Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1
- 19)
TUESDAY 7 MAY 2002
MR MARK
BYFORD, MR
NIGEL CHAPMAN
AND MR
ANDREW HIND
Chairman
1. Mr Byford, may I welcome you and your colleagues
to this session of the Foreign Affairs Committee. You have with
you, Mr Nigel Chapman, the Deputy Director and Mr Andrew Hind,
the Finance and Business Development Director. We thank you for
your helpful memorandum. As you know, Mr Byford, we are learning
from you and your colleagues first, in advance of the spending
round, and we will then meet your colleagues, if I may call them
that, from the British Council in a similar session, so it might
be helpful to begin in terms of the relationship between you as
head of the World Service and your colleagues in the British Council.
I give warning to anyone from the British Council who is here
they will have to field the same question. Can you give some indication,
given that many of the priorities of yourself and the British
Council are the same, of the nature of the relationship and the
co-operation between the two of you?
(Mr Byford) When I became Director of
the World Service in 1998, and David Green was the new Director
General of the British Council, it became clear there was a lot
of activity taking place between the World Service and the British
Council out in the field but it could be better codified and the
relationship could be put on a more formal basis between us, so
the following year we established a memorandum of understanding
between us both, a framework for us to co-operate. Now, David
Green and myself meet at least once a year, but in practice it
is twice a year, formally together—
2. Is the document available publicly? Could
the Committee see the document?
(Mr Byford) We would have no problem, and I am sure
the British Council would not either, in supplying you with that
overall framework.
3. Thank you.
(Mr Byford) We meet regularly, as I say, at least
twice a year. We also codify now all the projects we are working
on together, of which there are some 50-plus, and also annually
each year we come together to review the past year's activities
and look ahead to the future year with some of our senior editorial
colleagues working across both organisations.
4. Apart from that relationship at the top of
the pyramid, what are the relationships at other levels of the
two organisations?
(Mr Byford) Nigel Chapman as Deputy Director has a
direct relationship with the British Council. Our Head of Strategy
has exactly the same relationship with the British Council on
planning key initiatives on the way forward. Then actually in
the field there is a relationship between British Council offices
and the World Service. We are pleased that now within British
Council offices you can get access to the World Service internet
site, for instance, in the main reception areas. Things like that
are working well.
5. To what extent when you formulate your programme
for the spending round would you seek to overlap, to co-ordinate,
and to plan in tandem certain of the relationships over that planning
period?
(Mr Byford) We would certainly want the British Council
to know what our priorities are going into the three year spending
review, similarly we would expect to hear from them, which has
happened in having our two strategy documents put forward. We
would also see where there are areas for co-operation, for instance,
in English language teaching, in the CELLS project in China, and
there is potential for that happening in Russia, so the overall
strategic goals on which there would be shared knowledge. But
they are two different organisations and it is important we recognise,
they recognise, and may I say everyone recognises, that although
both organisations are working on the international front they
have separate goals, sometimes in parallel, but it is important
for us both to know what each is seeing as priorities for the
future.
6. If you step outside for a while and if you
were carrying out some consultancy into the work of the two organisations,
can you see any way in which you and your colleagues could build
on that memorandum of understanding of 1998, any further initiatives
which you think might lead to co-operation, perhaps reduced costs
or co-operation in markets?
(Mr Byford) Certainly in terms of impact on the ground,
and obviously, even though I am stepping outside, on the inside
we have been thinking about where we can work more effectively
together, in English language teaching opportunities there are
things to take forward on the new technology front, use of the
internet, et cetera. There are things we can do on the ground
in terms of presence between the World Service and the British
Council in offices, et cetera, but I think on the key goals of
us providing a core service of journalism, news, current affairs,
analysis and expertise, that programming remains within the World
Service itself.
7. So you would not expect any dramatic changes
in the relationship over the current planning period?
(Mr Byford) I would expect us to be building on the
strong relationship which we are already nurturing now, looking
at areas where we can build on joint initiatives for the benefit
of the Council, the benefit of the World Service and, frankly,
the benefit of Britain, but also to recognise we have separate
roles to fulfil as well.
8. Following 11 September, Afghanistan and the
Middle East, can you give examples of that closer co-operation?
