HL Deb 09 December 1993 vol 550 cc1013-5

Baroness Birk asked Her Majesty's Government:

Why, when the new independent television franchises have been operating for less than one year, they intend to change the rules as laid down by the Broadcasting Act 1990.

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, the only change we are making is to remove the distinction between the licences for the nine areas with the largest advertising revenue and the six other areas. A company can hold any two licences, except that no one could have both London licences. The moratorium will expire at the end of the year, under the terms of the Broadcasting Act.

Baroness Birk

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, which is not very satisfactory. Would it not be more rational to extend the moratorium on takeovers until full consideration has been given to all aspects of ownership and the BBC charter review has been completed so that broadcasting is looked at as a whole? Can the Minister say how this precipitate move will improve programme quality when the emphasis is on profits to be made and pockets to be lined?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, the moratorium on takeovers was intended to introduce a short period of stability at the start of the licence period. It has achieved that objective. It was not intended to provide long-term protection against the normal market forces. The moratorium does not prevent takeovers; it requires the approval of the Independent Television Commission before they take place. We cannot stand still in a changing world.

Lord Graham of Edmonton

That is a grand phrase!

Lord Thomson of Monifieth

My Lords, is the Minister aware that if she believes, to use her own words, that the consequence of the Government's decision is to promote stability, she will believe anything? Is she further aware that this decision has, according to press reports, apparently been taken without any consultation with the Independent Television Commission, and contrary to its known views about the need for a period of stability? Is that not a gross discourtesy to the Independent Television Commission; and, apart from that, a totally silly way to behave?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords—ignoring the tenor of the noble Lord's remarks —my right honourable friend discussed the issues with the chairman of the ITC on more than one occasion, but the decision was market sensitive and the Government's conclusions could not be disclosed before the announcement was made.

Lord Peyton of Yeovil

My Lords, adjusting my tone to what my noble friend may regard as suitable, can I ask her very gently why the Independent Television Commission was not consulted beforehand? Can she also say what thought has been given to the effect of this move on Ulster Television at this particularly sensitive time?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, I just answered the first part of my noble friend's question. With regard to the second part, we did not consider it necessary. Licence conditions will be enforced by the ITC regardless of ownership. Level and quality of regional programming will be maintained. A reintroduced rule to prevent the holding of neighbouring licences might prevent sensible links between some companies with a good deal in common.

Lord Jenkins of Putney

My Lords, can the noble Baroness tell us why the Government decided to do this? Had they reached a point when, without any reason at all, they quite deliberately decided to upset people? Is there no reason behind this change? I do not understand, and I have asked several Members on the other side who cannot understand, what the Government are up to. Can the Minister tell us?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, I should be delighted to do so. We always expected that the ownership rules would have to be altered if circumstances changed. Rapid changes are taking place in broadcasting throughout the world. This move should open new opportunities for UK broadcasters.

Lord Donoughue

My Lords, will the Minister confirm that the ITC formally recommended that the moratorium on takeovers in a television area should be extended until 1995 for three very good reasons: the need for stability in a new networking system just in place; the need to wait and see the future shape of the BBC; and a need for a thorough review of cross-media ownership and the anomalies in the rules on satellite and cable? I come back to the question that I have not quite heard the answer to: why have the Government decided to disrupt this system in the first year of a 10-year proposal? Why have the Government chosen to do this at this time?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, we really did not think that we could stand still while the rest of the world moved on. With regard to the other part of the noble Lord's question, all ownership issues will be kept under review in the light of changes both in the UK and world-wide. We shall look again at the cross-media ownership regulations.

Earl Russell

My Lords, does not the reiterated answer of the noble Baroness indicate that she is standing still while the rest of the House moves on?

Baroness Trumpington

My Lords, noble Lords are trying to get my knickers in a twist again!

Back to