] Neil
Hamilton: I’d like to ask you a couple of questions that
arise from the written evidence from Thomas Sinclair—
|
|
[417] Dr
Howells: Oh, okay.
|
|
[418] Neil
Hamilton: Well, they’re general points. In particular,
he’s suggested that the Welsh Government should provide
funding and training for local journalists and small local news
organisations. I was wondering whether that’s something that
you are in favour of, and if so, how do you think this funding
should be targeted?
|
|
[419] Dr
Howells: Broadly, I am in favour of it. I think it’s
really important that it’s arm’s length and I think a
dedicated fund that would do something similar to what Carnegie did
for us, which is to bridge or to help somebody start up, is a great
way forward. And it will encourage innovation in the sector, and
hopefully start to fill some of these news black holes, because I
think they’re far more prevalent than we know, just based on
the research that I’ve done because of this withdrawal of
journalism. I think communities are going to have to step up here
and fill this gap, so training is going to be essential for those
people. Legal training is essential, and the Herald is a
great example of perhaps not having that knowledge and not having
the resources to oversee people who don’t have the training,
which is what’s happening. I’m sure you’re aware
that the Herald’s been through the courts recently for
naming a sexual assault victim—or identifying one, sorry. I
think that just shines a light, really, on the fact that that
training and that oversight is very difficult to come by in these
small organisations.
|
|
[420] For the
Magnet, where, equally, we didn’t have access to
enough trained people, what that did to us was make us more
cautious. You don’t want a sector that’s too cautious
and too boring, either. You need one that’s rambunctious and
standing up to those in authority. So, I do think a targeted fund
would help. I think there are lots of other potential solutions or
ways that Government could ease things. Let’s be honest, the
news industry is subsidised anyway through VAT, at the moment, but
that’s not really accessible to that lower echelon of
start-up, because we weren’t registered for VAT anyway. That
made no difference to us, because our turnover wasn’t big
enough. So, there must be ways of easing or helping those smaller
operations just to get them off the ground, to give them the
capital to go into print, or create an app or whatever that might
be that’s suitable for their particular audience in their
geographical location.
|
|
[421] Neil
Hamilton: One of the financial mainstays of local news
organisations traditionally has been advertising by public bodies,
local authorities and so on. The other point I wanted to ask you,
arising from Thomas Sinclair’s written evidence, was changing
the system of local authorities publishing statutory notices. He
says in his evidence that—. I’ll quote what he says.
The commercial sensitivity of some local newspapers to local
authority revenue influences their editorial decisions. He cites
the example—I’m not asking you to comment on this
particular instance—but he cites The Carmarthen
Journal and the South Wales Guardian in his evidence to
us, and without being specific, I wonder if you would agree that
local authorities and others should use their facilities to assist
community publications such as yours, and some of that advertising
revenue should come to you rather than traditional news media.
|
|
[422] Dr
Howells: I think absolutely it’s something that
we’ve been calling for for a long time, that the
rule—it’s not actually a rule, it’s more of a
convention—that you can advertise or you should advertise in
the local newspaper—. But newspaper, in the dictionary, is
defined as a weekly or daily, and so anything else—. So, I
think Richard Gurner in Caerphilly and the Caerphilly
Observer have been able to argue successfully that his
fortnightly newspaper is eligible. So, the local council there have
changed their policy, and they do place some adverts with him. And
that’s, at the moment, being done local authority by local
authority, by people who are just trying to push and open the door.
We’ve not found things easy with our local council. There was
a small department within the council who regularly advertised with
us, but that was it. We didn’t get anywhere with them,
really, and there was almost a tone of derision in some of the
e-mails that we had back, offering to meet them or whatever.
|
|
[423] I think
there’s almost an education that needs to happen around the
virtues of community news and not-for-profit news and social
enterprise and co-operatives in that sector, because it’s not
been—. It’s not accredited at the moment, and I know
the Centre for Community Journalism are taking great strides in
moving that forward to gain accreditation, and perhaps that will be
a bit of a kite mark for those organisations, but at the moment
there’s not enough awareness out there of what they are and
what they can do. It took us seven years, really, to open those
doors to some of those organisations, but yes, I think it would be
hugely helpful to open that revenue stream up, to attend a process
or whatever that might be, to relax the conventions around it would
be hugely helpful.
|
|
[424] Neil
Hamilton: And obviously, the other point that he makes in this
respect is that it’s ridiculous, in an age that is
increasingly digital, that notices of that kind should be printed
in print.
|
|
[425] Dr
Howells: In print, yes. Potentially, that’s something
that I think will need to be looked at, yes. The problem local
authorities will have there is in establishing audience, and that
will freeze out the small players again, won’t it? If
you’re going to go to WalesOnline and they can give you
accredited figures for clicks, then the small players are not going
to be able to compete with that.
|
|
[426] Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Dawn.
|
|
[427] Dawn
Bowden: Thank you. On a similar theme, and still referring to
Thomas Sinclair’s evidence, what’s your thought on
local authorities producing their own magazines? A number do. I
don’t know whether they do in your area; certainly in mine,
they do—
|
|
[428] Dr
Howells: They did, yes.
|
|
[429] Dawn
Bowden: —and using that vehicle as the place to place
their advertisements. He’s suggesting that should be banned,
that we shouldn’t have local authorities producing their own
magazines and putting all their own adverts in there. I just wonder
what your thoughts on that might be.
|
|
[430] Dr
Howells: It’s an argument I’ve heard rumble back
and forth for a long time. I think it’s very difficult for
local authorities where there isn’t a well-established local
print paper that’s getting out to a mass audience. What are
they supposed to do to get their messages out there? But on the
other hand, of course then what you’re doing is taking away
that independence and that scrutiny, potentially, and just
providing a load of, basically, PR—potentially biased
material. So, that’s difficult for that audience, I would
argue, who perhaps don’t have access to the scrutiny that
they need. I don’t actually think it’s helpful for the
audience and I think they’ve become very cynical about the
level of top-down control of the news, and I think they are
calling—. Certainly in the focus groups that I did, they were
calling for more transparency, and they’re quite angry about
the fact that people don’t listen to them and their voices
aren’t heard, aren’t being represented. So, I think
there’s a danger there. Whether you ban them, I think
that’s a difficult thing to—.
|
|
[431] Dawn
Bowden: It’s the difference between information and
propaganda, I guess, isn’t it?
|
|
[432] Dr
Howells: Yes, absolutely, and that’s an age-old argument,
isn’t it? One of the things to bear in mind, now, is that
local councils and public institutions around the place are saying,
‘Well, we’ve got no money to advertise and we’ve
got no money to support this; we’ve got no money to give you
funding,’ and yet they do support enormous PR operations and
marketing operations. So, there is money; it’s just a
question of how you allocate it and what you choose to spend it on,
and I worry that there is a reluctance to spend on independence and
scrutiny. Perhaps it’s not wanted.
|
|
[433] Dawn
Bowden: Sure, okay. Just moving on to evidence that we have
from somebody else; I don’t know if you know Dr Andy Williams
from Cardiff University.
|
|
[434] Dr
Howells: He was my supervisor on my PhD, so I know him
well.
|
|
[435] Dawn
Bowden: There we are then. So, he called on the UK Government
to reassess the tax breaks for newspapers, but just hearing what
you were saying about your project with the Port Talbot
Magnet, you weren’t paying tax, were you? You certainly
weren’t paying VAT.
|
|
[436] Dr
Howells: We weren’t paying VAT.
|
|
[437] Dawn
Bowden: So, I don’t know whether that would have helped
in your situation, but I don’t know what your thoughts on
that might have been.
|
|
[438] Dr
Howells: No, but I mean, it would have been nice to be in a
position to be able to enjoy that. I think there are lots of
medium-sized independents and bigger companies as well who would
benefit from that. Something else that really did come strongly out
of my research is that it’s not one thing to the exclusion of
all others. Plurality and competition are really good for audiences
because they give audiences more angles on stories. They encourage
journalists to compete against each other and ask the
questions—the tougher questions—that maybe it’s
easier to skate over when there’s nobody else bothering or
doing it. You know, they’ve got—. The journalists were
telling me they’ve got to get an original front
page—back in the days when there was competition, they had to
make sure their content was original.