(Mr Byford) Between the Council and ourselves?
9. In particular geographical areas, say Afghanistan.
(Mr Byford) We know one priority they will be giving
to this session is their high priority on cultural programmes
of mutual understanding. That is in absolute parallel with our
own programme of extending services in Persian, Pashto, Urdu and
Arabic, which is all about greater debate, discussion as well
as extended news and current affairs programming. So both are
in that context of there being a greater understanding and freedom
of information.
Mr Olner
10. The answers you have just given, Mr Byford,
indicate your keenness to promote the World Service as the leading
British brand name. Is there any tension in that circumstance
between taking advantage of your brand name, which is an image
which is ideal for commercial promotion and for conveying political
messages, and the long-standing ideals of the World Service which
is impartiality and independence? Is there not a conflict there
which is a little uneasy to ride?
(Mr Byford) There would be a conflict if we did go
down the road of the former which you emphasise there. We are
absolutely a brand, an institution and a proposition that stands
by its core values of providing accurate, fair, impartial, objective
information, which is trusted across the world. The fact we do
receive grant-in-aid funding, ie we are a public service proposition,
is a great strength to our sense of being, if you like, independent
of political and commercial interest. Although we get our funding
through the Foreign Office, the fact we are the BBC World Service
within the BBC's constitutional framework is absolutely critical
to it being seen as independent of government and therefore wholly
credible.
11. Obviously we all have a series of questions
we need to ask you, Mr Byford, but looking through them one of
the areas which raises a little doubt in my mind is the accuracy
of your audience contact.
(Mr Byford) The audience figures?
12. Yes. Several MPs have said, yes, the BBC
World Service is a leading British brand name, but have we got
really good, solid figures to back that up?
(Mr Byford) Yes, an independent poll is carried out,
not by us but through MORI, of MPs.
13. What about the figures of those people in
third world countries or other countries who listen? Are the listening
figures accurate?
(Mr Byford) Those surveys of MPs here are merely to
try and give some support to the credit it brings to Britain and
its standing within the United Kingdom itself. So that independent
survey by MORI is but one small measure of our impact. The main
measure is our audience surveys which are carried out across the
world. They are independently carried out. They include listeners
that listen at least half an hour a week to the World Service,
and that is how we determine our overall reach. Sometimes they
are done with other international broadcasters, sometimes they
are commissioned direct from ourselves, but they are authoritative
and recognised to be so. That is where we get the 150 million
audiences from. There are some areas of the world where we cannot
survey, we cannot survey in Afghanistan, we cannot survey in Iraq
or Somalia because we cannot carry out what you and I would judge
as authoritative, comprehensive audience surveys. But in those
areas of the world where we can, we know we have an overall global
figure of 150 million. The surveys are done over a rolling cycle,
so we hope to cover 70 or 80 per cent of the world over a three
year period.
14. You are seeking additional operating funds
of £32.2 million over the next three years. Is that going
to be money that is going to be well spent? Is there any evidence
that the World Service can help with the rebuilding of civil society
and contribute towards a climate of tolerance?
(Mr Byford) In the current three year period the impact
and effect of the World Service can be seen. It is a very strong
investment. Also the new three year plan is obviously in a framework
where we think the priorities will not only bring credit to the
World Service and Britain but are the important priorities we
need to move forward on. In audience terms last year we had our
highest audience ever at 153 million, we still stay at a highly
credible 150 million, in a world of exploding competition all
around us, markets deregulating across the world, greater choice,
yet the World Service is still far and away the world's leading
international radio broadcaster.
15. What about the benchmark of how the World
Service is contributing towards fairness and a climate of tolerance?
(Mr Byford) Our overall aim for the World Service
is to be the best known and most respected voice in international
broadcasting, thereby bringing benefit to Britain. By being the
best known, ie being used by the largest number of listeners,
we are reaching as number one the audience groups that we want
to reach. "Most respected" is about reputation and standing,
our values of openness, tolerance, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality.
That trust is (a) a service from the World Service to the world
but (b) reflects on great credit from the World Service to home,
ie Britain, in providing that service. So in terms of its audience
impact, it is doing a strong job, but also in the values and contribution
it makes to building civil society, to providing impartial, objective
information, to being the promoter and catalyst if you like for
open debate and discussion, for understanding different cultures
and bringing communities together to discuss in an open and free
way, it is having a great contribution in the world today.
16. Can I say, Mr Chairman, I am no opposer
of the BBC World Service and think in fact it provides an incredibly
good service, but I think there is a need for the BBC World Service
to be able to not only rely on its name but be able to justify
to taxpayers that what they are contributing to is worthwhile.
(Mr Byford) We feel that very strongly ourselves.
We obviously recognise the money we get is from the taxpayers
of Britain, of the United Kingdom. We recognise there must be
in terms of delivery and impact as well as its raison 'êêtre
results from the World Service, but we think we are able to show
that demonstrably.
17. Post-11 September how were you able to fund
your increased output in Arabic, Pashto, Persian and Urdu following
those events?
(Mr Byford) We moved swiftly, post-11 September, to
extend the Persian and Pashto services through Iran to Afghanistan
and Tajikistan, to extend the Uzbek service and to make the Urdu
service extended too, and, the Arabic service a 24 hour news operation.
We also strengthened news gathering for the English service and
provided more current affairs and analysis, not just for that
region but of course the world on what was a huge global story.
So we moved very swiftly on it. We then were in discussions with
the Foreign Office about extra funding for that. We received just
under £3 million in the last financial year in order to support
the extension of those services. We did re-prioritisation ourselves
and that enabled us (a) to extend the services and (b) to improve
our audibility to the region by taking out a new medium wave frequency
from the Gulf, which gave us good audibility through Iran, Afghanistan,
to the region. We are still in discussions with them now about
providing funding for the current year we are in.
18. So the Foreign Office at that point in time
were able to react quickly and positively?
(Mr Byford) The Foreign Office was supportive. They
were able to have discussions with the Treasury about the World
Service as well as their own operational needs, and they were
able to win extra funding for us for last year, and as I say we
are in discussions now about that continuing for this current
year.
Mr Hamilton
19. Can I follow up some of the things you said
about the role the BBC World Service can play in areas of conflict,
and specifically come back again to Afghanistan. We have heard
a lot about the role the World Service has played in trying to
help produce a civic society once more in a war-torn country,
to try and heal some of the divisions caused by the Taliban's
time in office and of course the war and the different forces
which have been in the country. What evidence have you got, given
what you said earlier, that it is almost impossible to collect
listening figures in Afghanistan and other war-torn areas, specific
statistical evidence or just evidence from your reporters, people
like Baqer Moin, for example, of the role the World Service has
actually played in the reconstruction specifically of Afghanistan?
(Mr Byford) We are not able to do authoritative, independent
surveys across the country, and we do not then build that into
our global audience figure, but that does not mean we have no
sense at all of our impact. Afghanistan itself, pre-11 September,
was a country with no television, no credible national newspapers,
radio was the main medium and the BBC was the main impact source
for information, for education and for entertainment. There was
a limited United Nations survey done two or three years ago which
suggested that 70 per cent of Pashto male heads of households
and 60 per cent of Persian males heads of households were listening
to the World Service regularly, but we have never put a great
emphasis on that. What we do know is that our news and current
affairs programming in Pashto and Persian, as well as English
but mainly Pashto and Persian, is the primary information source.
We know from our own staff working in Kabul and Afghanistan today
that although television is coming back and Afghan Radio is coming
back, still the BBC has a huge impact in the area as a primary
source of information, because it is reliable. Hamid Karzai wrote
to us only two weeks ago saying the World Service had a huge impact
wherever he travelled in the country because it was credible.
So we provide an objective, impartial and trusted primary source
of news and information. On top of that, with our Afghan education
projects, we also provide additional offerings to the people which
are not just news and current affairs. New Home, New Life
is our very popular soap opera for the Afghan people, with strong
educational and social messages behind it. We do programming for
children and we do programming for refugees in Afghanistan. So
it is a rounded offer, if you like, more than just news and current
affairs, which is supporting that society as a whole. Since then
we have also, through money from DFID, been able to work on training
journalists, on building the new Afghan media itself in terms
of reconstruction. So a primary news and information source, education
and entertainment programming, and a very strong source of help
with the reconstruction of Afghanistan itself in the context of
media rebuild.
|
