European Standing Committee B
Wednesday 8 April 1998
[Mr. Peter Atkinson in the Chair]
Convergence of the Telecommunications, Media and Information Technology Sectors
[Relevant document: European Community Document No. 12793/97, a Commission Communication on the information society and the protection of human dignity.]
10.30 am
The Minister for Small Firms, Trade and Industry (Mrs. Barbara Roche): I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Commission's Green Paper on convergence. Unfortunately, my hon. Friend the Minister for Arts, who together with me signed the explanatory memorandum, cannot be with us today--he and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport are hosting the United Kingdom presidency's European Union audiovisual conference in Birmingham.
As my hon. Friend the Minister for Arts and I stated in our explanatory memorandum, the Green Paper aims to start a debate on issues raised by convergence. Chapter I of the Green Paper considers the scope of convergence; chapter II deals with its impact on telecommunications media and information technology sectors and its social and economic context. Chapter III examines existing and possible barriers to convergence, chapter IV deals with regulatory implications of convergence and chapter V considers principles and options for future regulation.
The Green Paper poses a series of questions. My hon. Friend the Minister for Arts and I have provided the Committee with a draft outline of the Government's reponse. The Commission's paper covers some important issues that are also being considered in the United Kingdom--including of course, by the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport--so this debate is timely. The Commission's consultation period extends until the end of April; the Government are reflecting on our reply to the Commission on questions raised by the Green Paper and we will submit a response by the end of the month. As I mentioned, I have provided the Committee with the most up-to-date draft of our response--I emphasise that it is a draft--and we will ensure that Parliament receives a copy of the final version. The timing of this debate allows us to take the Committee's views into account when drafting the final version.
In our response, we will also take into account the views of industry, users, consumers and other interest groups--we asked for their views by the end of March. Several broad themes emerged in the responses that we received: regulation should be consistent, transparent and fair; we must avoid dividing society into the information rich and the information poor; regulatory bodies should be based at national level, but there should be strong co-operation between regulators in different member states; and public service broadcasting is important.
Understandably, views on future regulatory models differed. Several respondents commented that it is important to keep an open mind, as the converged environment is still developing. None the less, broad support emerged for an evolutionary approach that does not rush into a totally new framework but builds on existing structures.
Views also differed on the question of whether regulation should be horizontal or vertical. In the former, content is regulated separately from the means of delivery; the latter applies different rules to content delivered by telephone and by broadcast media, for example. Several respondents thought that broadcasting--public service broadcasting in particular--should be a special case. Others were keen that sector-specific regulations should not stifle the growth of new information society services.
During the coming weeks, we will be revising the draft outline in the light of the comments already received--and of course the comments of the Committee.
Under the United Kingdom presidency, the Green Paper has been discussed at the Telecoms Council meeting that I chaired on 25 February and at an informal seminar for Ministers responsible for culture and audiovisual technology, which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Minister for Arts hosted in Macclesfield from 15 to 17 March. Public consultation on the Green Paper continues until the end of April. The Commission then intends to produce a report on the outcome of that consultation by the summer break. It has said that it is likely to prepare what it calls a convergence action plan by the end of the year. On that basis, proposals for Community legislation, if there are any, will not be drawn up before next year.
The Select Committee on European Legislation suggested that we include in this debate the Commission's communication on the response to the Green Paper on human dignity and the protection of minors in audiovisual and information services, including a proposal for a Council recommendation.
For the new audiovisual services to reach their full potential, there must be a climate of confidence. That will be achieved only if public interests such as human dignity and the protection of minors can be secured. The draft Council recommendation will foster international co-operation and promote a self-regulatory framework, which should help develop that confidence. I hope that it will be adopted by the Council of Ministers at the Audiovisual and Culture Council on 28 May.
As I have already said, major cultural issues are clearly linked to the convergence debate. Indeed, the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport considered those matters last week. However, I am obviously interested to hear the Committee's views, and I will happily pass those on to my hon. Friend.
The Chairman: Thank you, Minister. The Committee has until 11.30 am at the latest to question the Minister. I ask hon. Members to keep their questions brief and to ask them one at a time. There is ample opportunity for all hon. Members to be called.
