BBC Chairman (Hansard, 2 February 2004)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Lord McIntosh of Haringey)
My Lords, with the leave of the House I will now repeat the Answer to an urgent Question asked and answered in another place earlier this afternoon. The Question was to ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a Statement on the process of appointing a new chairman of the BBC. The Answer is as follows:
"I thank the honourable gentleman for his Question and welcome the opportunity to respond for several reasons. First, this gives me an opportunity to put on record the House's appreciation of the outstanding contribution made by Gavyn Davies, both as vice-chairman and as 479 chairman of the BBC. I regret that we now have to appoint a new chairman. But the fact that Gavyn felt that he had to resign—his decision and his alone—is a mark of his honour and integrity. It also demonstrates his overriding concern for the interests of the BBC. I should also take this opportunity to pay tribute to Greg Dyke and to the inspirational leadership that he has brought to the corporation. Now it is, of course, for the governors to appoint his successor.
"These two resignations happened over the past week, which has been a very difficult period for the BBC, but now we must look to safeguard its future. The corporation needs strong leadership, stability and the capacity to engage fully with the charter review process, which is already under way. We will therefore move swiftly to appoint a new chairman.
"The process for appointing Mr Davies's successor will follow in full the Nolan rules. We shall publish a role specification against which all candidates will be assessed. The post will be advertised in the national press and on the Internet. Shortlisted candidates will be interviewed by a panel, including an independent assessor, who will be involved throughout the process.
"Under the BBC's Royal Charter, the appointment will be made by the Queen in Council, following this process, on the advice of Ministers.
"It is worth recording, for the benefit of the House, that Gavyn Davies was the first BBC chairman to be appointed through the transparent Nolan process, which is now the standard for public appointments. The Nolan process is held in wide respect, but because of the public interest in this appointment we have decided to enhance the process further. Dame Rennie Fritchie, the Commissioner for Public Appointments, has agreed to act as guarantor for the fairness of the process and will convene a scrutiny panel to ensure its integrity. The panel will be made up of privy counsellors from the three main parties.
"I hope that the names of the counsellors will be announced in the coming days and I hope that the double lock of Nolan and the scrutiny panel will give the staff of the BBC and the public the reassurance that they need about the independence of this process.
"I have often said that we all want a strong BBC, independent of government. Anyone who cares about politics, standards in public life and the quality of our media knows how much the BBC matters. It provides this nation and the wider world with a cradle-to-grave public service. Because of that, it should have the self-confidence to promote those values and defend them against all comers. Central to that independence and self-confidence is the leadership of the BBC chairman. I can assure that House that whoever is chosen will be chosen fairly, freely and with the best interests of the BBC at heart".
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

§ Baroness Buscombe
My Lords, I thank the Minister for being flexible on the timing of this Statement. The Opposition join the Government in wanting to put on record our appreciation of the outstanding contribution made by Gavyn Davies as vice-chairman and as chairman of the BBC. We, too, very much regret that a new chairman must now be appointed. We agree that the fact that Gavyn Davies felt that he had to resign is a mark of his honour and integrity. It also shows his overriding concern for the interests of the BBC.
I also take this opportunity to join the Minister in paying tribute to Greg Dyke. I entirely agree with the Minister's comments about Greg Dyke as an inspirational leader who has brought to the corporation a great deal of excitement, change and challenge. We accept that it is the governors who must now appoint his successor.
The corporation needs strong leadership, stability and the capacity to engage fully with the charter review process, which is already under way.
We welcome the fact that the new appointment will be overseen by Dame Rennie Fritchie. She comes with a distinguished record of having already exposed the Government for packing health quangos with their own placemen. Does the Minister accept that if the Government had accepted our amendment during the passage of the Communications Bill to place the BBC fully under the remit of Ofcom, this whole sorry business of having to find a new chairman might not have arisen? Does he also accept that the public are rightly concerned at the very powerful accusations by Greg Dyke that he and other journalists at the BBC were systematically bullied and intimidated by the Government and that that makes it all the more important that the process of appointing the new chairman is impartial?
As morale at the BBC is clearly extremely low, will the Minister ensure that the appointment of a new chairman takes place speedily, as the BBC needs clear direction at a critical time? Will the new independent process for selecting the chairman of the BBC be made permanent? Will this very welcome transparent process extend to all other board members of the BBC in future? Finally, I return to the DCMS document, Review of the BBC's Royal Charter, published in December 2003. Page 24 makes the position clear. It states: The BBC governors have a dual role of, on the one hand, strategic oversight, acting effectively as non-executive Directors, and on the other regulating the Corporation on behalf of the public interest. Comments are invited on whether these arrangements continue to be appropriate. Do they, for example, put the BBC in the best position to deliver on its commitments to its audiences whilst at the same time preserving its strength and independence from Government? We on these Benches have always argued that the BBC board of governors cannot both run and regulate the BBC. There is now an even stronger case for independent regulation of the BBC. The role of chairman is a tough challenge. Let us hope that the events of the past week will not deter the right candidate from coming forward.

