Is drama safe at the BBC?

A run of award-winning shows and high ratings have trumped rival broadcasters - but writers are increasingly concerned about the performance of the BBC's top executives, reports Gareth McLean...

At last Sunday's Baftas, after the ceremony ended but before the dancing began, there was an aroma in the air. It was the smell of disappointment emanating from BBC executives that Cranford had been pipped to the best serial Bafta by Channel 4's Britz. Now as anyone who has ever served on one will know, Bafta juries are riven with politicking and the eventual winner only really tells you who awarded the prize. After all, BBC drama is blossoming, isn't it?

From Cranford to Lark Rise to Candle-ford, Five Days to The Street, the corporation's drama department has been bathed in critical acclaim at the same time as attracting respectable ratings. There is a new vigour at EastEnders, returning series such as Waking the Dead still do well and BBC3's recent foray into broadcasting pilots can be judged a success too.

Yet several award-winning writers and accomplished producers, both inside and outside the Corporation, have spoken to the Guardian about BBC drama and a disturbing picture has emerged. It is a picture of a regime in which only one person's opinion matters, a system in which the micro-management of projects by inexperienced executives and producers is, according to one writer, leading to "an anti-creative, stifling atmosphere that's killing new ideas".

"There are so many cooks involved in any new project now that any distinctiveness is being throttled," says another, Bafta-winning writer. "Such is the lack of courage of commissioners and the climate of fear in which they operate, the commissioning process is ossifying." The only opinion that these writers and producers say matters is that of Jane Tranter, the BBC's head of Fiction. One writer, who like the rest asked to remain anonymous, claims that trust between the BBC and writers and producers who deliver the goods has evaporated.

"They commission an episode, you write seven drafts, probably with input from four different BBC producers - all of whom contradict one another - and then, instead of making a decision, they commission a second episode and then often a third, even for a second series. They're so scared of getting it wrong, they'd rather play it safe. There is only one question in everyone's head, whether it be writer, independent producer or BBC exec - what would Jane think?"

Tranter certainly presides over an impressive empire with an annual budget of £440m. In 2006, she was appointed controller, BBC Fiction, making her responsible for drama, comedy, film and acquisitions. "No matter how good they are - and Jane Tranter is talented - that amount of power can't be a good idea," says one producer. If BBC drama is akin to a Tudor court, with Queen Jane at its heart, then the chief courtier - perhaps her Cardinal Wolsey - is Ben Stephenson. Head of drama commissioning for some three years, 31-year-old Stephenson is described as Tranter's gate-keeper or her "fig-leaf to delegation". His appointment caused resentment, largely because of his age and inexperience.

Critics are keen on two stories about him. The first is that the only thing he has ever produced - Bombshell, a show for ITV about life in the army made when he worked for independent producer Shed - has never been shown in the UK. The other is a note that he allegedly gave writer Frank Deasy on the script of The Passion. How does he respond to accusations that he is unqualified to judge the work of producers and writers with decades more experience than him?

"It's fair enough to make that comment but commissioning is totally different from producing and producing is totally different from commissioning - although at the end of the day, it's all about scripts and the judgement of scripts ... It's for other people to judge if I have the experience or not. I loved making Bombshell. It's not for me to talk about why it didn't air." When put to him the testimonies of the writers and producers, he says he doesn't recognise the picture painted and rejects the idea that BBC drama (budget: £288m) is run along autocratic lines. If anything, he says, there's a plurality of opinion.

"Ultimately the decision on what is made is made between me, Jane and the channel controller, but in terms of what's developed, there's a genuine diversity of voices which there wouldn't be if Jane and me developed things ourselves ...[Jane] isn't the taste-maker, she really isn't. My feeling is 'thank God we have a lot of commissioning editors' because that genuinely means that one person doesn't rule."

So the 'What would Jane think?' thing isn't true? "Everyone's always concerned with what the next person up the ladder will think. When a writer sends in a script they wonder what the script editor will think, and when the script editors work on it, they'll wonder what the producer will think and so on. Inevitably, you want the person who reads it next to love it, so someone will think 'what will Jane think?' or 'what will Ben think?' But that's just the way it goes."

Moreover, he says, micro-management is a myth. "The way I look at it is that we're in a creative partnership with writers, producers, directors. We've got different roles but we're in it together. That's a much better state than us being disinterested. As for their being 'too many cooks', I feel television is collaborative. We work with most of the best writers in the country and I think we've got good relationships with them. If we didn't, the work wouldn't be any good."

In many ways, BBC drama is in rude health. Whereas Channel 4 may shout about its triumphs in both the single drama and drama serial categories at the Baftas, it conspicuously lacks returning series beyond Skins and Shameless. The woes of ITV Drama are well-documented. Under Tranter, who was unavailable last week, BBC drama has blossomed and bloomed. She is credited with an eye and an instinct for what an audience - a BBC1 audience especially - appreciates and enjoys. Her considerable talent is only underlined by failed attempts at ITV1 to replicate what Tranter has done at BBC1. But could the travails of Laura Mackie and Sally Haynes at ITV be obscuring simmering problems at the BBC?

Stephenson is adamant that the concentration of power in one post is a good thing. "At the end of the day, we're all working with the same quite small pool of talent - be it actors, writers, producers - so it really makes sense for us to talk to each other. It's about someone having a strategic overview and bringing people together." All of which sounds terribly benign. So why does he think so many writers and producers have voiced such concerns? "People worry, but they don't speak to us. I always encourage agents to speak to me if there's a problem," he says.

Isn't that because they're frightened? "How can they be frightened of us?" he says incredulously, possibly disingenuously. So there's no truth in the rumour that there's a list of talent banned from working on BBC dramas? "Tell me who's on the black list and we'll look at what we're making and compare it. I know that there's one person supposedly on the black list who's making something for us right now. There isn't a list written down on a bit of paper and there isn't a list in anyone's head. What we always do is talk about who is the best person for a job. It's about putting the right team together."

Stephenson is a fulcrum around which rumour revolves. To his credit, he deals with it all rather cheerfully, even when confronted with the infamous story about The Passion. Apparently, he gave a note on the scene featuring Jesus's crucifixion which read "Is there enough at stake?"

"No. That is made-up. Frank Deasy did the most sensational job on The Passion but when you're writing a script with characters called Jesus and Judas, it's hard to give notes because you have to say 'Would Jesus do this?' so you're inevitably sending yourself up. I knew that when I was writing those notes but does that mean I can't ask the question? No." So what was the note? "We didn't want people to have to know the story of Jesus before, and therefore I asked a question about the beginning of the narrative along the lines of 'If you didn't know the story, would you understand what was going on?'"

Stephenson says he should be judged on his last set of notes and those were on Gwyneth Hughes' follow-up to her commendable thriller, Five Days. He points to Hughes' new series along with a new adaptation of Little Dorrit, Adrian Hodges' reimagining of Survivors, David Nicholls' take on Tess of the D'Ubervilles and a slew of one-off dramas including Fiona's Story, written by newcomer Kate Gabriel, about a woman whose husband is investigated for downloading child porn, as testament to the vitality and diversity of BBC drama. Other launches include this week's The Invisibles, with Warren Clarke and Jenny Agutter.

Yet the writers and producers tell a different tale. One of freshness and originality being squeezed out in favour of established brands and dramas that are easy to market internationally. "In the history of TV, the stuff that makes an impact is the stuff that has its own voice - something like Doctor Who, say," says one of the writers we spoke to. "And some of the best shows have come out of a tussle between creative people - writers and producers and executives," says another of the writers we spoke to. "But to me, the future of BBC drama looks bleak."

Like all the best stories, this one is to be continued.