HC Deb 13 July 1999 vol 335 cc166-320 3.32 pm
Mr. Edward Leigh (Gainsborough)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to remove restrictions on the ownership by religious bodies of broadcasting licences and to clarify the role of the Radio Authority and the Independent Television Commission in relation to the religious content of programmes. I suppose that the first issue that must be addressed in such a debate is whether we are still a Christian society. Much has been made in recent years of the decline of religious faith and of attendance, and it is true that that has happened to some extent. However, if we stop people in the street, seven out of 10 will say that they consider themselves to be Christians. If we conduct a similar survey—this would be a national survey—we will find that only 22 per cent. of people say that they have no religious belief. About 4 per cent. will say that they have a religious belief apart from that of Christianity. I contend that we are a Christian society to that extent.

The Christianity of our society is embedded in our traditions, our history and, of course, our laws. We still have a law that requests and requires schools to have a daily act of religious worship. That Act may not be carried out in every instance in secondary schools, but our laws state that that is required. To that extent, we are a Christian society.

One would expect that to be reflected in our laws relating to broadcasting, but in fact religious broadcasters are put in a uniquely disadvantageous position. As more and more franchises become available, as more and more people are given the freedom to broadcast on cooking, travel or any other subject, and as the digital revolution progresses, one aspect of our society—religious broadcasting—is uniquely discriminated against and constrained.

The relevant statute that my Bill would amend is the Broadcasting Act 1990, which states in schedule 2 that no religious broadcaster may own a national radio licence or an ITV franchise, and, more importantly as the digital revolution unfolds, that no religious broadcaster may own a digital franchise. That places religious broadcasters in a uniquely disadvantaged position.

One can promote anything one likes. One can get a national radio licence to promote atheism, but one is prevented by law from promoting Christianity. The law is so draconian that, if a local vicar were asked to join the board of a television franchisee, that company would immediately lose its franchise. My Bill would repeal paragraph 2 of schedule 2 to the 1990 Act.

Under the law, United Christian Broadcasters, a small broadcaster in the constituency of the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Mr. Fisher), can broadcast gospel music, which is hardly alarming and is unlikely to undermine society, only to people who have a special decoder on their television set, which receives only the music, with no picture.

The situation is absurd and anomalous. That view is shared by 170 hon. Members from all parties who have signed a motion tabled by the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central to try to put matters right.

There is only one Christian local radio station in London, Premier Radio. Why are there 50 religious radio stations in France, but only one in the United Kingdom? The reason is that the codes are so tight that, whereas politicians or anyone else can go on television or the radio to raise funds for charity, to make exclusive claims or to recruit, religious broadcasters are not allowed to do so. If a religious broadcaster manages to get round all the difficulties of the law, the codes are so tight that it is virtually impossible to produce an interesting programme.

What happens abroad? I have already described France. In no other country in the western world is religious broadcasting as tightly constrained as in this country. In America, there are 1,600 Christian radio stations. People say that we need stringent laws because of all the abuses that have occurred in America. However, in recent years, there have been only two cases of fraud by Christian broadcasters, who were rightly convicted of misleading the public. In any system, there will be a couple of bad apples. Why should all religious broadcasting—Christian, Jewish or Muslim—be banned, because of the fear that religious broadcasters, uniquely, will somehow bamboozle the public?

It could be argued that religious broadcasting is available on BBC 1 and other existing channels, but that is true only to a limited extent. For instance, people who are elderly or disabled or who live in remote part of the countryside may want a Sunday morning act of worship on television, but it is not available except on high days and holy days. It was not available even on Christmas day. The service is very limited. People must tune in to radio at 8.7 am; there is no televised morning service. Out of all the countless hours of game shows, chat shows, trivia, consumerism, violence and materialism, surely 40 minutes on Sundays for morning worship is not too much to ask of the BBC. It simply does not provide that.

Those people say, "We simply cannot rely on the existing channels. Give us the right to broadcast on our own." The 22 per cent. of people who have no religious faith will not be forced to listen to United Christian Broadcasters or watch Christian television, but surely those people have rights, as does anybody else, and they should be allowed to exercise them. I believe that we are still a Christian society. Many people are denied any kind of effective religious broadcasting and they look to the House for a simple change of the law to allow them to have the same rights as everybody else.

3.40 pm
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)

The existing law is anomalous, but we must address the question whether that anomaly gives rise to a particular benefit. There are Members present who would argue from different ends of the spectrum that there is a benefit—because Britain is either a secular or a multi-faith society—and that religious broadcasting is inappropriate. It is right, therefore, that those Members should express that view by voting to deny my hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh) leave to bring in his Bill

Question put, pursuant to Standing Order No. 23 (Motions for leave to bring in Bills and nomination of Select Committees at commencement of public business):—

The House divided: Ayes 138, Noes 9.

