Previous SectionIndexHome Page



'After paragraph 2(1) of Part III of Schedule 12 to the 1990 Act there is inserted--
"(1A) In discharging their functions under this Schedule as respects the licensing of diffusion services, the Commission shall do all that they can to secure that any diffusion services which are provided in digital form comply with any licensing requirements adopted by the Commission under section 2A of this Act; and a relevant licence may include such conditions as appear to the Commission to be appropriate for securing that the diffusion services authorised to be provided under that licence comply with any such licensing requirements.".'.

Amendment No. 228, in clause 7, page 8, line 3, leave out 'the service' and insert


'all the multiplex services available in that area'.

Amendment No. 229, in clause 8, page 9, line 8, leave out 'the service' and insert


'all the multiplex services available in that area'.

Amendment No. 256, in clause 11, page 11, line 41, at end insert--


'(i) that the licensed service complies with any licensing requirements adopted by the Commission under section 2A of the 1990 Act (power of Commission to adopt technical licensing requirements for digital television services)'.

Amendment No. 257, in clause 18, page 19, line 15, at end insert--


'(4A) Without prejudice to the generality of section 4(1) (general licence conditions), it is hereby declared that a digital programme licence may also include such conditions as appear to the Commission to be appropriate for securing that any ancillary service provided by the licence holder complies with any conditions adopted by the Commission under section 2A of the 1990 Act (power of Commission to adopt technical licensing requirements for digital television services).
(4B) In subsection 4A, "ancillary service" has the meaning given by section 21(2) of this Act.'.

Amendment No. 258, in clause 26, page 25, line 27, at end insert--


'(c) ensuring that qualifying services, and any ancillary services provided by independent analogue broadcasters, comply with any licensing requirements adopted by the Commission under section 2A of the 1990 Act (power of Commission to adopt technical licensing requirements for digital television services)'.

Amendment No. 259, in page 26, line 11, leave out 'either' and insert 'any'.

Government amendment No. 253.

Mr. Taylor: We are dealing here with a large group of new clauses and amendments. I shall speak briefly to new clause 41 and the consequential Government amendment No. 253, and pause to see what comments emerge.

1 Jul 1996 : Column 598

The Government have taken careful note of the debate in Committee on common technical standards for digital television. My hon. Friend the Member for North Thanet (Mr. Gale) played a key role in raising these questions in Committee, helping us to pin down the crucial issues at the heart of the matter. I give him credit for his contribution to the debate. The hon. Members for Caithness and Sutherland (Mr. Maclennan) and for Kirkcaldy (Dr. Moonie) also made leading and constructive contributions.

As hon. Members will know, the Government responded to the debate by undertaking a consultation exercise on the possibilities for co-operation between digital terrestrial multiplex providers to ensure that all digital terrestrial decoders could receive all digital terrestrial services. As both Government and Opposition amendments show, the issue crosses the different transmission media. Interoperability between services on any given medium is clearly desirable for digital terrestrial, cable and satellite, but so too is interoperability between services on different media in so far as that is reasonably practicable.

We can all find common cause in the aim of supporting interoperability. The Government believe that the commercial imperatives of a market in which the objective is to sell services to the largest possible number of subscribers will tend to support, rather than work against, interoperability. We should not ignore the potential for the market to find its own solutions, as has occurred in other areas covered by my responsibility as Minister for Science and Technology.

There is a desire for interoperability to enable the services to reach the widest possible market. To do so by providing powers to pick particular standards across the board, for example, would create unnecessary uncertainty, retarding development and raising costs. Neither of those effects is in the interests of the consumer, so we have endeavoured to strike the necessary balance. With that in mind, ensuring basic interconnection between services comes down principally to two issues: first, ensuring interoperability between different conditional access systems and, secondly, ensuring that the maximum compatibility that is reasonably practicable between transmission systems is achieved.

First, on conditional access, hon. Members will know that, on 26 June, we published for further consultation detailed proposals on the regulation of conditional access services for all modes of digital television. Those draft regulations and the associated draft licence for conditional access services will ensure that any broadcaster may obtain conditional access service from every operator. That means that he can include in his broadcast signal the control information for each system.

Each decoder can unscramble the picture under the control information appropriate to its conditional access system. That is known as simul-crypt, which I understand we will discuss later. It will work in practice because our regulations, following the European directive, will require every decoder to contain the so-called common scrambling alorithm. All that is necessary is to have the conditional access service data for each particular system to control its operation in unscrambling the picture. That is guaranteed by our regulations, which will oblige every conditional access operator to supply service to any broadcaster who requests it.

1 Jul 1996 : Column 599

The second main objective is to ensure the maximum practicable compatibility in transmission standards. The European directive already mandates particular transmission standards for each mode of digital delivery. Each standard contains a number of mandatory sections. Within those sections, however, a number of choices can be made for some required transmission parameters. That will allow broadcasters to adopt the best set of parameters for coping with the particular environment in different countries, for example, and provides important flexibility behind the different standards.

Most manufacturers are likely to incorporate substantially the full range of options in their broadcast and receiving equipment, but if different equipment manufacturers in the United Kingdom chose to manufacturer different limited selections of those options--perhaps because they were the options favoured by particular broadcasters or multiplex providers--technical incompatibilities could result. New clause 41, therefore, provides a reserve power for the ITC, following consultation with all relevant players, to select a particular set of options from those allowed by each transmission standard. All broadcast service licence holders would then be required to observe those choices in transmission.

Taken with our regulations for implementing conditional access regulation, I hope that it is clear that new clause 41 does precisely what we are seeking: it provides a means to ensure the greatest practicable mutual technical compatibility of digital television services across all three delivery mechanisms--terrestrial, satellite and cable.

New clause 41 also fulfils the Government's obligation to implement the rest of the provisions in article 2 of the television standards directive.

Amendment No. 253 provides simply that the definitions in the Broadcasting Act 1990 apply to new clause 41.

Our amendments achieve their aims without creating great uncertainty as to what standards might be specified. They also avoid certain of the undesirable side effects of some of the other new clauses and amendments in this group. Nevertheless, before I pause to allow other hon. Members to speak, it may be of interest to Opposition Members to know that the Government are minded to accept one further aspect of those amendments.

Mr. Hoon: I shall not delay the House by repeating the Minister's observations, as they reflect those of Opposition Members in moving various amendments designed to achieve the purpose that the Government are now so keen to advocate. It is appropriate, however, to repeat my earlier mild criticisms of the Government--and perhaps the Minister's Department--that the amendments were not tabled much earlier. I am afraid that it is an example of government by amendment.

I am pleased that the Government have shifted their position, gradually, in the direction of common sense. New clause 41 in particular reflects the views of the Committee. Hon. Members on both sides of the Committee were anxious that a common standard should be established.

The Minister referred to our deliberations in Committee. I hope that he also noted a number of plaintive cries for his attendance so that he could put the

1 Jul 1996 : Column 600

view of the Department of Trade of Industry as that would have assisted us all. It is for further consideration--perhaps by a different Government--if these matters require amendment in future, that there should be greater co-ordination between Government Departments to achieve what is finally a commonsense approach to the problem.


Next Section

IndexHome Page