Mr. Boswell: In the explanatory memorandum, Ministers place a heavy and entirely welcome emphasis on subsidiarity. Does the Minister see any advantage in having a co-ordinated European Union approach, rather than allowing the bilateral evolution of UK and other national policies or taking a more global approach? What is the particular added value in the European dimension?
Mrs. Roche: The hon. Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell) raises some important points. On some issues, an EU approach is correct--a good example is telecommunications. Our presidency has coincided with the single market in telecoms, which came about on 1 January. Indeed, what the EU has achieved in that respect--a driving forward of the agenda--is widely appreciated because broadcasting and telecoms are important.
The hon. Gentleman rightly asked what was important at the national level. Matters such as the granting of licences are clearly for national jurisdiction, as is detailed enforcement. However, some European Union recommendations may be helpful, as, for instance, was the EU recommendation on harmful material on the internet.
The hon. Gentleman also asked what global considerations were important. Copyright is a good example, as it is a matter to be considered world wide, not only by the UK or the EU. Another subject for global consideration is electronic commerce, and a conference in Ottawa in October is concentrating on that enormously important subject.
Mr. Hopkins: I welcome my hon. Friend's opening statement, particularly the Government's emphasis on subsidiarity and on taking broadcasting separately. Where convergence is seen to be advantageous, will the Government seek to ensure that best practice is pursued rather than having to make unacceptable compromises; and, if best practice is UK practice, will the Government press the UK's case hard in discussions with other member states?
Mrs. Roche: My hon. Friend makes an important point. The audiovisual and culture council noted that cultural diversity is strong and that people clearly want to enhance it. However, this is an odd area for politicians because technology is driving the debate forward at an enormous pace. We have yet to see how individuals, communities and countries respond to that. My hon. Friend's remarks about best practice are important. We shall endeavour to ensure that those remarks are kept on board.
Mr. Boswell: The Minister has very helpfully tabled the draft United Kingdom response to the Green Paper and, in her helpful introductory remarks, given us an indication of the flavour of responses. Given that the documents were prepared a week or two ago, can she update us on any new responses or on any additional thoughts that she might have had? Can she say more about the definition of ``information rich'' and ``information poor''? I sought to obtain from her colleague, the Minister for Science, Energy and Industry, similar definitions of fuel poverty, and it would be helpful to know what she has in mind.
Mrs. Roche: On the hon. Gentleman's first question, we are still in the response period and we are analysing the responses that have come in, which are in line with the draft recommendations. The recommendations are in outline, almost note, form, but I was anxious to give the Committee as much information as I could. Some of our first thoughts touch on my answer to the previous question in that convergence is more a technical than a market phenomenon. We must have a coherent response. We shall seek to develop the principles of coherency in economic regulation and of consistency in content regulation. I need not remind the Committee that this is a complex and evolving matter.
The hon. Gentleman's second question deals with an important point about perhaps one of the greatest challenges for all of us. We are in the middle of an information revolution that will affect not only our economic life--electronic commerce will alter how we do business--but our social and cultural life. Indeed, it will affect everything that we do. Therefore, it is important that we develop existing initiatives so that everyone is included in the information society. We cannot truly have an information society until everyone is included.
I shall do my best to give a definition, but this is a difficult matter. As the hon. Gentleman will know--he had the pleasure of being a schools Minister--it is important that everyone starts IT training at an early stage, and we are trying to ensure that that happens. It is also important that teachers keep themselves updated. That is why my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment has proposed the national grid for learning, which involves not only school equipment, but the role of teachers and keeping them constantly updated.
We have other proposals, such as the Department of Trade and Industry's ``IT for all'' initiative, which was started under the previous Administration. We have continued to support that initiative--indeed, we have provided extra funding for it in the past financial year. Under that initiative, we seek to provide hands-on experience for people who are perhaps apprehensive about new technology or find it a little frightening. It is difficult to give the hon. Gentleman an exact definition, but I have mentioned some of the steps that the Government are taking.
| 
