48 hours in the campaign for Diversity Tax Break for TV and Film

Last week (Jan 8^th and 9^th) the campaign for tax breaks for film and television productions, which meet certain diversity criteria, took another step forward. With several important meetings in the space of 48 hours.

BIGGER THAN JUST THE PEOPLE IN THE MEETING

I strongly believe that we will only achieve “Diversity Tax Breaks” if there is mass support in the industry for them. Which is why even though the meetings involved relatively few people it is important that I keep as many people as possible informed on the developments.

The first meeting was on Tuesday8th January at The Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). Present at the meeting were the actors Sir Lenny Henry and Adrian Lester, the film producer Nadine Marsh-Edwards, the former head of BBC Productions Pat Younge, former commissioner Angela Ferreira and of course I was also there with my experience of regional diversity as former editor of current affairs programmes at BBC Scotland.

I’d like to think we all brought very practical experiences to the meeting of exactly why diversity tax breaks would make a real difference to our work. This was most definitely not an ideological meeting but one where people were trying to look for practical solutions to a problem that has plagued UK film and television for far too long.

THE GOVERNMENT ARE SERIOUS

Over the years I have been to several government meetings about diversity but I have never been to one with so many senior officials representing so many different departments. Representatives from DCMS were obviously there but so were representatives from the Treasury, HMRC, Department for International Development (as UK women and equalities comes under their remit) and representatives from No 10.

My fear had been that after Lenny Henry and others had delivered the open letter, signed by over 80 prominent industry figures and bodies, calling for diversity tax breaks, this meeting was just going to be a polite chat with coffee and biscuits. But many departments sent two representatives and a senior Special Advisor. It wasn’t quite standing room only but extra chairs definitely needed to be brought in. This was not a polite coffee and biscuits chat!

WHAT CAME OUT OF THE MEETING

The debate covered a number of issues on the actual practical implementation of a diversity tax break and a small discussion on possible alternatives to tax breaks to increase diversity in film and television.

Without going into detail of the actual discussions two things came out of the meeting:

1.       The need for another meeting with all the major industry bodies to discuss diversity tax breaks specifically, as well as the issue of film and TV diversity more broadly. Such a meeting would include the BFI, all the entertainment unions (BECTU, Equity and Writers Guild), some of the major film studios and broadcasters as well as other interested parties such as Directors UK.

2.       Economic modelling to inform future discussions. This would answer serious questions as to how much how much a diversity tax break would cost the Treasury in the short run. Whether diversity tax breaks would be able to incentivise new UK productions to be made, as well as attract new productions from abroad, which would all obviously bring in new money to the Treasury. The modelling should also cover the different effects a diversity tax break would have depending on the level it was set.

We left the meeting optimistic that a second larger industry meeting will be held – hopefully before the end of March.

The government officials present at the meeting however informed us that it was their policy not to make possible tax modelling public unless and until a new tax (or tax break) had been agreed upon. Which means we are now looking at trying to commission some independent economic modelling ourselves.

AFTER THE GOVERNMENT COMES THE OPPOSITION

The following day a smaller group of us met with members of the opposition, specifically Dawn Butler MP, the Shadow Equalities Minister, and John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer.

We felt it was very important to meet with the Shadow Ministers because the issue of diversity tax breaks must be bigger than Party politics. It is a solution that should be implemented irrespective of whoever happens to be in government. The fact it was a smaller group was no indication of how important we all felt this second meeting was but more to do with pre-existing diary commitments, and the fact I was only in London for 48 hours did not help matters.

Again the meeting was incredibly constructive. But what became very obvious was that independent economic modelling is essential to take the issue further. Otherwise the debate quickly becomes people either asserting support for the idea or criticizing it with little or no evidence.

After seeing the Labour shadow ministers it also became clear amongst ourselves that we should be discussing the issue with the SNP if we really want this to transcend Party politics, and setting up a meeting with the SNP was added to out “to do” list.

On a personal level I also met with people from the Film Diversity Action Group (FDAG) for a quiet cup of coffee. The FDAG are also campaigning for a version of diversity tax breaks. It was the first time I had met with them since they launched in November and although we differ on some important points talking to them and hearing what they are doing made me feel that there is a real head of steam gathering for diversity tax breaks in one form or another.

After 48 hours and three long meetings there have been no concrete commitments by anyone and at best we might have another larger meeting in a few months’ time. We have also made more work for ourselves recognizing that we now need to commission some economic modelling and try and set up a meeting with the SNP. So why am I so optimistic?

WHY AM I OPTIMISTIC?

I have been campaigning and following the issue of diversity in film and television for longer than I care to admit and in those years I have never experienced meetings where so many senior officials have given up their time to discuss these issues.

The level of debate was higher and more detailed than anything I had ever experienced before. This was not mere lip service to “how bad diversity is behind the camera – can we set up another training scheme”. These were discussions probing the practicalities of implementing the policy both the positives and negatives.

The next two to three months will be essential to see if my optimism is well founded but whatever happens I will keep everyone informed via my blog.

Please keep supporting the campaign – the good will we have all received personally and via social media has been overwhelming.