§ Lord McNally
My Lords, I shall not follow the noble Baroness on a number of her points, including whether the Ofcom magic would have worked. I suspect we shall return to those issues, perhaps on Wednesday and certainly at later discussions about the BBC Charter.
I hope that the willingness of the Government to respond to this Question today indicates that it has dawned on them over the weekend that winning a game 26-nil is not always the best outcome, even for the victors, and that there is therefore a new sense of realism about what should happen at the BBC. We only have to imagine how we would have looked at a happening abroad where there was a spat between the prime minister and the state broadcaster that resulted in the removal of the chairman and the director-general of that state broadcaster. One would say that that would be quite understandable in Mr Berlusconi's Italy or perhaps even in President Putin's Russia, but not in a country that has taken pride in the robust independence of the BBC from the government of the day for over three-quarters of a century. Therefore, any hint of the "berlusconisation" of the BBC is something that is not only difficult to say but to be resisted.
We welcome the reference to the Nolan rules and the scrutiny panel in the Answer. We also welcome the assurances that the final choice will be free from political influence. Does the Minister agree with me that politicians should not necessarily be barred from applying? We can think of very good examples—Lord Hill of Luton in the BBC, my noble friend Lord Thomson of Monifieth in the IBA—who have managed to carry out these responsibilities with great skill. It is important to get the right person rather than to worry about their politics.
I share the noble Baroness's concern about speed. Of course, the process should be thorough, but there is a need for somebody to be at the helm as quickly as possible. There is also a need—we welcome the mention of it in the Statement—for a commitment to an independent, well financed BBC as the iron pole of our public service broadcasting. Vested interests and the enemies of the BBC have certainly seen their opportunity in the past few days. It is important that those of us who value a commitment to this organisation should be prepared to fight for it.
That also goes for the Secretary of State and for the Minister's department, the DCMS. All too often over the past months there has been an impression that, in Lord Willis's immortal phrase, the DCMS has been like a cushion bearing the imprint of the backside that sat on it last. If we are to defend the BBC, the first line of defence must be a robust Secretary of State and a robust departmental responsibility for its integrity. The commitments in this Statement are extremely welcome. By their deeds we shall now judge them. The sooner a good, independent chair of the BBC is in place, the better for all concerned.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the Statement was about the process of appointment of the chairman of the BBC. I shall depart so far from the subject matter of the Statement as to welcome what the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, and the noble Lord, Lord McNally, said about Gavyn Davies's work as chairman and Greg Dyke's work as director-general. I know the Secretary of State will be very grateful to hear those views expressed in this House.
A number of the other points made do not relate directly to the process of appointment of the chairman of the BBC. It would not be appropriate for me to respond to them, other than to say that many of these issues will come up over the next couple of years in the consideration of the charter review. It is entirely appropriate that those views, which have been expressed, should be expressed now but the Government should respond to them only in the context of the charter review.
I can confirm, as the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, said, that it is the duty of the governors to appoint a successor to Greg Dyke as director-general. She asked me about speed and urged it on the Government. I entirely agree with her. My understanding is that press advertisements will appear within the next week. We have no intention of losing time or leaving the BBC in a position of uncertainty. I do not think that there is anything else I need to respond to, other than to reaffirm, as did the noble Lord, Lord McNally, that it is the intention of the charter review process to land up with a strong, independent BBC. I think that that is welcomed all round the House.

