LOCAL RADIO FRANCHISES (Hansard, 12 July 1979)

§ Lord LOVELL-DAVIS
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Belstead)
My Lords, the award of independent local radio franchises is, under Section 2 of the Independent Broadcasting Authority Act 1973, the responsibility of the Independent Broadcasting Authority. I understand that the Authority already expects to see 1013 significant elements of local ownership and knowledge in the composition of applicant groups and companies.

§ Lord LOVELL-DAVIS
My Lords, while appreciating the position in so far as the Government and the IBA are concerned, may I ask the Minister whether he is satisfied with the present situation, whereby large non-local companies, among them some major Canadian broadcasting organisations owning radio stations in Canada and the United States, hold equity in a number of British independent local radio stations; and does he not consider that this represents something of a threat to the independence and local nature of the stations? Secondly—and here I should declare some interest, in that I would not have been aware of the position had I not been associated with a company intending to be involved in this field—may I ask the Minister whether he would tell the House if he and his right honourable friend the Secretary of State approve of the practice whereby some of these outside companies not only hold equity in the local radio stations, but also act as agents selling national advertising time for the stations, generally on a sole agent basis, from which they earn substantial commissions—that is to say, they are both agents and operators? Should they not be told to be either radio station owners or agents of advertising, but not both?

§ Lord BELSTEAD
My Lords, I think the noble Lord will know that it is the practice of the Independent Broadcasting Authority to seek substantial information from prospective groups about the local nature of the programmes to be provided, and elements of local ownership and knowledge in the composition of the applicant groups and companies. After that, it is a matter for the Independent Broadcasting Authority to decide to which companies to award the franchises. So far as the noble Lord's second question is concerned, it really is not a matter of my right honourable friend approving or disapproving of the practices which the noble Lord outlined. Giving the franchises is a matter for the Independent Broadcasting Authority.

§ Lord MURRAY of GRAVESEND
My Lords, was it not intended that on the setting up of independent local stations, 1014 newspapers would be restricted to 12½ per cent. of the shareholding? It has now reached the stage where some newspaper groups are holding up to 45 per cent. of the voting stock. This is obviously wrong and takes away much of the independence. Is the Minister prepared to do something, either now or in the near future, about the new franchise?

§ Lord BELSTEAD
My Lords, when the noble Lord says, "Is my right honourable friend going to do something?", he is really asking me whether my right honourable friend will put something into legislation. I must put it to the noble Lord that there may be circumstances either in which no application from a locally owned company is forthcoming or in which an application from a locally owned company may, in the Authority's view, be less satisfactory than another. In those circumstances, and subject to those considerations, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary would see no reason to introduce provisions in his forthcoming Bill to require the Authority to depart from their policy of awarding the franchise to the applicant group which they consider would provide the best service for the locality.

§ Lord DAVIES of LEEK
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that some of us who are concerned about the quality of life would urge that, before these concessions are made, the local idiosyncracies and the natural environment of an area should be taken into account as a qualifying factor rather than that there should be a foreign importation into areas which we should keep particularly local, since they have their own dialects and their own character?

§ Lord BELSTEAD
My Lords, I could not agree more with the noble Lord, and I assure him that this is precisely the policy of the Independent Broadcasting Authority.

§ Lord LOVELL-DAVIS
My Lords, while appreciating what the Minister has said, could I ask him whether he and his right honourable friend the Secretary of State might at least review the situation so far as the state of participation in independent local radio companies is concerned? It was, after all, the noble Lord's Government who established inde- 1015 pendent local radio, and I wonder whether the present situation is quite in accordance with the spirit in which they intended local radio to be set up.

§ Lord BELSTEAD
My Lords, I give the noble Lord an undertaking that I shall look with the greatest care at what he has said and that I shall draw the attention of my right honourable friend to what he and other noble Lords have said this afternoon.

§ Lord AYLESTONE
My Lords, having had some experience in the early days of independent local radio, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that, but for the difficult but nevertheless achievable amount of Canadian money which was put into one of the two London stations, it would never have got on to the air?

§ Lord BELSTEAD
My Lords, I think that the House will wish to take into account what the noble Lord, with all his experience in this field of the media, has just said in the form of a question to your Lordships' House.