---

Sir Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab): My right hon. Friend has announced proposed changes in the governance of the BBC that take account of the proposals of the Select Committee, and we appreciate that. It is also important to make the point that, after the mess that they inherited, Mr. Michael Grade and Mr. Mark Thompson deserve every encouragement in the new start that they are trying to provide for the BBC. I am sure that when my right hon. Friend produces her further proposals following the Green Paper, she will take into account the fact that her governance proposals need further clarification, and that she will be working on that.

With the Government, the Select Committee accepted, with whatever reluctance, that the only viable form of funding an independent public service BBC was the licence fee, and we do not quarrel with my right hon. Friend's proposal in that regard. While millions of people will accept, reluctantly or otherwise, that they are paying a licence fee for the BBC to continue, does she accept that they would be less happy with any possibility that the licence fee could be a kitty to be raided for other public service broadcasting organisations? It is very important that that should be taken into account.
 
2 Mar 2005 : Column 964
 

Furthermore, I hope that my right hon. Friend will impress on the BBC the disquiet that is felt in many quarters at the nasty, menacing advertising campaign mounted by the television licensing authority to scare people in a way that is, in my view, incompatible with a democratic society.

My right hon. Friend has issued a Green Paper, and she will obviously be issuing firmer proposals in due course. She pointed out in her statement the difference between the four channels that we had 10 years ago and the 400 that we have now. Will she take into account in her final proposals the fact that the growth will be almost exponential by the end of 2016?

Tessa Jowell: I thank my right hon. Friend for that contribution and I pay tribute to his Select Committee's recent report on the BBC, the Government's response to which I have published today. The report was timely because it enabled us to take serious account of it as we drew up the proposals in the Green Paper.

I entirely accept my right hon. Friend's cautionary note in relation to the public response to any other uses of the licence fee beyond the BBC. That is why I have signalled the intention of the review today, well ahead of time, and why there will obviously have to be extensive consultation and discussion in the light of the circumstances at the time on how such a provision might be applied.

I am well aware of my right hon. Friend's disquiet about what he has previously described as the "aggressive nature" of the advertising campaign for the collection of the licence fee. In the Green Paper, we have undertaken to review a number of outstanding issues in relation to licence fee collection, which, at the moment, costs about £150 million a year—a substantial amount. I hope that my right hon. Friend will accept those reassurances, and I look forward to the Select Committee contributing further to this debate.

Mr. Don Foster (Bath) (LD): May I, too, thank the Secretary of State for giving me advance sight of her statement? For the past 80 years, the BBC has been a pre-eminent public service broadcaster. It has made a major contribution to our democracy, our culture and our standing in the world. With the world of broadcasting changing so rapidly, it is vital for the new charter to ensure that the BBC is strong, independent, and well and securely funded, so that it remains the best in the world and the envy of the world.

We very much welcome the proposals in the Green Paper, which, in the main, we support. Will the Secretary of State confirm that, while she supports the continuation of the licence fee as the means of funding the BBC for the next 10 years, she has rejected outright the calls from John Birt and others to use some of the licence fee income to support other public service broadcasters during that period? Will she also confirm that digital switchover is a Government policy, and that she is not therefore expecting the BBC to take overall responsibility for it? We accept that the BBC should take a lead role in building and funding a digital Britain, but will the Secretary of State tell us the limits on the expenditure that the BBC would be expected to make in that regard? Surely she does not expect it to sign a blank cheque for all the switchover costs.
 
2 Mar 2005 : Column 965
 

On governance, we agree that the current conflict whereby the governors are expected to be flag wavers for the BBC as well as its regulators simply cannot continue. We would have preferred to see the establishment of a new, tough, independent public service broadcasting regulator for all the public service broadcasters, but the proposal for the trust is a move in the right direction. However, given that the trust will have strategic oversight of major BBC decisions and a role in overseeing whether it fulfils its public service purpose, will there not still be a conflict of interest? Will people not see the trustees as still being part of the BBC, rather than separate from it? Are the proposals on governance firm Government policy or merely a starting point for further debate?

Will the Secretary of State tell us what role there will be on the new trust for representatives from the nations and regions? Does she agree that, whoever serves on the trust, it would be better if appointments to it were made by a joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament, rather than simply by her or her successors?

On programming, will the Secretary of State ensure that there will be a requirement on the BBC to increase its local and regional programming, rather than merely to maintain it?

Overall, we welcome the proposals in the Green Paper, which contains most of the provisions that we seek, to ensure that the BBC is strong, independent, and well and securely funded.

Tessa Jowell: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his contribution. I have obviously confirmed the continuation of the licence fee throughout the next charter review period, but I have signalled that there will be two specific reviews. He made an observation about John Birt. As director-general of the BBC, he was a passionate advocate for the accountability of the BBC and the licence fee, and I am at one with him on his views on those matters.

The hon. Gentleman knows that I have made two written statements to update the House on digital switchover. The process of switchover is being led by broadcasters and the industry, supported by the Government. The licence fee settlement that will expire in 2007 took account of the BBC's role in promoting digital television and new digital services. We expect the negotiation of the new licence fee also to take account of the BBC's contribution to the costs of digital switchover.

On the status of the proposal for the trust, it is our intention that it should be the new form of governance for the BBC. It is important that the BBC should not be left in limbo for many months, and that it should be able to proceed to implement the new arrangements. How the membership of the trust is selected will obviously be a matter for discussion, but the working assumption is that the appointments will be made by the Crown. On the hon. Gentleman's final point on regional programming, the Government strongly believe in the BBC's right and proper role in the development of regional broadcasting, as I set out in my statement.

John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Lab): I congratulate my right hon. Friend on her statement today. I congratulate her on rejecting Lord Burns'
 
2 Mar 2005 : Column 966
 
wilder dogma, on retaining the licence fee and on the new structure of governance. Will she, however, clarify the time scale for the implementation of her proposals? There is a sense of urgency involved, and the new trust should be established quickly. If it is to have a role in maintaining quality, it should look now at the BBC's budget proposals, which include 3,000 job cuts, extensive privatisation and the slashing of 15 per cent. off budgets. The trust needs to be put in place as rapidly as possible to address those critical budgetary issues.

Tessa Jowell: I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. The proposals that I set out are intended to take effect as part of the new charter, which will come into force on 1 January 2007, but the BBC, through its internal conclusions, is moving to changes in the governance structure. It will be a matter for discussion with the BBC as to whether it is to establish some form of shadow trust arrangement in advance of the new charter and whether that will have properly established constitutional status at that time.

Mr. Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP): Will the Secretary of State respond on the issue of funding? I note that she said in her statement that the licence fee remains the fairest way to fund the BBC, and I know that she wants to maintain the highest standards of quality of broadcasting. That view, I presume, would be shared by every Member of the House.

On the issue of the fairness of funding, the Secretary of State must be aware that, across parts of the UK, there are very high rates of evasion—non-payment of the licence fee. Through a series of parliamentary questions, I have been endeavouring to get her Department to establish the evasion in certain parts of Northern Ireland, so far without success. Surely fairness in funding can be achieved only when the 90 per cent. who pay can see action being taken against those who do not. In parts of Northern Ireland, evasion rates are very high. Surely she should examine those rates, elaborate on where they occur and put the detection vans in those places to uphold the law and ensure that the fee is paid. If it is not paid, fines should be.

---