|
|
[439] Dawn
Bowden: Yes, the scoop.
|
|
[440] Dr
Howells: Yes, exactly, the scoop. So, that gave them
motivation, got them out of the office and got them asking
questions that, perhaps, their opposites on the other newspaper
weren’t asking. Where was I going with that? Yes, plurality
and competition are so important. So, trying to give tax breaks or
funding across all of the different echelons of media has got to be
a good thing. We need to foster more and let a thousand flowers
bloom, basically.
|
|
[441] Dawn
Bowden: Just to be one tool in the box, basically.
|
|
[442] Dr
Howells: Yes. You know, when I spoke to some of the journalists
that I interviewed for the research about the fact—did they
think that the Post had maintained what was proportionally
quite a big staff on the Neath Port Talbot patch because the
Magnet was there competing with them—they seemed to
agree that that was probably the case.
|
|
[443] Dawn
Bowden: That’s interesting, yes.
|
|
[444] Dr
Howells: So, it does make newspapers work harder when
there’s someone else working on their patch, which is why BBC
local would have been probably a good thing. I know it was argued
against because of competition, but I think, actually, in terms of
editorial, those kinds of projects are good for local
communities.
|
|
[445] Dawn
Bowden: Yes, okay. All right, that’s fine. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
|
|
[446] Bethan
Jenkins: Lee Waters.
|
|
[447] Lee
Waters: First of all, thank you for the evidence you’ve
submitted and the quality and the work you’ve put into it.
It’s very helpful for the committee. The section on your
experience in the Port Talbot Magnet is a profoundly
depressing read—
|
|
[448] Dr
Howells: It is, isn’t it? You didn’t have to live
it. [Laughter.]
|
|
[449] Lee
Waters: No, I know, and I think you should be commended for the
effort you put into trying to make it fly.
|
|
[450] Dr
Howells: Thank you.
|
|
[451] Lee
Waters: The lesson I draw from it is, apart from the changes
affecting the whole industry, which, clearly, are a huge factor in
your failure to make it work, but also the fact that you’re
working within a depressed local economic environment as well,
which are both equally significant—
|
|
[452] Dr
Howells: Yes.
|
|
[453] Lee
Waters: So, in terms of practical things, I similarly accept
the analysis of the second part of your evidence, which I find very
persuasive, what’s the practical level of intervention there
would need to be to allow that business to become viable—what
would that kind of annual subsidy be? Because it’s no good
doing just one-off training budgets or grants or—
|
|
[454] Dr
Howells: No, I agree with you.
|
|
[455] Lee
Waters: It needs to a sustainable revenue stream.
|
|
[456] Dr
Howells: Have you seen the research by the Media Trust? Natalie
Fenton’s team in London did it. It basically advocates the
establishment of news hubs across communities in the UK. So,
however they would be funded—Government funded,
perhaps—they would have a local journalist based in that
town, salaried, basically, going to every—similar to
what’s happening through the BBC at the moment now. But they
would be independent, perhaps sharing that news and information
with others. So, I think what I’m arguing for, in a very
roundabout way, because I think the case they make is very solid in
that report, is a salaried journalist in each community that
requires it—it’s that kind of commitment. But it would
need to be done at arm’s length, independent—.
|
|
[457] Lee
Waters: But that wouldn’t serve as a print model. You
wouldn’t be able to produce a newspaper based on
that—
|
|
[458] Dr
Howells: Not necessarily—you could. You could. At the
moment, the BBC scheme would have the journalist going to the
council meetings—and not necessarily the courts
either—it’s council meetings and health boards and
public institutions rather than the courts as well. So, I
don’t know how far-reaching it will be, and I don’t
think that local—. From what I’ve heard, anyway, I
don’t see that, because of the PAYE implications and covering
sick pay and all that—I don’t think that many
hyperlocals in Wales are going for that. I can see the bigger
companies taking it on, and the smaller companies taking advantage
of the copy that’s produced. Whether those journalists are
then going to be based—say, for example, there’s one in
Port Talbot—will they be based in the Evening Post,
because the Evening Post may bid for it. Will they be based,
therefore, in Swansea? And will that almost negate—? You
know, yes, they’ll go to the council meeting, but will they
be accessible to local people? Will they be accountable? Will
they—? They’re not necessarily going to be there
covering the campaigns or looking for other stories and giving the
representation that you might need.
