| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
I have nothing against the BBC, and I want it to remain in place, but I want to ensure that there is a challenge and true competition, which must come from
local newspapers, local radio and local television. Regional news and regional current affairs programmes must continue. Indeed, regional current affairs programmes are just as important as regional news. It is only right that BBC funding should be top-sliced, and that money should be put into a pot to ensure that there is true competition. The BBC has programmes online, and it has local radio, regional television and national television. There is nothing wrong with that, but I want competition to continue. It is important that ITV remains one of the main competitors.
The issue of product placement has been raised. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State got it absolutely wrong—product placement is a way of getting new revenue in and ensuring that there is true competition in the market. That is what we have to remember—it is about competition.
Of course, we must talk about local radio, which is under the cosh, but there is some good news for my hon. Friend the Minister. On Saturday I had the pleasure of reopening the new studios for that great community radio, Chorley FM, which is broadcasting all over Chorley as we speak. Chorley FM shows that there is some good news coming out.
As for our local newspapers, both daily and weekly, none are more important than the Lancashire Evening Post, the Lancashire Evening Telegraph and the Bolton News. My constituents rely on those newspapers. There are times when we do not like what newspapers print, and there are times when we love what they print. The important point is that they are there to provide news locally, and it is local news that would not be picked up in any other way if it were not for local radio and local newspapers, such as the campaigning Chorley Guardian.
Chris McGuire and Vanessa Taylor, the veterans of the newsdesk and the Chorley Guardian have not only run important campaigns, but have played an important part in raising money. After one of my colleagues on the local authority tragically died of cancer, the Chorley Guardian ran the Mary’s Prayer campaign, which raised the much needed sum of £50,000 for cancer charities.
My constituent, Jessica Knight, was, tragically, subjected to a frenzied knife attack, was stabbed 35 times and survived. The Chorley Guardian and the Chorley Citizen ran a great campaign. The Chorley Guardian raised £20,000 on behalf of Jessica Knight to set up a trust fund for the family during those difficult times. What other local newspapers have done is good, and if they did not such things, who would do it? There is nobody to step in and take their place.
We have touched on what has happened under the Manchester Media newspapers. The Chorley Citizen was running a very good weekly free sheet in Chorley. Unlike Preston and South Ribble, which lost their Citizen newspapers, Chorley’s remains, but it is now operating out of Blackburn. The news comes from that distant headquarters. Thank goodness we have Chris Gee as a reporter, a local person well qualified to report that local news. That is what it is about—local people guaranteeing the news.
If people want to know about a birth, a death or a marriage, as many do, they pick up the Chorley Guardian. They look at the news and they want to find out who has died and who has been born. They all want to hear
the good news as well. That is what the local media do. There is no alternative, so the Government must stand up and top slice some of that money from the BBC. Let us make a difference for the people we represent, give that money to the local media and ensure that there is competition in this country, not the dominance of the BBC.
3.37 pm
John Howell (Henley) (Con): We tend to think of local media, as we have done today, in terms of their broadcast role, but they are businesses in their own right, and not all of them are large groups. As my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, East (Mr. Wilson) pointed out, many of them are family owned. That applies to my own area. They are facing the normal business pressures that all businesses are facing in the recession, plus the knock-on effects and the specific problems of their industry.
I am glad that the undermining of local newspapers by the BBC over local video on demand has passed, but it is necessary to have a reasoned debate about how the future of local media will develop on a multimedia basis and the regulatory regime that will apply.
There has always been cross-fertilisation of different media. During the mid-1990s I was a business presenter for the BBC. Being a Conservative in the BBC at that time gave me a hint of what being an endangered species must be like. My experience of TV newsrooms was that they were fed by local papers, and not the other way round. We live in a world where we are blessed with different means of getting our messages across, and we should not throw out the old ones as we go along and pick up the new ones.
A number of points have been made about newspapers, principally that local newspapers are at their best when they have an affinity with the local area and when they have taken on a campaigning role. I pay tribute to the Henley Standard for the support it gave me for the recession networking event that I provided last week, and for its own Think Local campaign to help local shops in the town.
During the debate we have developed considerable consensus about the challenges facing newspapers with the drop in advertising income, loss of jobs and loss of titles. I hope we will also achieve some consensus about the solutions, such as freeing up restrictions, encouraging innovation and encouraging newspapers to take on roles within their own community.
We have not heard a lot today about what is local in terms of television, although the hon. Member for Great Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell) rightly touched on the matter. One of the great problems for my constituents is that the geographical areas covered by regional broadcasting have got bigger and bigger; someone in my constituency watching “local” news can see items about Birmingham or Southampton. Those reports will be important for the local communities involved, but they are not local news for my constituents. We will not have time today, but there is an issue of balance that we need to discuss and work through. What should the balance be between the need for regional television to have controllable and reasonable costs, and what works for the audience in respect of the regional network’s coverage?
It is time to end the endless review culture. The delay in sorting out the future for local media, including both newspapers and broadcast media, will cost jobs and erode an important part of our local heritage.
3.41 pm
Mr. David Drew (Stroud) (Lab/Co-op): I shall be very quick, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I know that the hon. Member for Colchester (Bob Russell) would like a quick word if he catches your eye.
I thank the Minister for the speed with which she and the Secretary of State responded to the National Union of Journalists group’s request for a conference to consider these issues. The meeting with the Secretary of State was very useful. It shows the benefits brought by all-party groups and how important it is for us to broach all issues relating to this crisis. I congratulate the Minister on what she said.
John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Lab): It was a brilliant idea.
Mr. Drew: We look forward to going ahead with what my hon. Friend has just described as “a brilliant idea”.
I want to talk about two issues. There is a view among those who work in the industry that the recession is being used as a front for some of the cuts in local and regional media. We know that the industry is in decline, although interestingly that decline is not anything like the same locally and regionally as it is nationally. Despite that, local and regional media are being sacrificed, often because of national titles. I hope that the conference will identify, consider and act on that issue.
Before making my second point, I shall refer quickly to my local newspapers, the Stroud News and Journal, the Dursley Gazette, The Citizen and Stroud Life. I feel sorry for the staff in local media. Some of the terms and conditions under which the journalists, photographers, editors and sub-editors work, and the pay that they receive, are simply unacceptable. The pay was low before the current cuts were imposed. Many people working in the sector are on the minimum wage—and, dare I say it, below it. Recently, more people have been encouraged to come on work experience as a way of getting a job. Disgracefully, that has included the BBC. It has been said that work experience is the best way to get into the industry, and the issue then becomes about people who have money and can afford to work free for six months. That precludes so many others.
It is right and proper that we look at the impact on people who work in local media; as hon. Members have said, we depend on them to get our message across. Furthermore, the general public have to trust and rely on them. If those people are treated in that deplorable way, we will not get quality and there will be no fairness.
3.44 pm
Bob Russell:
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) for shortening his speech. With all due respect to the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), it is an affront to the House that we can now have a two-and-a-half-hour Adjournment debate, given that many of us would like
to speak at greater length on this subject. That demonstrates that the Government are not that serious, bothered or concerned about what is happening in our provincial press. I have been advised that local newspaper week—“week” as in seven days, not “weak”—will be from 11 to 17 May.
I speak as a former branch secretary of the north Essex branch of the National Union of Journalists, and it may come as a surprise to colleagues that 40 years ago I was editor of a weekly newspaper. Looking back, it is clear that that was the heyday of local newspapers, when their penetration in local communities was virtually 100 per cent. What we are now witnessing is happening not only in newspapers but in regional television. Anglia Television, for example, has contracted its two news services into one, which means that across the east of England there is 120 hours a week less airtime for regional television.
In recent weeks, all our local newspapers, the Colchester Gazette, the award-winning Essex County Standard and the East Anglian Daily Times, have sacked staff—not that we read about it, because a non-aggression pact is in place. However, I can say that the Colchester Gazette has dispensed with the services of 13 experienced journalists including the editor, the news editor, the chief sub-editor and the features editor. I am not criticising local journalists or the editor, who is now running the Gazette and the Southend Echo, but the paper is now produced in Basildon and printed in Brighton for Colchester—it is our own BBC. My concern is that there is less and less coverage of our local councils, courts and so on, which is a serious problem for local democracy and accountability. Local journalists want to report on those things, but they are being prevented from doing so by commercial circumstances.
Newspaper conglomerates have built up massive profits over the years. They have not invested properly, yet they still want to cream off as much profit as they can. The Government need to act and get a grip on that.
3.46 pm
Barbara Follett: In the very short time that I have, I shall briefly cover three subjects. The first is the need to review the rules governing media ownership, which Members have mentioned in this passionate debate. I point out that the Government have already asked the Office of Fair Trading and Ofcom to examine the merger regime for local and regional media and let us know whether any changes are needed. They issued a discussion paper on 13 March inviting responses by 31 March, which is a short window.
I turn to national and local government support for local media through advertising. We need partnership working, and I know about the Killian Pretty recommendations and that planning applications and information are worth about £40 million a year in advertising revenue. I urge hon. Members to get their local councils and local papers working together on that.
