IT'S BEHIND YOU

If I was a guy, I'd have crystal balls.

As I predicted on June 6th (see Big Brother's Wee Bother) filmmakers have finally come out in protest over Ken Hay's plans to make himself and the entire film sector redundant by scrapping Scottish Screen and merging with the Scottish Arts Council. As agencies go, the SAC may be equally feckless but at least they've had more practice when it comes to self-preservation. And you don't need an MBA in Arts Admin to guess which of the two bodies will become the head, not the arse-end of the pantomime donkey that is Creative Scotland.

In an open letter to First Minister, Jack McConnell and Ken Hay, 45 'top' Scottish filmmakers have signed up to complain about the quango's demise. Nothing like a bit of solidarity, guys, even when you're two years too late and the government machine's already set on a collision course. To be fair to filmmakers though, Ken Hay failed to consult them, too busy bowing to bureaucracy and scraping to Holyrood high heid yins, forgetting the one part of his constituency - film - that justifies his salary. His tragic letter in today's Herald is positively Blairite in tone - but it doesn't wash. Hay was appointed to the post in April last year, ample time to assess the situation, consult with those keeping him in tenure and arrive at some solutions. Okay, he may well be justified in arguing the need for efficiencies in the way Scottish film operates, but his tardiness would never have been tolerated in the private sector.

But guess what? Scottish Screen isn't a private company. It may be accountable to government, but it doesn't have to answer to shareholders. Does the SAC worry about the profitability of poets or stained glass artists? The film business knows only too well that in order to survive you need to turn a buck. But when Scottish producers have to fight on several fronts - woeful lack of resource, London prejudice, Hollywood's cultural dominance - they need all the support they can get. Isn't it the case that for decades, various local theatre companies have had their overheads met, not to mention nice premises and large custom-liveried Mercedes vans to boot? Has any Scottish film company ever been so privileged? No. That's why they need a dedicated agency that understands the FILM business - not TV, who only ever looks out for itself. And not DIGITAL MEDIA. Ken Hay fails to make the distinction between the delivery mechanism and content, which is what ought to matter, not the box it comes in.

The fundamental problem is a total lack of trust. When a producer walks through the doors of West George Street, the first thing they're expected to do is hand over 100% of their rights in a project in exchange for a few paltry grand in development. They also need to fit together all the pieces of the finance puzzle before they can get past go. And, more recently, make their scripts 'upbeat'. Since the scrapping of the Seed Fund a couple of years ago, writers - a crucial part of the process - have nowhere to go, forced to write on spec. And they wonder why there's no good scripts in spite of a glut of screenwriting courses? Just who assesses these scripts? Amateurs, that's who, with little (okay, maybe one short) or no filmmaking experience, unknown individuals who've managed to make pals with some SS admin assistant. The TV execs, academics and media consultants and various committee-sitters who make up SS's panels and board don't know either. They don't know what film is. They're simply not qualified. The sad unspoken implication being - filmmakers, you're all shite, you're addicted to handouts and you moan all the time.

Which raises an important question, lost in the current brouhaha. Why wasn't the recent vacant post of 'Head of Talent and Creativity' advertised? Or was this a case of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? Does anyone know why Carole Sheridan was so hastily appointed to a key public post when she had already quit her own job to work in the private sector? Is it legitimate for any publicly funded body to operate in this way? And even if it is, what incentive was Ms Sheridan given to suddenly entice her to turn down a job in order to step into Claire Chapman's shoes? No offence to Carole Sheridan, but is she really the best person to succeed La Chapman? On that score, I guess the cleaner could give them all a run for their money.

The trouble is, as it always is, we're not told who does the deciding - or why. Witness the (presumably) defunct Fast Forward scheme of two years ago, an exercise in futility, money spent by Scottish Screen but with absolutely no outcome. Perhaps Ken shouldn't be so quick to accuse filmmakers of inefficency and loss-making, and certainly not while he clings to wrong-headed notions of audience development and training at a cost of millions. The former has lately become the holy grail of all publicly funded cultural bodies - but what's to develop? How to find your way to the local Cineworld? Meanwhile the latter - training - remains a joke. As the open letter says - in Scotland it's about creating labour, not talent. It's making tea at Hammerhead, not doing a deal with Celluloid Dreams. How many people are currently attending the much-lauded Screen Academy? A single figure, where a bunch of students all aspire to be directors, producers and screenwriters. What hope of their ambitions being fulfilled when our most experienced filmmakers can't even raise even a low budget? And what exactly does Skillset (with its 50 million pot) do that justifies a regular cash injection from SS? Is this the price of shifting blame when it goes tits up?

For Ken Hay to say on the one hand - 'I'm right and I'm not moving' - and then to state that "Creative Scotland is a step into the unknown for all of us" is an abject admission of failure. If, after fifteen months in the job he doesn't know - unless he's not telling us - then what are we paying him for? Rather than write disgruntled letters to the rags, maybe it's time for filmmakers to ask a few pertinent questions under the Freedom of Information Act. Or, if the worst comes to the worst, perhaps every filmmaker in Scotland should withdraw their talent, as well as their labour by turning their back on Scottish Screen. Well, it's no more than they've done to us and let's face it, it's an easy option, given how 'unknown' the future is. Maybe then we'll see how long the agency can stay in business. Otherwise our leading producers and directors can shout all they like - the prospect of a Scottish film industry is behind all of us.