|
|
[459] Lee
Waters: So, how would you mitigate that?
|
|
[460] Dr
Howells: Well, for me, it’s putting somebody in the
middle of Port Talbot in an office and allowing them to do their
job: get out of the office, report and submit that, either through
something like the Magnet, where you’d have a
co-operative of journalists, perhaps, who work—. You know, a
Wales-wide co-operative, with each journalist—
|
|
[461] Lee
Waters: What could be the platform that they publish on?
|
|
[462] Dr
Howells: Well, they could publish on the Magnet, they
could publish on Facebook, they could publish that copy if
it’s Government funded—that would be up to you, really,
to set the terms. But that copy could be used in the same way as
the BBC copy is, and be more publicly accessible. News works like
that, doesn’t it? It goes up in a funnel. So, the stories
starts at the grass roots, but they get picked up by the wider
media, and that gives them more authority and more voice in the
debate, then.
|
|
12:45
|
|
[463] Lee
Waters: Not unlike what you’ve suggested, in our
broadcasting report we recommended a wire-type service that would
address the areas of market failure, particularly around courts and
councils. Do you have a view on that recommendation?
|
|
[464] Dr
Howells: Yes, I think that could work, as I say, as long as
it’s funded in an independent way that’s similar to the
BBC, or something arm’s length.
|
|
[465] Lee
Waters: Were the Magnet still in existence when that
sort of wire service was up and running, how would that have helped
you to have made the Magnet viable?
|
|
[466] Dr
Howells: Well, if we could have had a lot of our content
produced and paid for by something like that—you know, having
somebody in our team whose salary was underwritten—it would
have just made life so much easier for us, because then—
|
|
[467] Lee
Waters: But it still wouldn’t have succeeded, though,
based on the reading of your evidence—
|
|
[468] Dr
Howells: Well, nobody was paid on the Magnet,
really—for that last year, none of us were. If one salary had
been covered, it would have made all the difference—it really
would have—because then the advertising revenue that we were
making could have gone to cover the other freelancers and the other
people who were involved.
|
|
[469] Lee
Waters: Right, okay. Thank you.
|
|
[470] Bethan
Jenkins: I’m afraid, because we started late and because
of time constraints, we have to end it now, but we have your
comprehensive evidence. And if there is anything else, I’m
sure we’ll be in touch, especially on some of the other news
organisations that you mention and the hub concept. We will ask you
for contacts there, if that’s okay.
|
|
[471] Dr
Howells: Sure. Yes, absolutely. No problem at all.
|
|
[472] Bethan
Jenkins: But thanks for coming in nonetheless. Diolch yn fawr
iawn.
|
|
[473] Dr
Howells: Okay. Diolch. Thank you.
|
|
12:46
|
|
Papurau i’w Nodi
Papers to Note
|
|
[474]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rydym ni’n symud ymlaen i eitem
6—papurau i’w nodi. Mae yna bapur 6.1—llythyr gan
Adam Price AC ynghylch cynllun ieithoedd swyddogol Cynulliad
Cenedlaethol Cymru. Yr unig sylw penodol y byddwn i eisiau gofyn i
Aelodau’r Cynulliad yn ei gylch yw’r ffaith bod Adam
Price wedi gofyn inni beidio â chyhoeddi’r asesiad
o’r effaith ar gydraddoldeb, sydd yn atodiad i’r
llythyr. A oes gan Aelodau’r Cynulliad farn ar hwn? A ydych
chi eisiau peidio â’i gyhoeddi, neu a ydych chi eisiau
iddo gael ei gyhoeddi?
