Memorandum submitted by the Community
Media Association
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. PROSPECTS
FOR THE
DRAFT BILL
ON COMMUNICATIONS
1. The Community Media Association is the
UK membership association for community media. In this response
to the Committee we comment on prospects for the draft Bill on
Communications and we set out in detail our views on the future
regulation of local and community television.
2. The delay in the publication of the Communications
Bill is of particular concern to the existing "access radio"
pilot licensees, whose licences are initially for 12 months, and
to those local and community television services whose licences
expire before the completion of communications reform.
3. It is our hope that the delay will lead
to a more strategic approach to community media development and
to more joined-up thinking between the communications reform and
other areas of social and public policy.
4. We believe OFCOM should be established
as a more broadly based body of six to twelve non-executive members
and that Government should make a commitment from the start to
its openness, transparency and accountability.
5. Government should establish a Citizenship
Panel in advance of the setting up of OFCOM. The Citizenship Panel
would be tasked with representing the public interest and working
on the setting up of OFCOM with the existing regulators.
6. OFCOM should adopt a strategic cross
sector approach to the regulation of Community Media including
broad public service requirements where licensing is required
and self regulation where appropriate.
7. OFCOM should have a properly staffed
Community Media Division to nurture and support the development
throughout the UK of a wide range of Community Media, including
radio, television and new media.
8. Recent public policy initiatives such
as the UK Online scheme and the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund need
to be joined up with Government thinking on communications reform
to ensure the enabling environment assists new and existing community
media projects to reach their full potential.
9. The development of a more appropriate
licensing framework for community radio as a distinct not-for-profit
tier should be complemented by a commitment to future dedicated
frequency allocation in the digital sound broadcasting environment,
particularly in the L-band (1452- 1492 MHz).
10. The CMA has welcomed the Government's
readiness to take forward the idea of a Radio Fund however, in
our view, a broader Community Media Fund would better stand the
test of time into the future digital environment and would encourage
further innovation and diversity.
B. FUTURE REGULATION
OF LOCAL
AND COMMUNITY
TELEVISION
11. Local and community television have
a significant contribution to make to the local communications
environment, providing access to local information, encouraging
citizens' participation, providing a platform for diverse cultures
and viewpoints and offering a counterbalance to the increasing
concentration of television ownership and reduction in regional
programming commitments.
12. It is time for fresh impetus to be given
to local and community television to ensure a range and diversity
of services on existing broadcast platforms and to map out a future
into the digital broadcasting environment.
13. The Community Media Association has
welcomed the proposals set out by the ITC on the future of Restricted
Service Licences but it is disappointed that the ITC decided to
defer the changes we consider necessary. There is broad consensus
that a more robust licence commitment to local public service
broadcasting content would enhance the status of this emergent
sector.
14. Such reform of TV RSL licensing should
be linked to longer term licences and guaranteed carriage on cable
and digital terrestrial platforms in order to provide a more secure
environment for further development.
15. The CMA believes that new measures are
needed to ensure a diverse and innovative range of local and community
television services. Measures are now urgently needed to prevent
excessive concentration in future ownership of local and community
television and to promote diversity and innovation.
16. The CMA believes that this objective
can and should be brought about, in part, by the establishment
of two distinct licensing categories. Category A licences for
not-for-profit organisations with clear rules to prevent transfer
and accumulation of licences. Category B for commercially operated
services.
17. The ITC should make clear that Category
A and Category B licences, by virtue of their respective "promises
of delivery", each form part of "public service"
provision. This should be linked to higher priority in the allocation
of analogue frequencies, and access to cable and digital platforms.
18. Linked to the introduction of a more
robust regulatory framework the existing location-based Category
A and Category B TV RSLs should be offered an extension in licence
duration to ten years in order to bring them into line with existing
regional independent television services.
19. The Category A and B licence distinction
should also be applied to licensed programme service providers
on cable and licensed digital programme service providers. All
Category A and Category B licensees should be guaranteed access
to the local cable platform. All analogue Category A and Category
B licensees should be guaranteed transition to a digital multiplex
platform in advance or at the switchover from analogue to digital.
