Mr. Kevin Bakhurst:

Deputy Phelan asked a question about the London bureau. This was ongoing when I came to the job and the decision had been taken. I spoke to the director general and my predecessor about it. I have no doubt that at the time it was the right decision. We had an expensive premises and we were operating in a decidedly expensive part of London, and unnecessarily so. We were operating in a particular way there as well. We had to save substantial amounts of money across the news department. Had we not shut the London bureau we would probably have been unable to maintain a presence in the region. These are the types of trade-off we have had to make.

Deputy Phelan remarked that there was an offer from the BBC. To my knowledge, that is not correct. In fact, the director general and I are keeping the London bureau and the coverage from London and the United Kingdom under review to see how we are doing, in particular with the events coming up in the UK, including the general election and, potentially, a referendum on the UK's future in Europe and a referendum on Scottish independence. Among other things that story is not going away. We are keeping it under review. As part of the process we have spoken to the BBC and other broadcasters about the potential of sharing premises. Even with my background, the response from the BBC has not been very positive whereas other broadcasters have been more positive. We are still exploring options and if at some point we have the resources we may do something. The London operation is high on the list of areas we might revisit, but if we did something we would do it in a very different way.