The Hindu Business Line : Indo-UK co-production in films proposed

The UK, base to a large number of NRIs, is tackling this dilemma as it forges a long-proposed film co-production treaty with India. The potential for jointly made films is easily understood. At places like Leicester, Indians are forecast to be the dominant community within a decade.

Making films that appeal to their tastes is not just attractive business but fits in with the multi-cultural approach to entertainment the British government wants. "Leicester offers a readymade package that meets the needs of Indian film makers," observed Ms Tessa Jowell, MP, Secretary of State (Department of Culture, Media & Sports), Government of UK, at the Frames 2004 conference.

British locations feature in a number of Indian films. "I am looking to see more Indian locations in British films. We are attracted in principle to a treaty. But if we were to have a treaty, it's got to be the right one. It's got to be a treaty that brings benefits to everyone," Ms Jowell said.

Canada has several treaties, 63 according to industry sources. The UK's collection is comparatively modest, seven bilateral treaties and one multilateral treaty covering Europe, all under review now given their inception at times when the global film industry was vastly different.

In the main, co-production treaties aim to share risk, get tax benefits and fetch business for film industries at either partner's end. Herein, a problem similar to overseas fear of the BPO business, surfaces. Location is a weak fulcrum for talks, particularly in the case of a geographically diverse country like India. Push comes to shove, Europe's Alps can be substituted with the Himalayas.

What makes economic sense is the use of a country's pre- or post-production facilities, anything that ensures work and spending within national boundaries. But if comparable Indian costs were many times cheaper than the UK's, which filmmaker would use British facilities? If spending does not happen and instead a spectre of business shipping overseas emerges, why should the British aspire for co-production with India, including tax cuts in the bargain?

Ms Clare Wise, Director (International), UK Film Council, concedes this a problem. That the film industry here is the world's biggest only underscores the technical expertise at affordable rates, which India has. Closer to UK, East Europe has a rich heritage in filmmaking. But its costs are believed to be ahead of India's. Besides, with those countries expected to join the European Union, new tax policies may add to production costs.

Senior media industry officials like Mr Ronnie Screwvala, Chairman, UTV, feel the UK must accept this reality, which is partly due to Hollywood being the western world's big-scale film industry. European countries have industries that are smaller and chances of a pan-European industry stance or related treaties are minimal since tax policies vary from nation to nation. Ms Wise agrees.

But the British interest in co-production is also driven by another angle, which may just be the panacea to incompatible production costs. What makes India truly attractive is its existing large domestic market for indigenous films and the future potential it holds for Hollywood or British films (this is what marks India apart from East Europe, even if costs that side become comparable).

Any loss to the British from a film co-produced with India can be offset with joint distribution, Ms Wise suggests.