| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
BBC Charter
4. Kitty Ussher (Burnley) (Lab): What mechanisms the Government plan to use as part of charter renewal to promote quality broadcasting by the BBC; and if she will make a statement. [55621]
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Tessa Jowell): The insistence on quality for the BBC is important for many reasons, not the least of which is that it was that which the public insisted on most consistently and vociferously in the unprecedented public consultation that we have undertaken as part of charter review. I will publish the BBC White Paper very shortly. It will set out a number of ways, developed from the Green Paper, in which we will ensure consistency and high-quality programming as part of the trademark of the BBC.
Kitty Ussher: I thank my right hon. Friend for that extremely helpful response. As she continues to lead her Department into the future with her characteristic vigour, will she undertake to involve BBC staff and trade unions in the development of the White Paper and the charter renewal process?
Tessa Jowell: I thank my hon. Friend for that question. I certainly will undertake to do that. Last week, we met the BBC trade unions to discuss the White Paper and the kind of changes that would be necessary within the BBC, which is a matter for the BBC governors and the BBC Trust. The involvement of the trade unions is an important part of the BBC being fit for the next charter review period.
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield) (Con): Will the Secretary of State join me in praising the BBC for delivering a unique service, not only providing quality programming but delivering a large audience? Does she agree, however, that there should not be pressures on the licence fee driving it upwards? Will the White Paper make it clear that no Government initiative will force the BBC to have an ever increasing licence fee?
Tessa Jowell: The hon. Gentleman sets a series of potential traps in his question. It is established Government policy and part of the manifesto that digital switchover will take place between 2008 and 2012. We have also guaranteed protection and help for the most vulnerable. That is Government policy. The funding of that policy will be met through the licence fee, which in the Green Paper I indicated would continue throughout the next charter review period. That is a broadcasting cost and should be met by broadcasting income.
Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): If we are really interested in quality journalism and quality broadcasting, will my right hon. Friend encourage the BBC to ensure that all journalists see a film that was nominated for but did not win an Oscar last night, "Good Night, and Good Luck"? It shows an age 50 years ago when journalists and television stations had the integrity, courage, independence and honesty to take on witch hunts and to face them down.
Tessa Jowell:
There is a bit more intrigue. I absolutely agree. "Good Night, and Good Luck" concluded the
6 Mar 2006 : Column 593
excellent London film festival this year. At that time, there was not much optimism that it would be distributed more widely. My hon. Friend is right. A BBC confident in its journalistic independence, seeking out truth, sits at the heart of our democracy and we all here have a duty to support that.
Steve Webb (Northavon) (LD): The Secretary of State rightly mentioned that an essential feature of quality public service broadcasting is political independence. What changes does she envisage will be made to the BBC's governance structure to reinforce its independence of Government?
Tessa Jowell: Very simply, changes will be made to get rid of the existing and long-established dual responsibilities of the BBC governors for both the regulation of the BBC and for overseeing the management of the BBC, and to establish the BBC Trust, which will be responsible and accountable to the licence fee payer. The BBC is a unique organisation and it needs a unique form of governance to deliver its responsibilities. Its responsibilities are to the people who pay for it—the licence fee payers, the people of this country.
Mr. Bob Blizzard (Waveney) (Lab): Does my right hon. Friend agree that the BBC will be more likely to achieve quality if it competes on fair terms with commercial broadcasting, rather than on favoured terms? With that in mind, where are we with the proposal to require market impact assessments of proposed new BBC services, and of significant changes to existing ones?
Tessa Jowell: I agree with my hon. Friend up to a point. The BBC's existence as an organisation with an annual turnover in excess of £3 billion is an intervention in the market. We in this country do not have a broadcasting system that is determined simply by competition and the market—a fact that reflects a long-standing public consensus, which will continue. That said, it is important that the BBC's impact on the wider market, which generates choice and innovation for viewers and wealth for this country, be kept under review. As he rightly says, the rigour of market impact assessments is a very important way of determining whether the BBC proceeds in the public interest with a given decision at a particular time, and that will be very clearly set out in the forthcoming White Paper.
Mr. Hugo Swire (East Devon) (Con): May I express my delight at the explosion of interest in the deliberations of this Department? I hope that we can look forward to similar interest in future. Although I understand that this must be a difficult time personally for the Secretary of State, we must not allow recent events to interfere with the running of her Department. The process of renewal of the BBC's charter is complex and involves billions of pounds of taxpayers' money. In such negotiations, what is needed above all else is transparency, accountability and credibility. How, therefore, does she answer the charge of the House of Lords Select Committee dealing with this issue that her
"proposals for reforming the governance and regulation of the BBC are confusing, misguided and unworkable"?
Tessa Jowell: I take the House of Lords' judgment on this issue very seriously indeed, and when the hon. Gentleman reads the proposals—they will be published shortly in the White Paper—he will see, I hope, that we have taken account of the views of the Lords and of others who have commented on the new BBC trust structure. But I come back to the essential point: the BBC is a unique organisation in this country and it is not like any other plc. The BBC belongs to the people of this country, and it must have an accountable and transparent governance structure that reflects that relationship. We will ensure that it does.
Mr. Swire: Indeed, but Ofcom has criticised the Government's failure fully to address the future of public service broadcasting, while the BBC itself fears that the Secretary of State's plans understate the importance of the digital future. Industry speculation suggests that there is absolutely no difference between her original proposals—made six months ago—and those in the forthcoming White Paper to which she has just alluded. If so, how can we be confident that she and her Department have been addressing the very serious issues at stake here?
Tessa Jowell: Very often, it is better to address the facts rather than the speculation, and I can promise the hon. Gentleman that, once published, the White Paper proposals will reflect that considered judgment on precisely the issues that he raises.
Newspaper Distribution
5. James Brokenshire (Hornchurch) (Con): What discussions she has had with the Office of Fair Trading and the Department of Trade and Industry on the distribution arrangements for newspapers and magazines. [55622]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (James Purnell): None, although officials at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport have had such a discussion. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State wrote to the chairman of the Office of Fair Trading on 12 October 2005, pointing out that serious concern had been expressed about how a different system could protect plurality and serve the public. She asked the OFT to give these concerns appropriate weight in reaching its conclusions.
James Brokenshire: I am grateful for that confirmation of the representation that the Secretary of State made, as I believe that she shares my serious concerns that, if the Office of Fair Trading confirms its original opinion, it will have a significant impact on the industry, including retailers, magazine distributors and newspaper titles, and will also affect the wider public interest. What further steps will the Department take in the event that the OFT either confirms its previous draft opinion or fails to provide the industry with sufficient legal certainty and Ministers at the Department of Trade and Industry continue to sit on their hands?
James Purnell:
The hon. Gentleman has been energetic in pursuing this issue. It is a matter of cross-party consensus that it is important to have an effective
6 Mar 2006 : Column 595
and independent competition regime, and we do not propose to change that. The OFT will have heard the concerns that he and other hon. Members have expressed and will make its decision in due course.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |