Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum submitted by Jeremy Peat, Chairman, BBC Audit Committee,

National Governor for Scotland, BBC

  I am writing to correct a point which I made at the CMS Select Committee hearing on 11 October.

  In my responses to questions, I may have given the impression that the National Audit Office has studied and endorsed the BBC's proposals for a Public Value Test (PVT) to be used to judge the contribution a new service or significant change to an existing service would potentially make to the delivery of public value.

  In fact the focus of the NAO's work has been on the BBC's Performance Measurement Framework, a new evidence based system of performance measurement which aims to provide assurance that each existing service delivers public service broadcasting and public value. This work is an integral component of the development of the PVT but is distinct from it. We have however been encouraged by the NAO's conclusion that the BBC has made good progress in developing the performance measurement framework and the important building blocks are now in place.

  Our PVT proposals have been subject to rigorous analysis and critique by an independent firm of consultants—Spectrum Strategy Consultants—who were commissioned by the Board of Governors. This commission was undertaken in parallel with the NAO's work; Spectrum discussed the issues involved with the NAO; and given the essential connections the NAO's work helped inform Spectrum's conclusions. But the NAP have not studied the PVT itself nor have they endorsed it.

  You may be interested to know that our revised proposals for a PVT are about to be put to public consultation. During this process we shall engage with a number of key stakeholders, including commercial companies, in order to gauge the wider public's view of its rigour and completeness. This consultation will be completed by Christmas, and the PVT will be available subsequently for use by the Governors and then the trust in considering whether to approve new services or significant changes to existing services. If at any point you would like to a fuller explanation of the PVT, I should be happy to arrange one.

  I do apologise if my responses were open to misunderstanding, and I hope that this letter has clarified matters.

14 October 2005


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 24 November 2005