Division No. 233] [3.41 pm
AYES
Anderson, Donald (Swansea E) Jenkin, Bemard
Arbuthnot, Rt Hon James Johnson Smith, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey
Atkins, Charlotte
Baldry, Tony Jones, Rt Hon Barry (Alyn)
Beggs, Roy Jones, Mrs Fiona (Newark)
Benn, Hilary (Leeds C) Kemp, Fraser
Body, Sir Richard King, Andy (Rugby & Kenilworth)
Boswell, Tim Kirkbride, Miss Julie
Brake, Tom Laing, Mrs Eleanor
Breed, Colin Laxton, Bob
Brown, Russell (Dumfries) Leigh, Edward
Burstow, Paul Lewis, Dr Julian (New Forest E)
Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth) Lidington, David
Campbell, Rt Hon Menzies (NE Fife) Lilley, Rt Hon Peter
Llwyd, Elfyn
Casale, Roger McCabe, Steve
Cawsey, Ian McCafferty, Ms Chris
Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet) McCartney, Robert (N Down)
McGrady, Eddie
Chope, Christopher MacKay, Rt Hon Andrew
Clappison, James Mackinlay, Andrew
Clark, Rt Hon Dr David (S Shields) Maclean, Rt Hon David
Clarke, Rt Hon Tom (Coatbridge) McLoughlin, Patrick
Clarke, Tony (Northampton S) McNamara, Kevin
Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey McNulty, Tony
Collins, Tim Madel, Sir David
Colvin, Michael Malins, Humfrey
Cook, Frank (Stockton N) Mallon, Seamus
Cormack, Sir Patrick Morgan, Alasdair (Galloway)
Cotter, Brian Oaten, Mark
Gran, James Öpik, Lembit
Crausby, David Organ, Mrs Diana
Cunningham, Jim (Cov'try S) Osborne, Ms Sandra
Dalyell, Tam Paisley, Rev Ian
Davey, Edward (Kingston) Plaskitt, James
Davey, Valerie (Bristol W) Rapson, Syd
Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (Llanelli) Robathan, Andrew
Davies, Geraint (Croydon C) Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)
Day, Stephen Robinson, Peter (Belfast E)
Donaldson, Jeffrey Ross, William (E Lond'y)
Donohoe, Brian H Rowlands, Ted
Evans, Nigel Russell, Bob (Colchester)
Faber, David St Aubyn, Nick
Field, Rt Hon Frank Salter, Martin
Fisher, Mark Sanders, Adrian
Flight, Howard Sarwar, Mohammad
Flynn, Paul Sayeed, Jonathan
Forsythe, Clifford Simpson, Alan (Nottingham S)
Foster, Don (Bath) Singh, Marsha
Fraser, Christopher Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns)
George, Andrew (St Ives) Smyth, Rev Martin (Belfast S)
Gibson, Dr Ian Streeter, Gary
Gill, Christopher Syms, Robert
Gorrie, Donald Tapsell, Sir Peter
Grieve, Dominic Taylor, David (NW Leics)
Griffiths, Jane (Reading E) Taylor, John M (Solihull)
Hammond, Philip Taylor, Matthew (Truro)
Harris, Dr Evan Taylor, Sir Teddy
Harvey, Nick Thompson, William
Heath, David(Somerton & Frome) Townend, John
Henderson, Ivan (Harwich) Trimble, Rt Hon David
Home Robertson, John Turner, Dr George (NW Norfolk)
Howard, Rt Hon Michael Tyler, Paul
Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot) Tyne, Andrew
Hume, John Waterson, Nigel
Hunter, Andrew Webb, Steve
Whitney, Sir Raymond Willis, Phil
Widdecombe, Rt Hon Miss Ann Wilshire, David
Wilkinson, John Winterton, Nicholas (Macclesfield)
Willetts, David Tellers for the Ayes:
Williams, Alan W (E Carmarthen) Mr. James Gray and
Williams, Mrs Betty (Conwy) Mr. John Bercow.
NOES
Ashton, Joe Levitt, Tom
Barnes, Harry Maxton, John
Bell, Martin (Tatton)
Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston) Tellers for the Notes:
Harris, Dr Evan Mr. Desmond Swayne and
Illsley, Eric Mr. Tim Loughton.

Question accordingly agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Edward Leigh, Mr. Mark Fisher, Mr. Donald Anderson, Mr. Frank Cook, Mr. Steve Webb, Mr. Colin Breed, Mr. Jeffrey Donaldson, Rev. Martin Smyth, Mr. Gary Streeter, Mr. Laurence Robertson, Mr. Gerald Howarth and Mr. Christopher Chope.

    c169
  1. BROADCASTING (RELIGIOUS PROGRAMMING) 269 words
  2. Orders of the Day
    1. c170
    2. CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL 51 words
    3. cc171-4
    4. Northern Ireland Bill (Programme) 61 words
      1. c171
      2. Timing of proceedings 291 words
      3. c171
      4. Questions to be put 148 words
      5. c172
      6. Lords Amendments 384 words
      7. cc172-4
      8. Miscellaneous 1,341 words
      cc175-232
    5. Northern Ireland Bill 31,781 words, 1 division
    6. c232
    7. NORTHERN IRELAND BILL [MONEY] 61 words
    8. c232
    9. NORTHERN IRELAND BILL 42 words
      1. New Clause 1
        1. cc232-47
        2. SUSPENSION OF PRISONER RELEASES 8,168 words, 1 division
      2. Clause 1
        1. cc247-93
        2. SUSPENSION OF DEVOLVED GOVERNMENT 25,260 words, 3 divisions
        3. cc294-312
        4. Northern Ireland 10,130 words
        5. c312
        6. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE (Statutory Instrument) 56 words
      c313
    10. DELEGATED LEGISLATION 5 words
      1. c313
      2. FOOD SAFETY 35 words
      3. c313
      4. NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE 62 words
    11. PETITION
      1. c313
      2. Poole Hospital 201 words
      3. cc314-20
      4. National Air Traffic Services 3,550 words