GLASGOW'S historic opportunity to host the Scottish Parliament next month faces having the plug pulled on live television coverage because of a behind-the-scenes row over costs.
The Business Bureau, convened by Presiding Officer Sir David Steel, but with the Minister for Parliament Tom McCabe as the key figure, has balked at the #30,000 cost of putting in a live television feed.
This would mean that, as MSPs gather in Glasgow in full Parliamentary session for the first time, the BBC could be forced to replace its Holyrood Live programme with Westminster coverage.
The bureau faced taking a decision on the issue at the height of the controversy over the spiralling costs of the Holyrood building project. It was decided to ask the BBC to contribute towards the extra cost of televising the Glasgow proceedings, failing which a minimal coverage costing around #15,000 would be provided, which would not enable live broadcasts.
Mr McCabe said last night that he hoped the bureau would take a final decision next week, but he insisted: ''We very much take the view that we should do our best to keep the costs to a minimum. The BBC has to look at how it can help in this situation.
''The last time I looked, the BBC was a public service broadcast institution. If it thinks that its service would be sub-standard or that it requires a full live feed, it should be prepared to help.''
But the SNP's Michael Russell countered: ''It would be extremely foolish to reduce the standard of coverage when the Parliament is in Glasgow. It would not only be an insult to Glasgow, it would also deprive the people of Scotland from seeing the Parliament at work, and this is meant to be an open, accessible institution.
''I have been through the figures and I believe the costings are reasonable, give the minimum required level of coverage and most importantly of all do not breach the principle of the existing arrangement between the broadcasters and the Parliament.''
The city's Lord Provost Alex Mosson urged the bureau to think again, saying: ''We want to show the Parliament's historic sitting in Glasgow because it has never been held here before . . . It is a matter for the archives, for posterity and for history, to show the Parliament sitting here in Scotland's biggest city.''
For five days, on two Wednesdays and three Thursdays, from May 17 to June 1, the Parliament will vacate its temporary home on The Mound to enable the Kirk to stage the General Assembly in its traditional home. MSPs will gather instead in the former Strathclyde Regional Council building in Elmbank Street.
While nine cameras normally record plenary sessions on the Mound, the minimum required to provide adequate coverage in Glasgow is considered to be four cameras with a control room, probably in a van outside, to mix and direct the shots.
The public gallery at Elmbank Street will house only 80 spectators, compared to some 450 in Edinburgh, making television coverage even more important than normal.
The press gallery is also far more restricted, but an overflow facility had been assumed. The lack of a live feed would prevent this. The Herald understands that Mr McCabe fought strongly for the cheapest option, against the backdrop of criticism in the media of the overspend at Holyrood.
His LibDem Junior Minister, Iain Smith, said little but backed his stance, while the Tory member of the committee Lord James Douglas Hamilton also supported the lowest-cost option.
BBC Scotland's deputy head of news and current affairs, Val Atkinson, said last night: ''We are still in negotiation on this. There has been no communication in recent days and no decision yet so far as we know, but it is not the BBC's position to negotiate in public.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article