Readers of Northern Exposure furth of Scotlandòs borders may be surprised to learn that the political axe is poised to fall on Scottish Screen, among dozens of other quangos, just four years after it was set up.

Two things should be borne in mind.

First, quango-bashing often occurs after political change. Although the recent general election was for the Westminster parliament alone, ripples of the need-for-change fervour of the new Labour administration in Westminster reach Scotland well enough. The Labour-dominated Scottish Executive in Holyrood has little choice but to bob up and down to a similar reformist tune.

Secondly, Scottish Screen has come under sustained attack from the Scottish press, particularly the Edinburgh-based Scotsman newspaper, which has been very critical of Scotlandòs screen agency, particularly since it revealed that Mrs John Archer, known professionally as, had received a grant towards the cost of a film she was making from the very agency her husband leads.

Cronyism Again

Charges of cronyism of the sort levelled by the Scotsman are not new to filmmaking in Scotland. Film cronyism was a charge also levelled at the Scottish Arts Council ¸ and equally vigorously denied - when that body had responsibility for funding some of Scotlandòs film production, before Scottish Screen was set up.

One of the reasons a unified film agency came into existence was because support for film was spread across too many agencies and as a result, was spread thin. Scottish Screen was set up as a single door film support agency. Its creation has had considerable impact on the industry within Scotland and its influence has spread far, not only beyond Scotlandòs borders, but beyond the United Kingdomòs as well. It may not be perfect yet, but no-one in the industry would suggest it is not working properly.

What the agency must be allowed is further time to refine and develop its methods of working and to have dialogue with the industry itself. The ³consultation² process of a few months ago, over the direction of future support was a useful step along that road. Leadership, not dictation, is what is needed. Considering the lead time a full length feature requires before it hits the screens, Scottish Screen lies somewhere between development and pre-production.

Same Script

The one thing that is absolutely essential, is that we are all reading from the same script, industry practitioners, government ministers, influential newspapers. Filmmaking is a village industry in Scotland, where everyone you know, you'll meet. Glasgow is the village high street. Is surprising then that the same people keep appearing wearing different hats?ë As long as the processes followed are completely open and accountable, interests are declared and possible conflicts of interest clearly avoided, where's the harm?

Thereòs a plea this week for more resources to be given to entry-level filmmaker support in Scotland, suggesting that future talent is being starved from developing by lack of the most basic resources. If that is true ofë cities like Edinburgh and Glasgow, how much worse for the filmmakers of the Highlands and Islands? ¸ and they do exist, because at Netribution we have interviewed them.

Open Doorë

Whilst there is a need to put resources into projects developed by successful practitioners, we neglect our emerging talent at our peril. These new entrants are the future ofë Scotlandòs film industry. If it is to have a future, they need nurturing. A single door agency is a simple enough idea, but to foster talent at its fragile stage, that is a door that needs to be open.