3 Meeting the core tasks of select
committees
Introduction
10. All select committees are guided in their
work by a set of common objectives (core tasks) agreed by the
Liaison Committee in order to encourage a common approach to the
business of scrutiny. These core tasks are:
A: To examine and comment on the policy of the department.
|
C: To examine the administration of the department.
|
1. To examine policy proposals from the UK Government and the European Commission in Green Papers, White Papers, draft Guidance etc, and to inquire further where the Committee considers it appropriate.
|
6. To examine the department's Public Service Agreements, the associated targets and the statistical measurements employed, and report if appropriate.
|
2. To identify and examine areas of emerging policy, or where existing policy is deficient, and make proposals.
|
7. To monitor the work of the department's Executive Agencies, NDPBs, regulators and other associated public bodies.
|
3. To conduct scrutiny of any published draft bill within the Committee's responsibilities.
|
8. To scrutinise major appointments made by the department.
|
4. To examine specific output from the department expressed in documents or other decisions.
|
9. To examine the implementation of legislation and major policy initiatives.
|
B: To examine the expenditure of the department.
|
D: To assist the House in debate and decision.
|
5. To examine the expenditure plans and out-turn of the department, its agencies and principal NDPBs
|
10. To produce reports which are suitable for debate in the House, including Westminster Hall, or debating committees.
|
11. The table in Annex A to this Report shows
the relevance of the core tasks to our work during Session 2008-09.
Scrutiny of policy
THE LICENSING ACT 2003
12. Our inquiry into the impact of the Licensing
Act 2003 show the benefits of Committees conducting post-legislative
scrutiny. The Act, which has been in force since 24 November 2005,
established a single integrated scheme for licensing premises
which are used for the supply of alcohol or to provide regulated
entertainment. In March 2008, the Government published the findings
of an evaluation of the impact of the Act, which concluded that
"This first review of the Licensing Act reveals a mixed picture".[6]
In order to understand the reasons for this "mixed picture"
the Committee agreed to undertake its own post-legislative scrutiny
of the Act, announcing its plans for an inquiry on 18 July 2008.
Though much of the inquiry was conducted in the 2007-08 Session
we reported our conclusions and recommendations in May 2009.
13. We concluded that broadly speaking the Act
had been a success. Bringing together a number of different regimes
into one licence had simplified the licensing system, there was
a greater diversity of premises on the high street and the Act
had encouraged and led to the successful development of partnership
working between licensees, licensing authorities and others such
as the police and fire service. However we also found that the
licensing process was still too bureaucratic and costly. This
was especially so for non-commercial groups such as sporting and
not-for-profit clubs and community groups who organised occasional
events. We also expressed particular concern that the Act was
hampering the performance of live music, especially that of young
musicians. We made a number of recommendations of ways in which
both the Act and its supporting guidance could be improved.
14. We were disappointed that while the Government's
response to our Report noted the "practical and helpful"
nature of our recommendations[7]
it did not in the main include practical steps to implement them.
The Committee secured a debate on the Report in Westminster Hall
on 22 October 2009 to allow us and other interested Members to
discuss this with the Minister. We welcome the announcement made
by the Minister at that debate that there would be a consultation
on allowing venues with a capacity of up to 100 to put on live
music performances without the need for a licence, although we
note that the consultation is yet to be launched. We also note
the current DCMS consultation proposing a number of ways to simplify
the Act.
BBC COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS
15. In Session 2008-09 in addition to our annual
scrutiny of the work and accounts of the BBC we undertook an inquiry
into the BBC's commercial activities. In recent years these activities
have undergone a marked expansion, with the Corporation seeking
both to maximise income from traditional sources and diversify
into other areas. Our inquiry BBC Commercial Operations
was a timely investigation into the implications for the media
industry and general public of the scope and value of the BBC's
commercial activities.
16. While there are major benefits from the BBC
undertaking commercial activities there also needs to be a balance
drawn between generating a return to the BBC and preventing damage
to its commercial competitors. The BBC's commercial obligations
are governed by a set of requirements set out in the BBC's agreement
with the Secretary of State. These requirements are designed to
guard against the possibility that the BBC's reputation could
be damaged or markets could be unfairly distorted by its presence.
We considered the benefits and risks of the BBC undertaking commercial
activities and the extent to which its activities were in line
with the criteria required of them.
17. We concluded that the balance had tipped
too far in favour of the BBC and we called on it to rein in its
commercial operations. Although we believed that the BBC should
continue to reduce pressure on licence fee payers by obtaining
maximum value from its brand and assets, we concluded that the
BBC should not undertake commercial activity when there is no
clear link to BBC programming.
18. We also examined the appropriateness and
effectiveness of the governance framework for the BBC's commercial
activities. We concluded that the BBC Trust should have a greater
say in the BBC's commercial decisions, and that the £50m
threshold for referral of a commercial transaction to the Trust
was set far too high and should be reduced. We also raised particular
concerns about the Chief Executive of BBC Worldwide being on the
BBC's Executive Board.
