Cannon Cinema Chain (Hansard, 14 July 1988)

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, I am not aware that the Cannon group has any plans to sell its cinema chain. Any sale, whether of the chain or of individual cinema sites, would be a matter for its commercial judgment.

The Viscount of Falkland
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer but I hardly think that it will bring cheer to the film industry. Does he not agree that in the short time since the Cannon group took over the film interests of Thorn EMI, that group has fallen down on its undertakings and commitments in almost every respect? Indeed, so far as concerns the Elstree film studios, it very recently rejected an offer from a British group to take over the studios and run them should there be any difficulties within the Cannon group; it gave that prospective purchaser to understand that all was well and it had no intention of selling. Is it not therefore quite normal that the film industry, and indeed the public, should now feel very concerned that the next part of that group, which covers nearly 50 per cent. of the cinema screens in this country, could well pass into other hands which might have very little intention of keeping them as cinemas, with the social effects that that implies?

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, I should not like to speculate on what may or may not happen to the assets of the Cannon group in this country. It is a matter of record that the company has experienced severe financial problems affecting its international interests. I understand that equity of at least 100 million dollars has recently been injected into Cannon but Cannon is a private sector company and it is not for the Government to intervene in its commercial decisions.

§ Viscount Mersey
My Lords, now that Elstree film studios have been listed by Hertsmere Council, does my noble friend agree that it would be difficult to use them for any purpose other than filming?

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, the future use of the studio property is a matter for the commercial judgment of the new owners, subject to any consents 931 which may have to be obtained from the planning authorities. I, too, am aware of press reports on the listing, but I understand that the Department of the Environment has not yet been notified officially.

§ Lord Lloyd of Hampstead
My Lords, is the Minister in fact saying that the fate of those great studios at Elstree is a mere matter of commercial judgment? Does he not agree that the studios are an important component in our film industry? Are the Government not willing to show some concern about the future of those studios and exert whatever influence they can to affect the outcome of this sale, which is in breach of previous undertakings?

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, it is not for the Government to try to intervene in commercial decisions. The owners of the studios are best placed to make commercial judgments as to their future. The noble Lord knows better than I that the Government support the British film industry through a number of initiatives, including the National Film and Television School, of which he has great knowledge.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that, although the film industry is a large and growing world industry, in this country it seems to be getting smaller and smaller? Ought not the Government, without interfering in a private concern, to pay more attention to ensuring that we preserve such an important industry, quite apart from their efforts to establish new industry? At the moment things do not seem to be happening that way.

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, the Government do not believe that the commercial British film industry needs wholesale subsidy. However, we recognise that in some areas there are special difficulties and hence our support through British Screen Finance Limited, the British Film Institute and, as I said earlier, the National Film and Television School.

§ Lord Jenkins of Putney
My Lords, is it not to be welcomed that at long last the noble Lord has got round to the idea that there is a role for the Government in this matter? Is this not a case in which he might even consider the possibility of an element of de-privatisation? Does he not agree that in the past government money has played a very beneficial role in the film industry? Would he not consider the possibility that its re-entry might be necessary at this time?

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, the noble Lord will not be surprised if I do not follow him down the route of deprivatisation. However, the Government wish to see as much activity as possible in the film industry in this country but within the policy guidelines that have been laid down and operated by the Government.

§ Lord Dormand of Easington
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the closure of Elstree Studios would cause great damage to the ability of the British film industry to compete internationally? In view of the blatant breaking of the agreement by Cannon 932 and of the fact—despite what the Minister has said—that Elstree Studios have made a profit for a number of years now, is that not the strongest case for intervention by the Government?
I visited the studios yesterday. There was unanimous support for the first-class facilities which exist there from international film stars—they are making two features films there at the moment—from producers, directors, technicians and everybody.

Noble Lords
Speech!

§ Lord Dormand of Easington
My Lords, the Government ought to take more cognisance of these factors than they have up to now.

§ Lord Beaverbrook
My Lords, I was very interested to hear the noble Lord's report of the activity at Elstree. It is a matter for the owners to make a commercial judgment on the future of the studios. The Government will not and could not intervene in such decisions. However, the Government would like to see as much activity as possible in the industry in this country.