20. To ensure potential for at least one
Category A and one Category B digital programme service in every
locality, post digital switchover planning should ensure sufficient
spectrum provision to allow for at least one local digital multiplex
in every locality. This could best be achieved by the establishment
of a nationwide network of local digital multiplexes operated
by a non-profit-distributing publicly accountable body with a
public service remit.
C. PROSPECTS
FOR THE
DRAFT BILL
ON COMMUNICATIONS
Introduction
21. The Community Media Association is the
UK membership association, founded in 1983, for organisations
working in the community media sector. It groups together local
and community television operators, community radio stations and
community based Internet networks. The CMA set out its preliminary
position on communications reform and the Communications White
Paper in January 2001 in our response to the previous inquiry
of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee. In our written and
oral evidence at that time we commented in detail on the future
development and regulation of community radio (HC 161-II) and
the pilot "access radio" scheme. The Committee, in its
final report (HC 161-I) concluded that there is "a strong
need and overwhelming case for the establishment of a permanent
community radio sector in the United Kingdom". In this response
to the Committee we comment on prospects for the draft Bill on
Communications and we set out in detail our views on the future
regulation of local and community television.
Implications of the delay in establishing OFCOM
22. The delay in the publication of the
Communications Bill and the establishment of OFCOM has had a consequential
impact on the pace of development of new community media services.
The immediate impact of the delay would appear to be a postponement
by at least 12 months of the development of new community media
services although we believe there is scope for intervention by
the existing regulators to mitigate this effect. The delay has
also produced a lengthier period of regulatory uncertainty. This
is of particular concern to the existing "access radio"
pilot licensees, whose licences are initially for 12 months, and
to those local and community television services whose licences
expire before the completion of communications reform.
23. Alongside the negative impact of the
delay there are some potential gains. In particular the extended
period for completion of communications reform has enabled Government
to engage in deeper and broader consultation. It is our hope that
this will lead to a more strategic approach to community media
development and to more joined up thinking between those parts
of Government responsible for communications reform and those
responsible for areas in which community media can be expected
to have beneficial impact. The latter including social exclusion,
neighbourhood renewal, lifelong learning and access to ICTs, e-democracy
and active citizenship.
24. Following the previous Inquiry by the
Committee the Government gave a green light to a limited pilot
scheme for "access radio" licensing to enable a tier
of not-for-profit community radio services to be tested out in
advance of legislation. The Radio Authority, after consultation
with industry, announced the parameters of the scheme in March
2001, setting out proposals which were largely in line with CMA
recommendations for the development of community radio. At the
time, our major concern was the duration of the experimental licences,
which we recommended should be for a 24 month period in order
that they carry through into the new OFCOM regime. The Radio Authority,
however, proposed that the licences should be limited to 12 months
which we understand to be based on the assumption that this would
be sufficient to take the new services through to a decision by
OFCOM to continue or otherwise. In fact, the delay of 12 months
in setting up OFCOM means that most, if not all of the "access
radio" licences will expire before OFCOM has assumed regulatory
functions. This creates considerable uncertainty for this new
tier of community radio pioneers, impacting on their ability to
raise public and private financial support and raising the unwelcome
prospect that even the successful services may be switched off
after 12 months of operation.
25. In establishing the "access radio"
scheme the Radio Authority launched a call for expressions of
interest in June 2001. Despite a short deadline for replies the
Authority received 200 expressions of interest from aspirant "access
radio" licensees. From the expressions of interest a shortlist
of 15 was prepared based on achieving a diversity of types and
approaches as well as a broad geographical spread. The 15 pilot
"access radio" licensees were not selected on the basis
of those most likely to succeed and there remain large numbers
of highly competent and well resourced community radio groups
who still await the opportunity to move beyond the general 28
day limit on Restricted Service Licences. This "second generation"
of community radio is ready to move ahead but their aspirations
now face a probable wait of at least 12 months due to the delay
by Government in the establishment of OFCOM.
