CHANNEL 4’s sale could lead to a “brain drain” down south, with Scotland’s top talent forced to move to London to find work, a senior TV executive has warned.

Three years ago the broadcaster opened a new creative hub in Glasgow, with a promise to develop closer working relationships with local independent production companies,

It also saw “key creative decision makers” responsible for commissioning daytime, entertainment, live events and factual programming based in the city.

But there are fears that the UK Government’s decision to move ahead with the sell-off could see that come to an end.

Alan Clements, the Managing Director of Two Rivers media, thought it unlikely any of the big firms touted as possible buyers of the station would feel as obliged to have their operations spread out across the country.

He told The Herald: “Channel Four was a very metropolitan organisation. It was them and their mates in Soho. And finally, finally, they got their act together and committed to out of London production, in particular, production in the nations of the United Kingdom. The BBC blazed the trail for this and Channel Four has followed really strongly with its hubs in Leeds and Bristol and of course, in Glasgow.

“And this happens just at the point where they're starting to do this. Why would a Viacom or a Discovery or an Apple or an Amazon-owned Channel Four be bothered with that?”

Asked what this could mean for the industry, Mr Clements said: ”Would you see a brain drain back south again? Possibly. Depends who the new owner is, depends on what remit is set by the [legislation]. I think it's maybe a wee bit early to say definitively. But it's not good news. I'm not sure if it's gonna be a broken arm or a broken leg or both. But it's not good news whatever's coming.”

There was criticism too from the Scottish Government. Culture Secretary Angus Robertson warned that privatisation could dilute Channel 4’s focus on “creativity and public benefit substituting this for a focus on commercial shareholders.”

He added: “In particular, this will be disappointing news to the independent production sector which has flourished with Channel 4’s help including £200 million for Scottish-based productions and support for 400 jobs since 2007.”

Channel 4 has a unique funding structure, in that while it’s state-owned, it’s entirely commercially funded, making its money through advertising.

Launched 40 years ago under the Thatcher government, it has a public service remit that commits it to working with independent producers and making programmes for a younger, more diverse audience.

Recent hit programmes include It's a Sin, and Derry Girls.

Yesterday, Lisa McGee the creator of the hit Northern Irish show, tweeted:“Thinking of all the voices that might never be heard.”

Confirming plans to sell the station on Monday night, the UK Government’s culture secretary Nadine Dorries tweeted that she had come to the conclusion “that government ownership is holding Channel 4 back from competing against streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon.”

She said putting the station into the private sector would give the channel “the tools and freedom to flourish and thrive as a public service broadcaster long into the future.”

The government hope the sale will raise around £1bn, which Ms Dorries has said will be re-invested into “independent production and creative skills.”

The process will be lengthy. It could be 2024 before the legislation is passed. It’s likely the opposition parties will all oppose, and the government could face a sizeable rebellion from their own backbenchers.

The Lords will almost certainly vote against the legislation.

Scottish Tory MSP, Jamie Greene, who worked in broadcasting before entering politics, including a stint with Viacom when it took over Channel 5, said he was not convinced by the case for private ownership.

“I have no ideological view on who owns Channel 4, I am more interested that the stipulation of new ownership comes with very strong original production, indy production and nations and regions spending and commissioning commitments.

“I don’t want to see the Chanel asset-stripped and simply become a window into the pay tv sitting room of a media conglomerate who reduced UK production in favour of buying in US imports.”

“Given that it doesn’t cost the taxpayer a penny the case is yet to be made as to any tangible benefits new ownership will actually offer the viewer, the production industry or the government,” he added.

Writing in our sister paper, the Glasgow Times, the SNP leader of Glasgow City Council, Susan Aitken, suggested the proposal was more about taking on a channel seen as a "bit too leftie."

She referenced recent research by PACT which represents many of the UK’s film and television producers, that warned of a £3.7bn black hole for independent producers because of privatisation.

"And the Exchequer will over the longer term lose hundreds of millions of tax income generated year in, year out by those independent producers and their employees, contractors, suppliers. I suspect many in the UK Government know this," Ms Aitken wrote.

"Channel 4 doesn’t cost the public any money, it nurtures new talent, it produces remarkable investigative journalism, so why put it up for sale?

"And why put Nadine Dories, a minister who didn’t even have a clue how Channel 4 operates, in charge of the matter?

"I suspect the Tory MP Julian Knight probably isn’t far off the mark with his comments about revenge against Channel 4 for its coverage of Brexit and its relentlessness in holding the UK Government, and particularly Boris Johnson, to account.

"Boris’s government doesn’t like accountability, they see Channel 4 as a bit too ‘leftie’, public service broadcasting is the opposite to what they stand for, and they can get their own back.

"Once in private hands, it’s difficult to see a scenario where the Channel 4’s new owners don’t prioritise shareholder returns over broader public service goals or the importance of the creative economy."