Culture, communications & digital: Promises of a new TV service alongside the old favourites

As has been trailed for some time, at least since 2008, the SBS would take over the staff and resources of BBC Scotland, and would provide television, radio and online content.

It would have an annual budget of £345 million, based on licence fees, a proportion of BBC commercial profits and £12m from the Scottish Government, and would begin broadcasting on December 31, 2016.

To perhaps placate nervous viewers of this new channel, the paper spells out that "current programming like EastEnders, Doctor Who and Strictly Come Dancing, and channels like ­CBeebies, will still be available in Scotland".

This would be because the new channel would enter into a "formal relationship" where SBS would supply programmes to the BBC network and in return the corporation would allow access to its wares for Scottish viewers.

This agreement, of course, has yet to be made, as has the proposed inheritance of a "proportionate share of the BBC's commercial ventures, including BBC Worldwide Ltd, BBC Studios and Productions Ltd and BBC News Ltd, and of associated ongoing profits" which the paper also proposes.

The paper says this new channel would lead to an increase in "production opportunities for Scottish producers, and an increase in productions that reflect life in Scotland and of Scots", while "Scottish viewers and listeners should continue to have access to all their current channels".

The mechanism by which SBS would assume the property and assets of BBC Scotland is not outlined in the paper, nor are there details of what would happen if the BBC disagreed with the prospect of handing over its Pacific Quay building on which it spent £188m, albeit in licence fee money to which Scots will have contributed, to another station.

Last night a spokesman for the BBC said: "We will not enter into any public or private discussions about the future or the shape and nature of our services after the referendum until that referendum has taken place."

The chapter's words on the arts are broad and encompassing: "As a nation we have the unique opportunity to build a society that nurtures and is nourished by songs, poems, stories, drama, dance, paintings and sculpture."

Although there are no references to individual Scottish artists, not even world famous figures such as Robert Burns, the work of the National Galleries of Scotland, National Museum of Scotland, National Library of Scotland, National Theatre of Scotland, Scottish Opera and Scottish Ballet are mentioned, as is the relative newcomer Sistema Scotland, which has established inspiring youth orchestras in Stirling and Glasgow.

The language and broad-brush support of all artistic endeavours takes its lead, as it was expected, from Culture Secretary Fiona Hyslop's generally warmly received Talbot Rice speech from June.

It says: "We know that public funding of the arts is a fundamental good, and independence will provide the opportunity to take this to new heights. And with independence our cultural and creative life will flourish."

It adds, quoting from that speech: "We value culture and heritage precisely because they embody our heart and soul, and our essence."

Of course, culture is already devolved, and so no major changes could be required to arts infrastructure in an independent Scotland: one can assume that Creative Scotland, the national arts, film and creative industry funding body, would continue in its role. It is not mentioned in the chapter.

Nor is there a mention of extra funding for Scotland's film ­industry, although it says it will encourage investment, nor the building of a national film studio, a hot topic at the moment.

The chapter does refer to "new powers over the economy to encourage our culture and creative sectors".

The paper says that in an ­independent Scotland the Royal Mail would be in public ownership, the Lottery would continue, and geographic coverage of telecommunications would be upgraded.