|
Bethan
Jenkins: We move on now to item 6—papers to note. We have
paper 6.1—a letter from Adam Price AM regarding the National
Assembly for Wales’s official languages scheme. The only
specific comment I would like to ask you about is that Adam Price
has asked us not to publish the equality impact assessment, which
is an annex to that letter. Do Assembly Members have any views on
that? Would you want to not publish it, or would you like to see it
published?
|
|
[475]
Jeremy Miles:
Wel, mae’n mynd i gael ei
gyhoeddi maes o law, ond ddim ar hyn o bryd, onid e?
|
Jeremy
Miles: Well, it will be published in due course, but not at the
moment, I assume.
|
|
[476]
Bethan Jenkins:
Rwy’n credu mai dyna beth yw e.
Rwy’n credu beth y maen nhw’n trio ei ddweud yw bod
angen cysoni pob un o’r asesiadau o’r effaith ar
gydraddoldeb, sydd yn mynd i gael eu creu ar sectorau eraill o fewn
y Cynulliad. Ond nid ydym ni yn—
|
Bethan
Jenkins: I think that is the case. I think what they are
endeavouring to say is that they need to ensure that all the
equality impact assessments are made consistent across the other
sections within the Assembly. But we’re not—
|
|
[477]
Jeremy Miles:
Efallai y gellid gofyn beth
yw’r bwriad o ran amseru cyn inni wneud
penderfyniad.
|
Jeremy
Miles: Perhaps we could ask what the intention is in terms of
timing before we make a decision.
|
|
[478]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ie. So, cael bwriad yr amseru cyn ein
bod ni’n cyhoeddi.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Yes. So, to get the intention of the timing before we
publish.
|
|
[479]
Suzy
Davies: Mae yna ddadl yr wythnos nesaf, anyway—ai’r
wythnos nesaf?
|
Suzy Davies: I
think there’s a debate on this next week, anyway, isn’t
there?
|
|
[480]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ai wythnos nesaf
mae’r—
|
Bethan Jenkins: Is it next week?
|
|
[481]
Suzy
Davies: Mae yna ddadl ddydd Mercher wythnos nesaf. Dyna pam efallai
te, ie?
|
Suzy Davies:
There’s a debate on Wednesday of next week, I believe. That
may be the reason.
|
|
[482]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ocê. Wel, gallwn ni, efallai,
godi hynny yn ystod y ddadl, neu ofyn am esboniad o’r
amseriad, a wedyn—
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Okay. Well, we may be able to raise that issue during
the debate or ask for an explanation of the timing, and
then—
|
|
[483]
Jeremy Miles:
Mae’r llythyr yn dweud
mai’r bwriad yw ei gyhoeddi maes o law, felly mae
hynny’n ddigonol, os oes rheswm teilwng.
|
Jeremy
Miles: The letter says that the intention is to publish in due
course. So, if there’s an adequate reason, I’m content
with that.
|
|
[484]
Bethan Jenkins:
Ocê, iawn. Diolch.
|
Bethan Jenkins: Okay, fine. Thank you.
|
|
12:48
|
|
Cynnig o dan
Reol Sefydlog 17.42 i Benderfynu Gwahardd y Cyhoedd o’r
Cyfarfod
Motion under Standing Order 17.42 to Resolve
to Exclude the Public from the Meeting
|
|
Cynnig:
|
Motion:
|
|
bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y
cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42.
|
that the committee resolves
to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in
accordance with Standing Order 17.42.
|
|
Cynigiwyd y cynnig.
Motion moved.
|
|
|
[485]
Bethan Jenkins:
Symudwn ymlaen at eitem 7 a’r
cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42 i wahardd y cyhoedd o’r
cyfarfod. A ydyw pobl yn hapus gyda hynny? Diolch.
|
Bethan
Jenkins: Moving on to item 7 and a motion under Standing Order
17.42 to resolve to exclude the public from the meeting. Is
everyone content? Thank you.
|
|
Derbyniwyd y cynnig.
Motion
agreed.
|
|
|
Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am
11:48.
The public part of the meeting ended at
11:48.
|
