|
Column Number: 737
Standing Committee E
Tuesday 28 January 2003
[Mr. Peter Atkinson in the Chair]
8.57 am
Ordered,
That the Order of the Committee of 10th December 2002 (as amended on 12th December 2002) be further amended as follows—
(a) in the Table, in respect of the nineteenth sitting, in the third column, the words '11.25 am' be omitted;
(b) in the Table, in respect of the twentieth sitting, the words in the second column be omitted and the following words be inserted—
'Clauses 276 to 284, Schedule 11, Clauses 285 to 326, Schedule 12, Clauses 327 to 333, Schedule 13 and Clause 334 (so far as not previously concluded)';
(c) in the Table, in respect of the twentieth sitting, in the third column, the words '5 pm' be inserted.—[Dr. Howells.]
Clause 302
Local content and character of local sound broadcasting services
Amendment proposed [23 January]: No. 603, in
Clause 302, page 261, line 19, at end insert—
'(7A) Before drawing up or revising the code, OFCOM shall have regard to the extent to which matters they are required to secure under this section are, or may be, secured by effective self-regulation; and, in the light of that, to consider to what extent it would be appropriate not to draw up, modify or withdraw a code under this section.
'(7B) In determining for the purposes of this section whether procedures for self-regulation are effective OFCOM may take account not only of self-regulation independent of those to whom it applies, but also of the extent to which the matters to be secured under this section are being, and are likely to be, secured without the further imposition of a code.'
Question again proposed, That the amendment be made.
The Chairman: I remind the Committee that with this we are taking the following:
Clause stand part.
New clause 41—Local content of local sound broadcasting services
'(1) It shall be the duty of OFCOM to secure that appropriate local content is included in the programmes broadcast by local sound broadcasting services.
(2) In carrying out its duty in subsection (1), OFCOM shall—
(a) take all local sound broadcasting services receivable in any area together as a whole; and
(b) take into account the results of research carried out under subsection (7)(a); and
(c) take into account the extent to which the expectations of listeners for local content (under subsection (7)(a)) are being met by other services receivable within the area; and
(d) take into account the degree to which any action taken by OFCOM pursuant to this section may affect competition between local sound broadcasting services and any other class of service.
(3) OFCOM must draw up or agree a code giving guidance as to how the requirements of subsection (1) should be satisfied and, in doing so, shall have particular regard to the desirability referred to in section 3(3)(c) of promoting and facilitating the development and use of effective forms of self-regulation.
Column Number: 738
(4) The code may, in particular include guidance as to the relevance of different descriptions of local content included in local sound broadcasting services.
(5) From time to time, OFCOM may revise the code or direct that it should be revised.
(6) The code and every revision of the code should be published in such manner as OFCOM considers appropriate.
(7) Before drawing up or revising the code, OFCOM must—
(a) conduct research into listeners' expectations of local sound broadcasting services and other services receivable within any area concerned, including the extent to which they expect local content to be broadcast; and
(b) consult with persons holding licences to provide local sound broadcasting services or persons appearing to represent such persons, or both.
(8) In this section, ''local content'', in relation to a local sound broadcasting service, means content (including news or information) which is of particular interest—
(a) to persons living or working within the area or locality for which the service is provided; or
(b) to persons living or working within a part of that area or locality; or
(c) to particular communities living or working within that area or locality.
(9) References in this section to persons living or working in an area or locality include references to persons undergoing education or training in that area or locality.
(10) A code drawn up as a result of subsection (3) shall not have the effect of varying an existing sound broadcasting licence.'.
Mr. John Whittingdale (Maldon and East Chelmsford): Good morning, Mr. Atkinson. We have spent a little time already on amendment No. 302 and I shall do my best not to recap the arguments that have already been made. Nevertheless this is an important part of the Bill as it sets the framework in which local radio will have to operate in future. The Government have made some movement from their original proposals for ownership restrictions on radio stations and that is very welcome. In their place, this clause is there to protect the local character of a station. The Government are correct to focus less on who owns the station than what its programme output should be.
Rather like my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley), I was struck by the Minister's remarks when we were debating clause 301, particularly when he said:
''This is meant to be a deregulatory piece of legislation and we do not want to be too prescriptive in dictating how Ofcom . . . should draw up a localness code.''——[Official Report, Standing Committee E, 23 January 2003; c. 727.]
That is a very welcome principle, and perhaps it should also be applied to clause 302.
It has been argued that to provide the protection of localness against any possible risk that might be posed by the liberalisation of ownership and permitting overseas ownership, Ofcom should have a duty to protect and promote localness.
Hon. Members might remember that I referred to one of my local stations in Chelmsford, Dream 107, and the way in which it was committed to participation in its local community. The character of the station was very much based upon its local links and its participation in community activities. That was its selling point. That brings me to my central point:
Column Number: 739
for successful commercial radio operators, localness is a key component of their programming for commercial market-driven reasons and not because Ofcom has told them that that is what it should be. Anyone running a radio station recognises that.
I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) made the interesting observation that Clear Channel—and a lot of the discussion around ownership seems to get back to what Clear Channel might or might not do—had had to recognise in Australia that localness did matter, and having started off by rather abandoning the local identity of their stations, that had proved very unsuccessful, so they had to move back in that direction.
Brian White (Milton Keynes, North-East): Is not one of the lessons of that that it is very hard to rebuild that localness having lost it and should we not be doing something to prevent it from being lost in the first place?
Mr. Whittingdale: I am not sure whether that is true. In particular, I point to my own experience in Chelmsford, where Dream 107 has recently been taken over by Tindle Radio. It has rapidly won back audience share because the station had not previously been identified as being locally based. There is a great willingness on the part of listeners to respond to local appeal. The dilemma is how to achieve that—whether it requires the intervention of Ofcom to prescribe local content or whether we should leave it to the market. Ralph Bernard, who addressed the Westminster Media Forum about the Bill last December, said:
''Localness is a key selling point to listeners—it has to be when our competitors are generally regional or national—and advertisers in an area are much more likely to support a radio station that is a vibrant local business with its roots deep in the local community. So we're experts on what makes a local station really hum, which aspects are relevant to our listeners, which events are going to draw a crowd, which local institutions deserve support.''
He continued:
''Against this background of in-depth local expertise, the Bill proposes that a regulator—based principally in London—should judge whether a station is local enough. The clause seeking to deliver another bit of dynamism to consumers takes no fewer than ten sub-paragraphs to meander its way through the subject—and yet this is something that, if we get it wrong, will cause our stations to lose audience and advertisers faster than any regulatory process could react to.''
Mr. Chris Bryant (Rhondda): I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I presume that he is now about to make the point that the market alone is most likely to provide localness. However, Red Dragon FM in Wales and its sister station in London, Capital FM are virtually identical in terms of their play list. The only difference between them relates to a few populist events in the summer. So is it not essential to make sure that we jig the market a little bit? It will not do it all on its own.
Mr. Whittingdale: Obviously, I am not familiar with Red Dragon FM, although clearly if the situation is as the hon. Gentleman describes, listeners will look elsewhere for a local service.
Column Number: 740
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): I am familiar with Red Dragon FM as I was involved in setting it up—[Interruption.] That was before I became a Member of Parliament. One of the reasons why Capital Radio took it over was that its audience figures were falling. The play list that the hon. Member for Rhondda (Mr. Bryant) referred to is more popular with its audience than it was previously.
|
