Digital Broadcasting Licences: Religious Bodies (Hansard, 21 July 1999)

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the Broadcasting Act 1990, as amended by the Broadcasting Act 1996, disqualifies groups whose objectives are wholly or mainly of a religious nature from holding a terrestrial digital radio multiplex licence or a programme service licence. The Government have received legal advice to the effect that the UK's policy on national radio licensing represents a legitimate aim for the purposes of the European Convention on Human Rights and that the Broadcasting Acts pursue those aims in a fully defensible way. We have no immediate plans to introduce new government broadcasting legislation, but then would be the time to review matters of broadcasting policy.

§ Viscount Brentford
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for that disappointing but also somewhat encouraging reply. I should declare an interest as chairman of the trustees who own Premier Christian Radio, which broadcasts throughout the Greater London area. Does the noble Lord appreciate that all such bodies are effectively being barred from applying for the new licences currently being advertised in an industry that is growing at an unprecedented rate? Are the Government prepared to allow time in the next Session for a Private Member's Bill to correct this anomaly and to permit religious organisations to hold terrestrial digital radio licences?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, there is certainly an anomaly in the sense that the amendment of the Broadcasting Act 1990 by the Broadcasting Act 1996 allowed local analogue licences but did not allow local digital licences. That was an omission from the 1996 Act. As I made clear in my first Answer, the Government do not have any plans to introduce legislation. We would take any private Member's legislation on its merits.

§ Baroness Anelay of St. Johns
My Lords, my noble friend has a point. This is an appropriate matter for Parliament to consider, particularly against the background of the revolution in digital broadcasting. Now is perhaps the right time to investigate fully whether it is appropriate to allow the regulators to consider whether or not licences should be granted, rather than to exclude those who wish to broadcast religious programmes from applying for licences because of the inhibitions of the 1996 Act. As the Government are somewhat wedded to reviews, is not now the time to launch such a review?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I should make it clear that no new frequencies are available at 969 present. The prohibition that affects groups whose objectives are wholly or mainly of a religious nature is not confined merely to religion but applies also to local authorities and political organisations. I hope that the noble Baroness, whose government legislated in this way, will agree that it would be undesirable, where frequencies are limited, to have them taken up by organisations whose objectives are—I put it in a totally neutral way—propaganda-based. We should be encouraging channels which reach a broad cross-section of consumers. It would not be right for us to re-investigate the matter now, in the absence of any programme of primary legislation.

§ The Lord Bishop of Durham
My Lords, does the Minister understand that his responses; must be seen in the context of a reduction in religious broadcasting and its marginalisation on normal terrestrial channels? Would any investigation also include that consideration?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I do not know that I can accept that. The Central Religious Advisory Committee, which meets the BBC, the ITC and the Radio Authority twice a year, has not taken the lead in any representations in support of United Christian Broadcasters, the organisation to which I imagine that the original Question referred. If there are problems about the religious content of broadcasts more generally, they can be taken up without raising the issue referred to in the Question.

§ Lord Ewing of Kirkford
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that I am worried about my future, and that that is why I gave way to the right reverend Prelate? At the risk of sounding like a politician turned preacher—if only because the preachers may turn into politicians and get their own back—may I ask my noble friend whether he agrees that we should save the people of this country from the American experience? That country has extensive religious programming, broadcast by what are no more than money-raising organisations. Does he further agree that the morning service on a Sunday morning and "Songs of Praise" on Sunday evening are very acceptable to the people of the United Kingdom, and that we should not go further than that?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I do not know that I want to encourage any analogy between religious broadcasting in the United States and United Christian Broadcasters, or indeed Premier Radio. My noble friend is right, in that our objective—which was also the objective of the previous government in introducing the Broadcasting Act—must be to encourage diversity in broadcasting. That means broadcasting that reaches a broad cross-section of consumers. That includes the ability, but not the obligation, to listen to religious broadcasting on general channels.