19. We received a response from the BBC to our
Report in July 2009, which we published, with comment, in our
Seventh Report. We were disappointed that the BBC Trust had failed
to respond to a number of our recommendations, particularly since
the BBC receives significant public funding and should therefore
expect to be held to account. Immediately following the publication
of our Seventh Report the BBC Trust announced changes to the governance
arrangements of BBC Worldwide, implementing our recommendations
on Board membership and the threshold level. In making this announcement
the Trust chose not to acknowledge the role that the Committee
played.
20. Since then the BBC Trust has announced further
changes to the remit of BBC Worldwide. In particular, there will
be no more mergers or acquisitions unless there are exceptional
circumstances as well as divestment over time from non-BBC branded
international channels and from any activity not in keeping with
the BBC brand. In addition, the arrangement by which BBC Worldwide
has "first look" at rights for all BBC programming is
to be made more transparent with greater market testing. This
tightening of the remit goes some way towards implementing the
Committee's original recommendations and we welcome these changes
as well as the acknowledgement of the Committee's role in the
Trust's announcement.
PRESS STANDARDS, PRIVACY AND LIBEL
21. The Committee announced its inquiry into
Press Standards, Privacy and Libel in November 2008. The
inquiry has looked at issues such as: the operation of the self-regulatory
regime; the interaction between the operation and effect of UK
libel laws; and the balance between press freedom and personal
privacy. We have been particularly concerned at evidence we have
received about the impact of Conditional Fee Arrangements on freedom
of expression and libel tourism.
22. We had concluded oral evidence when allegations
appeared in the Guardian newspaper on 8 July 2009 that
News Group, the division of News International to which the News
of the World newspaper belongs, had paid £1m in damages
and costs after its journalists were accused of involvement in
the phone tapping of numerous public figures including Government
ministers. We took these claims very seriously as they cast doubt
on assurances we had been given during our 2007 inquiry Privacy
and media intrusion that the phone hacking at News of the
World had been limited to one 'rogue reporter', Clive Goodman.
We reopened our inquiry and have so far held four further evidence
sessions. We hope to conclude our programme of oral evidence and
make a report of our conclusions and recommendations in early
2010.
THE FUTURE FOR LOCAL AND REGIONAL
MEDIA
23. In March 2009 the Committee responded to
growing concern as to the impact of the recession, the downturn
in advertising revenues and structural changes within the media
industry by launching an inquiry into The Future for Local
and Regional Media. We drew our terms of reference widely,
to allow us to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the challenges
faced by local and regional newspapers, radio, television, and
new media providers.
24. During the course of our seven evidence sessions
we have considered a wide range of issues, including: the impact
on local media of recent and future developments in digital convergence
and media technology; changing consumer behaviour; the impact
of newspaper closures on independent local journalism and access
to local information; the future of local radio and television
news; and the desirability of changes to the regulatory framework
for print and electronic local media, including cross-media ownership
and merger regulations. We expect to report our conclusions in
early 2010.
Scrutiny of expenditure and administration
of the department
THE DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA
AND SPORT
25. The Committee continues to scrutinise the
Department on its performance against its Public Service Agreement
targets as well as on its expenditure, administration and policy.
We were assisted in this task by the National Audit Office, The
House of Commons Library and the House of Commons Scrutiny Unit
who provided informative briefing notes to the Committee ahead
of its annual oral evidence session with the Secretary of State
on his responsibilities and the Departmental Annual Report and
Accounts.
SPONSORED BODIES
26. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport
has responsibility for 61 public bodies, including three public
corporations, two public broadcasting authorities, one executive
agency and 55 non-departmental public bodies. The Committee discussed
the work of a number of these bodies, including the Arts Council,
Sport England and English Heritage, as part of its annual session
with the Secretary of State.
27. The DCMS-sponsored public body with arguably
the most public prominence is the BBC, and the Committee receives
regular correspondence from the public on its work. It is therefore
no surprise that holding the BBC to account is high on the Committee's
agenda. In addition to conducting its inquiry into the commercial
activities of the BBC the Committee as usual held an oral evidence
to discuss the BBC Annual Report. The Committee also, for a second
time, held an evidence session with Channel 4 on its Annual Report.
LONDON 2012 OLYMPICS
28. Although we did not publish a specific Report
during 2008-09 the Committee has continued its scrutiny of the
progress being made towards staging a successful and cost-effective
Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. Our regular private briefings
keep the Committee in touch with developments and our public oral
evidence sessions serve to maintain public accountability in the
build-up to the Games.
29. We have had a particular focus on Olympic
finances in 2008-09. At our evidence session in December 2008
the Olympics Minister, Tessa Jowell, warned that the current financial
climate meant it would be very difficult to collect the finances
pledged to the Games by the private sector. John Armitt, the Chairman
of the Olympic Delivery Authority told us that they had been forced
to take £95million from the £1billion contingency fund
to ensure building work on the Olympic village remained on schedule,
and that a further drawdown on contingency might be necessary.
We returned to this topic and others at our evidence session with
the Minister and John Armitt on 15 December 2009, as we continue
our scrutiny of this area as 2012 moves closer.
6 Evaluation of the impact of the Licensing Act, p7 Back
7
Government Response to the House of Commons Culture, Media and
Sport Committee Report on the Licensing Act 2003, Session
2008-09, July 2009, Cm 7684 Back
| 
