HC Deb 07 November 1991 vol 198 cc563-4
8. Mr. Simon Coombs

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the recent allocation of regional television franchises by the Independent Television Commission.

Mr. Kenneth Baker

The commission was carrying out the responsibilities laid on it by Parliament in the Broadcasting Act 1990. The decisions on channel 3, and other licences, are a matter for the commission.

Mr. Coombs

In view of the widespread and sometimes ill-founded criticism of the recent franchise round and despite the uniform excellence of the successful tenders, will my right hon. Friend nevertheless consider the possibility of providing a review system so as either to show up ways in which it could be improved in future or to demonstrate that an extremely good job has been done by the Independent Television Commission?

Mr. Baker

I think that a good job has been done by the ITC, but I am prepared to consider any representations that are made to me about the future determination of licences. The situation will change in the 1990s and beyond. There will be a greater proliferation of services, well beyond these licences, and at least one other channel, channel 5.

Mr. Maclennan

Does the Home Secretary share the view of the right hon. Member for Finchley (Mrs. Thatcher) in her letter to the outgoing chairman of TV-am? Does he feel like offering a similar apology?

Mr. Baker

When there are 40 bids for 16 licences, some companies will lose out. The system has resulted in new blood coming into the television industry. Some of the companies that have been displaced have, in their time, displaced others. The opportunity that they now have is to become independent production companies, an opportunity that they did not have in the last round of licence decisions.

Dame Janet Fookes

Can my right hon. Friend answer a riddle for me? How is it that Television South West passed the quality threshold, offered by far the most money but still lost?

Mr. Baker

That is a riddle for the ITC, not me, to answer. The ITC made the determination and it would be inappropriate for me to comment upon the matter, especially as I believe that it is now sub judice, because the company has applied for judicial review.

Mr. Corbett

Does the Home Secretary, in common with his right hon. Friend the former Prime Minister. now feel too painfully aware that the franchise round has ended in farce, with some companies losing their licences for offering too much and others failing because they offered too little? Will the right hon. Gentleman now acknowledge that a system based on the highest bid was always likely to undermine the quality and variety of British television? What message has he for the 2,000 television staff who lost their jobs in the run-up to the franchise round, and the similar number who will now be put out of work?

Mr. Baker

I do not agree at all. New blood has come into the industry, and many of the companies now have the opportunity to become independent production companies. I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman's assertion that the franchise round has been unsuccessful. On the contrary, we have always sought to increase viewer choise. We introduced Independent Television; the Labour party was against it. We have introduced new opportunities for television, and we will introduce a new channel—Channel 5. We believe in more viewer choice and more competition. That will improve quality, and the Labour party has always resisted that.

Mr. John Greenway

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Broadcasting Act 1990 placed on the ITC the requirement to ensure that all bids were sustainable and stable for the whole 10 years of the franchise? Is not the ITC's judgment that that is the case both with the existing franchisees who have retained their licences and with some of the newer companies? At the press conference at which the ITC announced the licences Mr. Simon Albery, who ran the campaign for quality television, said to me, "Quality has won".

Mr. Baker

I am sure that that will prove the case. Whenever there has been a change within television in this country there has always been the accusation that quality would suffer. That has not happened. Over the past 30 years, as choice and competition have worked their way through, variety and quality have improved.