I shall end by talking about job losses and short-time working. I have enormous sympathy with what the hon. Member for Colchester (Bob Russell) said. I did an interview with the Colchester Gazette this afternoon and spoke to a young reporter who was deeply shocked at having been asked to take a week of unpaid leave. At the East Anglian Daily Times, I spoke to a much older reporter who was shocked at being made to work short
time and at the fact that his job was under threat. Those are the human tragedies behind the figures that several hon. Members mentioned in huge detail. The Government do care about this issue, and we are doing something about it. I thank hon. Members for their contributions.
That this House has considered the matter of local and regional news.
Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot) (Con): On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Further to the important point that the hon. Member for Colchester (Bob Russell) made in his speech in the topical debate, it will be apparent to you and all those in the Chamber this afternoon that one and a half hours has been wholly insufficient to deal with an issue of huge concern to hon. Members representing constituencies throughout the country. I had intended to intervene, but I understood that there was such pressure that you decided—entirely rightly—to reduce hon. Members’ speeches to five minutes. It would therefore have taken time out of their contributions if I intervened. The hon. Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) has tabled an important early-day motion on the matter—
Mark Hunter (Cheadle) (LD): It was me.
Mr. Howarth: I am sorry. The hon. Member for Stockport signed that early-day motion. Will you, Madam Deputy Speaker, consider having a word with Mr. Speaker to ascertain whether, when we have a topical debate, which is a good institution, some discretion could be given to the Chair to extend the debate when it appears, perhaps at the last minute, that more Members want to speak than was first believed? We would not then have two and a half hours on an individual Member’s Adjournment debate and the House would have an opportunity to discuss a topic further because, in my case, I have been told that the Aldershot News will be merged with the Aldershot Mail—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order.
Mr. Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley) (Lab): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. When we introduced topical debates, I thought that there was provision for flexibility for the Chair. If that is not correct, will you advise us about how we can ensure such flexibility in future?
Simon Hughes (North Southwark and Bermondsey) (LD): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am the third complainant, though the hon. Member for Chorley (Mr. Hoyle) spoke during the topical debate, so he is in a better position. May I also ask you to use your influence with Mr. Speaker—and we can obviously approach the Leader of the House—so that we can consider the flexibility of rules on a Thursday? For example, if an Adjournment debate does not take up the whole of the rest of the time, perhaps we could resume the topical debate afterwards and thus use the time allocated. Often, as you know, there is great pressure on the topical debate when the subject is important, and the House would be grateful if, together, we found a solution that allows big issues to be discussed by everyone who wants to participate.
Mr. Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley) (Con): Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The subject of a topical debate is, by nature, something that is in the news, but also important. Could the flexibility that we all seek be such that the Adjournment debate, which is supposed to run for only half an hour, stick to its half hour, and the topical debate could run until 6 o’clock? Clearly, we will now finish early if the hon. Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott) does not take two hours over her Adjournment debate. She probably will not because she expected only half an hour. We want to give you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the ability to use your discretion and wisdom to extend a topical debate.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The points of order that four hon. Members have made on their concerns about the topical debate are now well and truly on the record. It is a matter for the Leader of the House and the Modernisation Committee. Those views are on the record and will be taken up.
City and Hackney PCT (Tuberculosis)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—( Helen Goodman.)
3.52 pm
Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney, North and Stoke Newington) (Lab): I am grateful for the opportunity to address the House on a vital public health matter in my constituency: tuberculosis. My Adjournment debate is about City and Hackney primary care trust and that disease.
Tuberculosis stalked the pages of the Victorian novel. To someone who reads enough of them, it appears as if there was not a home without some young woman slowly expiring from that horrible disease. However, it became a 20th-century public health success story. Cases of TB in the UK fell to only 50,000 in the 1950s, and in my lifetime and that of the Minister, it was virtually eradicated. In the late 1980s, there were barely 5,000 cases a year.
Tragically, the incidence of TB has begun to rise again. In a deprived inner-city area such as Hackney, it is one of the most serious public health issues that we face. In contrast with the situation not so many years ago, when TB had been virtually eradicated, England now has one of the highest rates of TB in the western world, and in recent years Hackney has consistently had one of the highest rates in England.
What is more, the pattern of TB infection has changed. In the 1950s, the disease was found throughout the general population. However, the resurgence of TB has been confined to certain distinct groups. What all those groups have in common is their extreme social exclusion. TB was always a disease of poverty and poor housing, and the street homeless are more likely to have it. Drug addicts, prostitutes and sufferers from AIDS are more likely to have TB. Immigrant groups, whether legal or illegal, and would-be economic migrants and failed asylum seekers who come from parts of the world where TB has not been eradicated, are also more likely to have it.
Mr. Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con) rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order. Is the hon. Lady prepared to accept the intervention?
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |