---

Column 930

As my hon. Friend mentioned, it has had considerable success overseas and has, I understand, further international ambitions. I am well aware of the requests that we should take the opportunity of any legislation that might be proposed to alter the licensing procedures in the Broadcasting Act 1990. My hon. Friend has correctly pointed out that there is a difference between the radio and television licensing provisions and asked that incumbent operators should be given similar scope for licence renewal.

I understand the desire for parity between independent national radio services and the Channel 3 television companies, but the requirement for fresh competitive tender for the independent national radio licences was designed to keep services fresh and offer regular opportunities for new operators. It also recognised that national radio frequencies were at a premium. While the advent of digital audio broadcasting will allow for the provision of six independent national radio services as compared with the existing three, they will still be at a greater premium than their digital television counterparts.

The distinction between the arrangements for independent national radio and television licensing in the 1990 Act was drawn in recognition of the differences between the two media. Television stations, for instance, face considerably higher start-up costs to meet their more stringent licence conditions. Parliament considered that eight-year licences for radio stations offered sufficient scope for them to recoup their costs and to make a reasonable return on their investment. There was also the view that these arrangements would be more disruptive to viewers, if applied to television licensing arrangements, than to radio listeners.

Government policy is to provide regular opportunities for newcomers, to secure a proper return to the taxpayer for the use of a limited national resource and to encourage competition. At the same time, however, the Government recognise the need for those criteria to be balanced against acceptable levels of potential disruption for listeners. I can only assure the House and my hon. Friend that we are looking closely at these issues right now, but I cannot at this moment give any indication as to the outcome.

It is the nature of radio that safeguards its future. It has a unique appeal to the imagination. It has the ability to go anywhere with the consumer without intruding on their other activities, whether driving a car or relaxing at home. Research shows that listeners treat it as a friend. The loyalty with which listeners continue to respond to radio in the face of competing demands on everyone's time and attention demonstrates that radio has a solid future. The growth of commercial radio's audiences and revenue and the advantages which digital audio broadcasting offers signify that radio is not only secure but that radio is on the move.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-eight minutes to Eleven o'clock.

---