§ 5. Mr. John Grogan (Selby)What correspondence he has had with Kirch sport regarding television coverage of the 2002 and 2006 football World cup finals. [149389]
§ The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Mr. Chris Smith)I wrote to Dr. Dieter Hahn, the managing director of Kirch Holding, on 29 January in response to his letter to me of 20 December. Dr. Hahn acknowledged my reply on 5 February. A meeting with officials has been arranged for 7 March. I am determined that all viewers in the United Kingdom, including those who do not have subscription television, should be able to watch live all games in the World cup finals and not just those involving the home country teams.
§ Mr. GroganWill my right hon. Friend give me the further assurance that if this Anglo-German contest between the will of Parliament—which first made the World cup finals a listed event as long ago as 1985—and the German media company Kirch goes into extra time and penalties at the European Court, he will make strong representations to both the court and to the Commission in defence of the United Kingdom"s listed events? As he said, the list stipulates that every match in the World cup finals should be made available live and at a fair price to free to air terrestrial television.
§ Mr. SmithI agree entirely with my hon. Friend. When live rights are made available, they must be made available to all. That is part of the provisions of the listed events that have been put in place. We have made that view very clear, and we shall stick strongly to it.
§ Mr. Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath)Does the Secretary of State recognise that one of the most important points 569 about keeping major international sporting events on free to air television is the fact that youngsters from less well off backgrounds should have access to the highest quality sport? Does he agree that it is essential to preserve the concept of the listed events as set out in the Broadcasting Act 1996 which was introduced by the previous Conservative Government?
§ Mr. SmithIt is central to our policy for the protection of viewers and for the long term interests of sport to ensure that the provisions for listed events remain in force. We inherited excellent legislation on this matter from the previous Government and we increased the number of events on the list following the review that we conducted shortly after we came into government. The legislation is an example of good cross-party work on an essential matter that is important to all television viewers and to all sports enthusiasts in this country.
§ Mr. Derek Wyatt (Sittingbourne and Sheppey)Will my right hon. Friend reconsider the provisions for the World cup in 2002? Given the 12 hour time difference between here and Korea and Japan, many of the games will be shown live at 3 o"clock in the morning in this country. I do not quite see the logic of anyone having the rights to broadcast the games live it 3 o"clock in the morning because what really matters is when the games are first shown. In 2002, the first showing of matches—and not necessarily their live broadcasting—will be the key issue.
§ Mr. SmithThese are, of course, separate issues. Live events are important and despite the late hour at which some Olympic events were shown, they still attracted substantial interest. We should also remember that many people have video recorders and will want to record the live games so that they can watch them at the first opportunity available to them.
§ Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale)Will the right hon. Gentleman join me in paying tribute to the late Sir Donald Bradman who was undoubtedly one of the greatest cricketers whom the world will ever see?
On the World cup, we entirely sup Sort the Secretary of State"s campaign to retain the concept of listed events. It was the result of the settled will of Parliament and such an approach has cross-party support. It is right to defend the concept in this case because of all the other listed events. If the concept of listed events goes in this instance, what else will be lost?
Has the right hon. Gentleman spoken to FIFA? Surely it recognises that it must be in the interests of sponsors and the future of football that as many people as possible are able to watch the matches. Is there not a must-transmit clause in the contract with Kirch? Should pressure be put on BSkyB not to seek exclusive rights to the matches, because that would not be in the interests of football? Sky has done wonderfully well out of football and it must also be in its interests that as many people as possible watch the World cup so that they will watch other football matches in the future.
§ Mr. SmithI certainly join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to Sir Don Bradman, who was one of the greatest cricketers, if not the greatest, that we have seen for many years. His loss is deeply felt by many people.
570 I thank the hon. Gentleman for his general remarks about broadcasting. FIFA requires that the opening match, the semi-finals and the final, as well as matches involving the national team of any one country, should be shown on free to air television. That is included in the FIFA sale of rights. However, FIFA does not go beyond that, but our listed events requirement does because it includes matches other than home country matches. In the previous World cup, viewing figures for some games that did not involve England or Scotland were remarkably high; Jamaica-Croatia, Brazil-Chile and Nigeria-Denmark each had more than 10 million viewers. These events are important to many millions of viewers in this country, and we shall ensure that we stand by the will of Parliament on this matter.