26. The 1996 Broadcast Act introduced a
new category of Restricted Service Licence for television (TVRSL)
which has enabled the emergence of a new tier of local television
services. The first licensees commenced broadcasting in 1998 initially
with 24 month duration licences, later extended to 48 months.
The first TVRSL licences will expire in 2002. In July 2001 the
Independent Television Commission opened a consultation into the
future regulation of Restricted Service Licences. There was broad
consensus amongst the existing licensees that the public service
character of the sector should be reinforced, that licences should
be longer (in line with regional television), and that there should
be guaranteed carriage on cable and transition into digital. The
ITC set out a new approach including a not-for-profit licence
category, which the CMA has welcomed and which we consider necessary
to underpin the future diversity of local and community television.
27. Despite a clear case for reform and
a more robust regime the ITC have concluded "that it would
be appropriate to defer, for the time being, implementation of
substantial changes in the way local television services are licensed
and regulated". In addition to concerns about the economic
difficulties experienced by some of the licensees, the ITC cites,
as reason for deferring its proposals, "the prospect for
significant debate about the future of local television when the
Communications Bill is published this year". In effect the
delay in establishing OFCOM has therefore also contributed to
continuing uncertainty in development of local and community television.
In the second part of this submission to the Culture, Media and
Sport Committee we set out in detail our own proposals for the
future of local and community television.
Issues raised by the OFCOM bill
28. The Office of Communications Bill provides
some indication of the type of regulator the Government has in
mind. It envisages a body of not less than three nor more than
six members, including the Chief Executive of OFCOM and other
"staff members" appointed from within OFCOM itself.
The inclusion of staff as "members" of OFCOM runs the
risk of placing the public interest role of the appointed members
in conflict with the interests of the staff with day to day executive
responsibility. We believe OFCOM should be established as a more
broadly based body of six to twelve non-executive members. Members
of OFCOM should be drawn from the public, private and voluntary
sector and from the different nations, regions, cultures and communities
of the UK.
29. The initial function of OFCOM is broad:
"to do such things as they consider appropriate for facilitating
the implementation of, or securing the modification of, any relevant
proposals about the regulation of communications". The Bill
makes clear that OFCOM will have a role in the communications
reform debate itself but it is disappointingly silent on OFCOM'S
own accountability and openness. Government should make a commitment
from the start to openness, transparency and accountability in
the functioning of OFCOM. This should include publication of agendas
and minutes, a requirement for public consultation and the publication
of reasons for decisions.
30. The detail of OFCOM'S shape and functions
are not in the Bill and will be worked out by Government and existing
regulators over the coming months. There is no doubt though, that
the debate on the Bill will also provide an opportunity to draw
attention to some of the key issues around the structure and composition
of OFCOM. The White Paper highlights the importance of consumer
and citizenship interests and proposed the establishment of a
Consumers Panel. Public Voice has called for a Citizenship Panel
to be set up to represent the public interest in communications.
We believe Government should establish a Citizenship Panel in
advance of the setting up of OFCOM. The Citizenship Panel would
be tasked with representing the public interest and working on
the setting up of OFCOM with the existing regulators.
31. The Community Media Association believes
OFCOM should adopt a strategic cross sector approach to the regulation
of Community Media including broad public service requirements
where licensing is required and self regulation where appropriate.
OFCOM should have a properly staffed Community Media Division
with its own Community Media Committee to nurture and support
the development throughout the UK of a wide range of Community
Media, including radio, television and new media. A Community
Media Division in OFCOM would provide a clear focus for the implementation
of the public interest in communications at the local level linking
early initiatives such as analogue community radio and television
with a longer term view on broadband and the future local digital
communications environment.
Other issues and policy developments
32. Since the previous Inquiry there have
been a number of significant public policy developments which
are of importance to the community media sector. The roll out
has begun of the first UK Online Centres under a Department for
Education and Skills initiative and assisted by the £250
million Capital Modernisation Fund. Many of the new UK Online
Centres have a significant media component to their facilities
and bring access to media production skills to neighbourhood and
community level. Local Strategic Partnerships have begun work
in the 88 most deprived neighbourhoods in the UK where the £800
million Neighbourhood Renewal Fund is to be deployed. Community
media organisations will be looking to play a significant role
in strengthening the local communications environment, empowering
citizens and encouraging dialogue on urban renewal and social
and economic development. These and other public policy initiatives
need to be joined up with Government thinking on communications
reform to ensure the enabling environment assists new and existing
community media projects to reach their full potential.
33. Future prospects for community media
in a digital broadcasting environment remain unclear and need
to be given a higher priority in forward planning. This is of
immediate concern to local and community television services currently
operating on analogue terrestrial frequencies and facing the prospect
of switch-off at the time that other terrestrial TV services switchover
to digital. Despite indications in the White Paper that this issue
would be addressed, no firm commitment has yet been made by Government
to the allocation of digital terrestrial channels for local and
community television.
34. Transfer to digital is also an immediate
and pressing concern for local and community programme services
on cable. The switchover to digital cable systems is scheduled
to take place over the next year. Several local cable television
programme providers have recently been informed that their current
analogue services will come to end in the next few months while
being given no guarantee that they will be offered affordable
carriage on digital cable. There are presently no "must carry"
rules on the cable operators with regard to local and community
services. The forthcoming legislation should be used to introduce
guaranteed carriage for local and community services similar to
the arrangements which apply to the established public service
broadcasters.
35. Community radio development in the short
and medium term is likely to be mainly in the analogue environment
on FM and AM, however in some localities suitable frequencies
are already scarce and in the longer term digital radio broadcasting
is expected to become the medium of listener choice. The development
of a more appropriate licensing framework for community radio
as a distinct not-for-profit tier should be complemented by a
commitment to future dedicated frequency allocation in the digital
sound broadcasting environment, particularly in the L-band (1452-
1492 MHz).
36. In its previous Report on the Communications
White Paper, the Committee supported the creation of an Access
Radio Fund "to assist in the establishment of new projects
and to provide continuing funding to reflect the fact that funding
of the sector will not be primarily commercial". The then
Secretary of State indicated to the Committee that he "would
be very keen on pushing this forward". The CMA has welcomed
the Government's readiness to take forward this idea however we
believe that such a Fund should take a broader and more strategic
approach to community media, including support for community television
and new media initiatives. Community radio is the medium best
placed to bring immediate impact due to the large number of existing
community radio groups. Community television, however, is emerging
in a number of locations using cable, broadband and terrestrial
channels. Community media organisations also have an important
role to play in testing out new approaches in convergence media.
In our view a broader Community Media Fund would better stand
the test of time into the future digital environment and would
encourage further innovation and diversity.
D. FUTURE REGULATION
OF LOCAL
AND COMMUNITY
TELEVISION
Introduction
37. Community-based video production is
very widespread in the UK but efforts in the past to broadcast
local and community television have been largely confined to cable
and have been limited by the high costs of production, insufficient
audience penetration by the early cable networks and the absence
of "must carry" rules. In recent years cable has become
more widespread, production costs have reduced substantially as
a result of digital production technologies and a new generation
of free to air local television has commenced through the establishment
of the Restricted Service Licence (RSL) framework enabled by the
Broadcasting Act 1996.
38. Local and community television have
a significant contribution to make to the local communications
environment, providing access to local information, encouraging
citizens' participation, providing a platform for diverse cultures
and viewpoints and offering a counterbalance to the increasing
concentration of television ownership and reduction in local and
regional programming commitments. The development of digital terrestrial
television and of broadband digital delivery systems promises
a huge proliferation of television channels but without public
policy intervention it is unlikely that growing interest in local
and community television will be met by access to new digital
platforms. It is time for fresh impetus to be given to local and
community television to ensure a range and diversity of services
on existing broadcast platforms and to map out a future into the
digital broadcasting environment.
39. The Community Media Association has
welcomed the proposals set out by the ITC (Consultation Paper
on Restricted Service Licences, July 2001) on the future of Restricted
Service Licences but it is disappointed that the ITC has decided
to defer the changes we consider to be necessary. The current
stations broadcasting have demonstrated a variety of station structure,
operations and output. There is, however, broad consensus that
a more robust licence commitment to local public service broadcasting
content would enhance the status of this emergent sector and would
underpin its growing contribution to the UK broadcast ecology.
Such reform of TV RSL licensing should be linked to longer term
licences and guaranteed carriage on cable and digital terrestrial
platforms in order to provide a more secure environment for further
development.
40. In the following paragraphs we set out
our own proposals for reform of the current licensing arrangements
for local and community television services. We also raise longer
term issues about the development of local and community television
which we wish the Government to consider.
Regulating for diversity
41. The CMA believes that new measures are
needed to ensure a diverse and innovative range of local and community
television services. During the course of the year 2001 more than
half of the Restricted Service Licences came under the control
of a new company, LBG, through a series of acquisitions. The LBG
model for local television remains to be effectively tested since
only three of the 33 licences acquired went to full service before
the company went into administration in December 2001. It is now
seeking a buyer. The impact of this high level of concentration
and the subsequent failure of LBG has been damaging for the development
of local and community television. Measures are now urgently needed
to prevent excessive concentration in future ownership of local
and community television and to promote diversity, innovation
and a plurality of services.
42. The CMA believes that this objective
can and should be brought about, in part, by the establishment
of two distinct licensing categories. Category A licences would
be reserved for not-for-profit organisations with clear rules
to prevent transfer and accumulation of licences. Category B would
be for commercially operated services. Transfer of ownership of
Category B services would be allowed but within a framework of
overall limits to prevent excessive ownership concentration within
any one company. Regulatory intervention may also be required
to prevent the replacement of a tier of distinct local services
with a single quasi-regional or quasi-national service utilising
scarce local television frequencies.
43. The aspirations of community groups
to engage in television production for broadcast may be met, to
some extent, by commercial Category B licence holders providing
access to airtime. We believe such provision should be welcomed
and encouraged. There are also community television groups who,
quite reasonably, aspire to be licence holders in their own right
in order that they have editorial control over content and can
manage broadcast assets in the pursuit of their own social purpose.
We recognise that most RSLs that are currently on air would generally
fall into licence category B. Among the new TV RSLs, however,
there are a number of groups that we would expect to choose licence
category A and our wider consultation has found significant interest
in not-for-profit models of community television that would be
encouraged by a clear distinction.
44. The economics of not-for-profit community
television are qualitatively different from commercial approaches
to local television. This difference is the main reason why a
clear distinction in licence category is not only desirable but
is necessary to underpin diversity in local television.
45. Commercial television attracts investment
not only because of the potential operating profit in its activities
but also because share value in its production and broadcast assets
can be realised by trade among different investors. Category B
licensees require a degree of flexibility on behalf of the regulator
in order that shares can be traded and investment attracted.
46. Not-for-profit community television
attracts investment from the general public and from public and
private grant making bodies because such organisations and individuals
consider their investment to be made for social purposes rather
than for financial return. Their principle concern is that their
investment (grants, loans and donations) be made to a properly
constituted and accountable not-for-profit body with strict limitations
on transfer of assets and ownership. Their concern is to ensure
that their public investment is retained as a public asset. Category
A licensees therefore attract investment more easily where there
are rigorous and enforced limits on changes in ownership and the
transfer of licences.
47. There is ample evidence from experience
in other countries and from the emergent sector in the UK to demonstrate
that a separate broadcast licence category for not-for-profit
groups would make a valuable and necessary contribution to the
viability of these services and therefore to the diversity of
the broadcast landscape. This proposal is also consistent with
Radio Authority proposals for a sector of not-for-profit "Access
Radio" licences and would contribute to a coherent cross
media approach to the development of not-for-profit community-based
media initiatives.
48. Subject to demand and frequency availability
the regulator should endeavour to achieve an equitable allocation
of Category A and Category B type licences. In an area where there
is already an existing Category A licence, priority in future
licensing should first be given to a Category B licence, and vice
versa. Where only one channel is available in one area and there
are two competing Category A and Category B applicants, a frequency
sharing resolution should be sought between the two groups.
Local programming commitments
49. For Category A licensees a broad "promise
of delivery" should be produced for each service to be licensed.
This would incorporate a simplified statement of programme proposals
including the description of the target audience, transmission
hours, proportion of local content and programming in languages
other than English. It should also refer to any developments in
the programme service anticipated over the duration of the licence.
In addition the "promise of delivery" should set out
plans for local accountability and involvement, community access
to training and facilities, support for volunteers, and commitments
to specific cultural programming and to particular target groups
within the community.
50. For Category B licensees the "promise
of delivery" should be broadly modelled on the format agreements
for independent local radio contractors. This should include a
specified percentage of local programming and any commitments
made to local news and current affairs provision, to educational
programming and to carriage of programmes made by community groups
(community access programming). In setting the local programming
commitment it may be useful to consider a percentage local programming
requirement linked only to particular (peak) viewing times of
the day, in order that off-peak viewing times can carry a variety
of programming from non-local sources.
51. The definition of local programming
for Category B licences should include any programming which is
locally produced and uses local presenters and should not be limited
strictly to local content. For example a music video programme
produced and presented by a local VJ, or an arts based programme,
with no specific local reference, but produced by a local artist,
should be considered as part of the local programming output.
To ensure a commitment to local information and educational content,
as opposed to locally produced programmes of mainly entertainment
value the regulator might also include specific additional commitments
from both Category A and B licensees in their "promise of
delivery".
52. The definition of local origination
should be sufficiently flexible to include a proportion of programming
originated in the region in which the service is located but which
is not produced within the actual licensed service area.
53. The ITC should make clear that Category
A and Category B licences, by virtue of their respective "promises
of delivery", each form part of "public service"
provision. This should be linked to higher priority in the allocation
of analogue frequencies, and access to cable and digital platforms.
Transfer and duration of licences
54. A Category A licence should not be considered
transferable except to a body having similar aims and objectives
and not-for-profit status.
55. Category B licences should be transferable
subject to such constraints and conditions as the regulator may
impose to ensure compliance with the licence conditions for the
duration of the licence. Such constraints should include rules
to prevent excessive concentration of ownership.
56. The regulator should not normally allow
any one company to hold more than one licence (Category A or B)
to provide services which substantially share the same potential
audience. This ownership rule should not preclude the holding
of separate licences in contiguous areas, or the inclusion in
one licensed service of provision for in-fill transmitters.
57. Linked to the introduction of a more
robust regulatory framework the existing location-based Category
A and Category B TV RSLs should be offered an extension in licence
duration to ten years in order to bring them into line with existing
regional independent television services.
Access to cable and digital platforms
58. The Category A and B licence distinction
should also be applied to licensed programme service providers
on cable and licensed digital programme service providers. All
Category A and Category B licensees should be guaranteed access
to the local cable platform. This should take the form of a specific
obligation placed on the cable operator to carry the service(s)
at no charge or a nominal charge. All analogue Category A and
Category B licensees should be guaranteed transition to a digital
multiplex platform in advance or at the switchover from analogue
to digital.
59. To ensure potential for at least one
Category A and one Category B digital programme service in every
locality, post digital switchover planning should ensure sufficient
spectrum provision to allow for at least one local digital multiplex
in every locality. Government should take immediate steps to investigate
the most spectrum efficient method of ensuring universal provision
of a tier of local and community television services. The CMA
believes this could best be achieved by the establishment of a
nationwide network of local digital multiplexes operated by a
non-profit-distributing publicly accountable body with a public
service remit.
16 January 2002
| 
