The Courier & Advertiser (Angus and Dundee)
Council balks at cost of plan to broadcast meetings online
Transparency: Forfar councillor floated the idea earlier this year
Budget pressures have put plans to webcast meetings of Angus Council on the back burner until at least next spring.
The proposal to live-stream debates was met with widespread enthusiasm but costings of around £25,000 a year led the council to abandon the plans in the meantime – and look at funding options, including an approach for Scottish Government cash.
Forfar Conservative Braden Davy’s suggestion earlier this year was the subject of a full council report which considered the type of system which could be used and the potential audience figures for the exercise.
Aberdeen City Council already records meetings and attracts average audience figures of almost 250 for its broadcasts – although south of the border at Aylesbury Vale the figure is less than 20.
First-year costs for the systems examined by Angus officials varied between £23,000 and £26,000.
Mr Davy said: “Since being elected I have been determined to make the work we do in this chamber as accessible and understandable as possible.
“This is why broadcasting our meetings online is important.
“However, I do understand there has been concern over cost.
“Some have suggested Skype, Facebook Live or webcam, however this would not provide a good enough coverage of our chamber, the sound quality, or hosting costs.”
Mr Davy said he agreed that any scheme introduced had to be as affordable as possible.
“After listening to members across this chamber and speaking to constituents, some of whom are in favour, even with the cost, and others who aren’t, we as an administration have decided to postpone looking at this further until the next budget cycle.
“The cost is currently not allocated, and would require funding from other parts of the council’s budget.
“Also, we don’t know what Angus Council’s budget allocation will be from the Scottish Government, meaning significant rises could bring this into reach as affordable, or further substantial cuts could make this out of reach.”