§ Lord Barnett
My Lords, as oppositions do not like to congratulate governments too often, perhaps I could. I am happy to congratulate the Government on deciding to use the Nolan rules, even though I was appointed as vice-chairman by the then Prime Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Thatcher. She also appointed me acting chairman on the occasion when, sadly, the chairman died. I am sure that the Government are right to press ahead as quickly as possible. I hope that they will not rush into accepting the advice of the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, that an independent regulator might have avoided a lot of these or any other troubles. I am not sure that Gilligan's error would have been spotted any quicker by an independent regulator. I hope all of us are concerned about a truly independent BBC with an independent chairman. In my experience, whichever political party held the chairmanship of the time, there was never any problem with its independence, even though the chairmen were not appointed under the Nolan rules. The Nolan rules are an improvement and I congratulate my noble friend.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I am grateful for those congratulations.

§ Lord Puttnam
My Lords, given that the entire thrust of the Government's statement seems to be about independence, impartiality and the creation of an atmosphere of trust, does the Minister agree that very important people, such as chairmen of select committees, would do well to temper their expressions of prejudice during this difficult period? There is a real danger that in displaying prejudice they could discredit the entire system of evidence-based select committee scrutiny.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, in so far as that question relates to the process of appointment of the chairman of the BBC, I would say that everyone involved in the process of selecting the new chairman of the BBC should exercise the maximum restraint.

§ Lord Phillips of Sudbury
My Lords, how will the panel that is to make the selection be compiled? How will the role specification be alighted upon? Will there be any external consultation, particularly with the governors, on both those matters?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, it is not normal to name those who take part in the interviewing process other than to say, as the Statement says, that there will be an independent assessor. The answer to the second part of the noble Lord's question is that Dame Rennie Fritchie is already involved and will be involved throughout the process including in the selection of the panel of three Privy Counsellors and of the independent assessor.

§ Baroness Carnegy of Lour
My Lords, I understood the noble Lord to say that the process will be carried out according to the Nolan rules, that it will be scrutinised by the scrutiny panel and that a name will be put forward to the Prime Minister that he will put before Her Majesty. Will the Prime Minister be able to decline to put that name forward?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the Nolan rules are very clear and we shall observe them in detail. They involve publishing a role specification against which all candidates will be assessed, advertising the post as widely as is necessary and, as I said in response to the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, shortlisting candidates who will be interviewed by a panel, including an independent assessor, who will be involved throughout the process. The final part of the question of the noble Baroness, Lady Carnegy, is answered under the Royal Charter which says that the appointment will be made by the Queen in Council following this process on the advice of Ministers. It does not mention the Prime Minister specifically. Clearly, the Prime Minister has at least a formal responsibility for any advice that he tenders to Her Majesty, but that is true of all appointments; there is nothing particular about this one.

§ Baroness Carnegy of Lour
My Lords, I hope that I may follow that up. Can Ministers decline to put the name forward? That was my point.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I believe that in theory they could.

§ Baroness Howe of Idlicote
My Lords, given the grave circumstances under which these resignations of two such distinguished people have taken place, is it not appropriate that all the people who are to be on the scrutiny panel are named in the interests of greater transparency and, indeed, independence?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, we have said that we shall involve the Commissioner for Public Appointments right from the very beginning and that she has agreed to be involved. She will be assisted by a panel of three Privy Counsellors from the three major parties. If she wants to make recommendations about the process—so long as those recommendations do not involve a departure from Nolan procedures—of course we shall listen.

§ Lord Jopling
My Lords, while it must be right that Mr Davies and Mr Dyke resigned, will the party leaders be consulted in this process? Does the noble Lord not agree that there is some advantage in choosing a chairman with no political baggage? I say that as the noble Lord will know that over the years there have been a great many accusations from both sides of this House and another place that the BBC has been guilty of bias. I seem to recall that often that was attributed either to Labour "luvvies" or to Conservative contributors. Does he not agree that it would be an advantage if someone could be found to lead the BBC in the future who had sufficiently tough managerial experience and no political baggage?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, it would be most unwise for me to respond to suggestions regarding the right kind of person to lead the BBC whether it is the suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord Jopling, that he or she should not be a politician or the suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord McNally, that he or she should be a politician—I did not quite think that that comment constituted the job application when he said it. I shall not respond to that point if the noble Lord, Lord Jopling, will forgive me.
However, the noble Lord asked me a specific question regarding consultation with party leaders. We have said that Dame Rennie Fritchie will convene the scrutiny panel of Privy Counsellors. Who she consults in doing that is a matter for her.

§ The Earl of Onslow
My Lords, why will the names of those on the scrutiny panel not be published? Will the noble Lord give an undertaking that even though theoretically the Prime Minister can decline to accept the nomination and pass it on to Her Majesty, he will not do so?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I did not say that the names of those on the scrutiny panel would 485 not be published. The names of the three Privy Counsellors will be published. I said that it was not normal practice for the names of those on the interviewing panel to be published. My answer regarding the powers of the Prime Minister was a theoretical answer. It has always been the case that when the Prime Minister submits names to Her Majesty he has the power in theory to reject names.

§ Lord Baker of Dorking
My Lords, in view of recent events, will the noble Lord ensure that no judge is involved in this process?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I shall not comment on the qualifications or background of any potential candidate for the job.

§ Lord Howe of Aberavon
My Lords, will the noble Lord accept an anecdotal reminiscence that the procedure outlined seems likely to be an improvement on the one that was followed when I was remarkably present in the early 1970s and suggested a name that provoked the Prime Minister to comment that the named person had much too high an opinion of himself, which led my noble friend Lady Thatcher to retort, "But most men do, Prime Minister"? That led to the appointment of Sir Michael Swann, who was not at all a bad choice in the circumstances. The present method seems more orderly than that which was then adopted.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I am glad to have that wise contribution. It will have been noticed that I avoided doing what the Secretary of State did in the Commons, which was to read out the way in which the noble Lord, Lord Hussey, was appointed chairman of the board of governors of the BBC in a manner that was a long way from Nolan procedures.

§ Lord Jordan
My Lords, I welcome the speedy moves to replace the director-general and the use of the Nolan procedures. A strong character is needed. The acting director-general, Mark Byford, is such a strong character. I hope that his name will be put in the hat. A strong character is needed not only to maintain the world perception of a BBC that is independent of the pressures of government but also to counter the culture of contempt and arrogance that emerged from within its ranks and gave birth to the problems that led to the departure of the director-general and the chairman. I hope that such a character emerges.
Noble Lords in this House who side with those who declare their opposition to political interference must bear in mind that the present culture of contempt extends to everyone within the parliamentary system—there are no sides in that regard. I hope that the next director-general will recognise that such contempt does the BBC an injustice and will certainly undermine its attempts regarding the renewal of the charter. I hope that the procedure we are discussing will result in the director-general recognising that the 486 BBC's arrogance regarding an anti-war campaign does not endear the British public to what is after all the best broadcasting system in the world.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, in response to the noble Lord, Lord Jordan, I am conscious that throughout these brief proceedings I am resisting any temptation to talk about candidates or the qualifications for candidates. In other words I am saying very little positive in response to the questions, but I am sure those who have taken part in asking questions will realise that those who are responsible for this process will inevitably be reading Hansard today. Therefore what they say is not running into the sand. In response to the noble Lord's specific question, the appointment of a director general is the responsibility of the governors and not of the process I have been describing today.

§ Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville
My Lords, on the Homeric precedent of Achilles and his Myrmidons, I declare an interest as being a Myrmidon of the BBC at a modest level. My question is about process. I am not quite clear whether I caught a response from the Minister to the question of my noble friend Lady Buscombe about whether this process which we are now adopting will be applied in future to governors at large.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
No, my Lords, I did not answer that question because it is wide of the question of the appointment of the chairman of the BBC.

§ Lord Bragg
My Lords, is my noble friend the Minister entirely confident that once the new chairman or chairwoman has been appointed, the existing governors will be the right or the best people to determine the future of the BBC in the light of their performance over the past few months?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, that question is certainly wide of the process of appointment of the chairman of the BBC!