| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Tobacco (Protection of Children and Restriction of Promotion)
Mr. Simon Hughes accordingly presented a Bill to protect children, young people and others from the harmful effects of tobacco by restricting the advertising, sponsorship and promotion of tobacco and tightening existing legislation on enforcement of illegal sales to minors; and for connected purposes: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Friday 16 February and to be printed. [Bill 12.]
Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You will know that, in recent months, I have repeatedly raised with you, both on the Floor of the House and in correspondence, the question of the role of the Deputy Prime Minister. As I understand it, he is currently responsible for deregulation and the co-ordination of Government policy.
The publication of the unemployment figures is the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Education and Employment, and they are due to be announced tomorrow. I draw your attention to a statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister this morning at the Pilkington technology centre in Lancashire, in which he announced that the real news of today is that unemployment is down for the 28th month in a row. I remind Government Members that the figures are fiddled, but that is a matter for another day.
The central argument is the responsibilities of the Deputy Prime Minister. He is now usurping the responsibilities of the Secretary of State for Education and Employment by announcing the figures 24 hours in advance, and probably without her permission.
Madam Speaker:
I cannot be responsible for what Ministers say in the House, and I am certainly not responsible for what Cabinet Ministers say outside the House. Ministers' duties and responsibilities are a matter for the Prime Minister, and I hope that the comments of the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) will be brought to his attention.
Madam Speaker:
I have selected the amendment standing in the name of the Prime Minister.
Mr. Robin Cook (Livingston):
I beg to move,
I am conscious of a novel experience. On Supply days it is normal to move a motion that divides the House. I think that I can say that on this occasion there is much in the motion that unites the House. It is agreed in all corners of the House that the BBC World Service is a great British success. It is by far the largest of any of the external broadcasting services of the western nations. Its audience is still rising. In the past three years, it has risen from 120 million to 133 million. The audience would be larger still if there were not uncounted millions in places such as China and Iraq. We cannot be certain whether they listen to the World Service, because were they to be asked and were they to say yes, they would be liable to be put in prison.
In a now notorious speech, the Secretary of State for Defence assured the Conservative party conference that the letters SAS were feared throughout the world. If there is a British organisation that is known by three letters round the globe, it is surely the BBC. They are letters that inspire not fear for Britain but respect, admiration and good will. It would be difficult for the Foreign Secretary to name any way in which he could spend his money that would give him a better return on a positive environment for good will towards Britain.
I know of one letter that has been sent to the Foreign Secretary by a listener in Africa, which expresses the point well. The letter reads:
It is for that reason that Members on both sides of the House support the World Service. It deserves also the support of all parties. The World Service demonstrates in practice our democratic values, including truthful reporting, independent comment and all the other features on which an open society must be based. As a result, the World Service provides a beacon for countries with regimes that suppress truth and independent comment.
When the Burmese opposition leader emerged from years of house arrest to claim her Nobel prize, she said:
When Nelson Mandela emerged from prison, he said that what he really wanted in prison was a receiver that would enable him to listen to the World Service. As his name
reminds us, the dissident of today is the leader in power tomorrow. It is impossible to exaggerate the influence for Britain of the politicians throughout the world who have come to rely on the BBC for their independent news.
We all recognise the importance of the World Service. Both sides of the House are agreed on its value. Even more unusually, both sides of the Tory party are agreed. It is one of those issues around which Euro-sceptics and one-nationers can find common cause. Even Ministers agree with us. Last week, the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office recognised the
The real crisis that the executive faces will come in 1997-98, when the revenue budget--the one that pays for the services that it provides--will be reduced. The Foreign Secretary has written to the World Service saying that it can expect a cut in 1997-98 of £2.5 million. That will be on top of a cut of £2 million in the same year's budget, which was imposed in November 1994.
Those cuts cannot be replaced by the private finance initiative because they are cuts in the operating budget. It may be that the Foreign Secretary is right and that cuts in the capital budget can be replaced by the private finance initiative.
Perhaps somebody will come forward and build a new transmitter in Oman and lease it back to the BBC World Service. I would, in passing, express a worry about the commercial relationship that that would create. I am concerned that it might compromise the most prized and respected quality of the BBC World Service--the independence of its editorial comment and its freedom from external pressures, whether political or commercial.
This month, we were reminded of the risks of such a commercial relationship when BBC World Service Television bulletins covering the expulsion of Muhammad al-Masari, which were broadcast to the middle east, were disrupted at the transmitter in Italy, which, of course, is funded from the middle east. That example shows the potential conflict between commercial funding-- I presume that the Foreign Secretary does not exclude foreign funding--and the freedom of the BBC World Service to broadcast without interference.
For the purposes of the debate, I offer a deal to the Foreign Secretary. I shall not object to the private finance initiative as a source of capital funding for the World Service if he stops pretending that the PFI will solve the financial pressures on it, because if the World Service is successful and manages to get the PFI money, that will not solve the pressures on its operating budget. Indeed, it will increase the pressures because the BBC World Service will have to find extra cash to pay the bills for leasing the transmitter.
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Mid-Staffordshire):
The hon. Gentleman will know that I agree with much of what he has said, as I worked many years ago for the BBC World Service and I still have some connections with the BBC. In total, the cut amounts to around 1 per cent. of the BBC World Service's operating budget. Will he now give a
Mr. Cook:
I have already answered the thrust of the hon. Gentleman's question several times today.
[Interruption.] If Ministers will be quiet, I shall repeat what I said before: that I give an undertaking that, under the next Labour Government, which, I hope, will be with us in 1997, we shall maintain the present level of language broadcasts by the BBC World Service. The hon. Gentleman's figure is wrong. The total cut in the operating budget of the World Service is about 8 per cent. Yet that is less than 1 per cent. of the budget of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which is spending
£77 million this year on management consultants--almost half the total budget of the BBC World Service. Is that really better value for money than putting money into the BBC World Service?
4.8 pm
That this House congratulates the BBC World Service on its international reputation for objective news and comment and records its appreciation of the valuable contribution it makes to promoting respect and goodwill for Britain; expresses its concern at the effects of cuts imposed on the World Service and its alarm at the likely reduction in the range of foreign language broadcasts; and calls upon Her Majesty's Government to ensure that policies on the Private Finance Initiative and public support for the World Service enable it to maintain its present level of services and to build on their success.
"The BBC World Service is the diplomat who can enter the rural home, the urban business centre, the civil servant's office and the country hospital ward."
"The BBC World Service really was a lifeline."
"great value and high quality"--[Official Report, 10 January 1996; Vol. 269, c. 201.]
of the World Service. This morning, the Foreign Secretary described it as "superb value". If superlatives would pay wage cheques, the World Service would be on the verge of major expansion. Instead, its executive met this weekend to consider where it would cut services.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |