Formal Minutes
Tuesday 10 February 2015
Members present:
Mr John Whittingdale, in the Chair
| Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
| | Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Mr Ben Bradshaw made a declaration of interest in relation to
his partner's employment by the BBC.
Draft Report (Future of the BBC), proposed by the
Chair, brought up and read.
Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time,
paragraph by paragraph.
Paragraphs 1 to 22 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 23 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 24 to 26 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 27 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 28 to 57 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 58 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 59 to 71 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 72 read and amended.
Further amendment proposed, to leave out from "We"
to the end of the sentence and add "We believe that people's
background, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or regional
accent should neither be a barrier nor an advantage for jobs at
commissioning level or on screen within the BBC or at other broadcasters.
Jobs should always be given on merit and merit alone without any
formal or informal quotas or targets." — (Philip
Davies.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
| Ayes, 2
Conor Burns
Philip Davies
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Tracey Crouch
Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 72, as amended, agreed to.
Paragraphs 73 to 105 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 106 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 107 to 111 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 112 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraph 113 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 114 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 115 to 121 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 122 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 123 to 138 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 139 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 140 to 153 read and agreed to,
Paragraph 154 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraph 155 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 156 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 157 to 178 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 179 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 180 to 191 read and agreed to.
Paragraphs 192 and 193 read, amended and agreed to.
Paragraphs 194 to 196 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 197 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph 197. —
(Mr John Leech)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Mr John Leech
| Noes, 5
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philp Davies
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 197 agreed to.
Paragraphs 198 to 211 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 212 read and amended.
Further amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph
212 and insert:
"We believe that the licence fee should be abolished
and the BBC should be funded by voluntary subscription. Given
that the BBC told us how the public feel the licence fee represents
excellent value for money, they have nothing to fear from a subscription
model as presumably the public would be happy to continue paying
on a voluntary basis. Those who do not wish to access BBC services
shouldn't have to pay." — (Philip Davies.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Philip Davies
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 212, as amended, agreed to.
Paragraph 213 read and agreed to.
Paragraph 214 read and amended.
Further amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph
214. — (Mr John Leech.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Mr John Leech
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
Paul Farrelly
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 214, as amended, agreed to.
Paragraph 215 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph 215. —
(Mr John Leech.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Mr John Leech
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
Paul Farrelly
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 215 agreed to.
Paragraphs 216 to 223 read and agreed to.
Paragraphs 224 and 225 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from "decriminalisation
of non-payment of the TV licence fee." in Paragraph 224 to
end of Paragraph 225, and insert:
"We recognise that the current system of licence
fee payment compliance works well, and takes up very little time
in the magistrates' court. We question the motives of the vast
majority of those arguing for decriminalisation of the licence
fee, whose main aim is to see the scrapping of the BBC as a universal
public service broadcaster, and see decriminalising the licence
fee as a means of vastly reducing payment compliance and undermining
funding to the BBC." — (Mr John Leech.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Mr John Leech
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
Paul Farrelly
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraphs 224 and 225 disagreed to.
New paragraph (Mr Ben Bradshaw) brought up,
read the first and second time, and inserted [now Paragraph 224].
Paragraphs 226 to 232 [now Paragraphs 225 to 231]
read and agreed to.
Paragraphs 233 and 234 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraphs 233 and
234, and insert:
"Whilst we were impressed with aspects of the
broadcasting levy model in Germany and the hypothecated tax model
in Finland we do not believe they dealt with the underlying unfairness
within the licence fee of forcing people to contribute to a broadcaster
that they may not wish to access. That is why we do not believe
these models are as good as moving to subscription." —
(Philip Davies)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Philip Davies
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraphs 233 and 234 [now Paragraphs 232 and 233]
agreed to.
Paragraphs 235 to 257 [now Paragraphs 234 to 256]
read and agreed to.
A new paragraph—(Philip Davies)—brought
up and read as follows:
"It is our view that a further freeze in the
licence fee in the period beyond 2017 would make the BBC concentrate
more conscientiously on its core public service obligations as
well as driving further efficiency improvements. During this inquiry
we have heard no persuasive arguments for any licence fee increase
in the next period."
Question put, That the paragraph be inserted in the
Report.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 3
Conor Burns
Philip Davies
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
| Noes, 5
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Tracey Crouch
Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
|
Question negatived.
Paragraphs 258 to 270 [now Paragraphs 257 to 269]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 271 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraphs 271 to
341.—(Paul Farrelly.)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 2
Philip Davies
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 271 [now Paragraph 270] agreed to.
Paragraph 272 [now Paragraph 271] read and agreed
to.
Paragraph 273 [now Paragraph 272] read, amended and
agreed to.
Paragraphs 274 to 285 [now Paragraphs 273 to 284]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 286 read.
Amendment proposed, at the end of the paragraph to
insert:
"During evidence sessions, we also expressed
surprise about the apparent dis-connect between the BBC Board
and the Trust when it came to recent major announcements by the
Director General, without any accompanying detailed plans, and
the understandable effect on the Trust's ability to respond quickly
in terms of scrutiny and approval, or otherwise. These recent
major changes relate to BBC Production and the BBC3 channel and
concerns have been expressed about the uncertainty they have prompted
in the wider broadcasting sector."— (Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
| Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 286 [now Paragraph 285] agreed to.
Paragraphs 287 to 293 [now Paragraphs 286 to 292]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 294 [now paragraph 293] read, amended and
agreed to.
Paragraph 295 read and amended.
Further amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph
295 and insert:
"We set out below our own preferred model for
governance and regulation of the BBC which, although adopting
external, independent oversight, together with a unitary BBC Board,
differs in one principal respect from Lord Burns' 2005 model.
This is that responsibility for final appeals regarding viewers'
and listeners' complaints about BBC content should transfer to
Ofcom. One underlying theme in many of the BBC's failures in recent
times has been lack of robust challenge, within both the BBC's
board and the Trust. While attempting to strengthen the BBC's
board, it would be exactly the wrong response to weaken the replacement
regulator and its functions, and its potential to carry on the
positive things the Trust has achieved, such as agreeing licences
for BBC services. We agree in this respect not only with Lord
Burns, and his 2005 recommendations, but also with David Liddiment:
the BBC is a big beast in the UK broadcasting sector and the last
thing it needs is light-touch regulation." — (Paul
Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 295 [now paragraph 294], as amended, agreed
to.
Paragraph 296 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from "to be
scrutinised" to "(PSBC),".—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Further amendment proposed, after "that plan." to insert
"As we discuss further below, the BBC Board would agree its
strategy and strategic business plan with the new external regulator,
the Public Service Broadcasting Commission (PSBC), that would
replace the Trust, along the lines recommended by the Burns Panel,
to ensure it is compliant with the BBC's responsibilities under
the Charter and Framework Agreement in pursuing its public service
broadcasting remit."—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 296 [now Paragraph 295] agreed to.
Paragraph 297 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraphs 297 to
300 and insert:
"Such a structure for the BBC should enable
it to strengthen its own internal corporate governance, while
retaining its accountability to the Trust's replacement as the
representative of the licence fee payer - the new independent
PSBC - as envisaged by the Burns Panel in 2005. It also recognises
the uniqueness of the BBC in being a publicly funded body, without
outside institutional shareholders to which a board would ultimately
be accountable in the case of a publicly quoted company. The Chairman
and non-executives would be in a majority on the new unitary BBC
Board, and should be in a position to more effectively challenge
the executive management. The fact that the BBC would remain accountable
to the PSBC as a strong regulator should, however, further strengthen
their hand to make poor decisions less likely. Regarding the determination
of appropriate levels of executive remuneration, for example,
we note that boards of publicly quoted companies are often criticised
for their lack of restraint. Accountability to an independent
PSBC, therefore, would help ensure that there would be less risk
of the unitary BBC Board repeating the Corporation's recent mistakes
and devaluing its reputation in eyes of licence fee payers.
"A unitary board, which we refer to from now
on as the 'BBC Board', would operate along the lines recommended
by the Burns Panel. Regarding the strategic plan for the BBC prepared
by the BBC Board, we note that the Burns Panel proposed that the
PSBC should subject it to open and transparent scrutiny, and also
'approve or reject it in response to that scrutiny and…oversee
its execution'. The strategic plan agreed between the PSBC and
the BBC, it suggested, might cover such issues as the number and
broad objectives of television and radio channels, online and
other services, including commercial services; the broad allocation
and expenditure by services, audiences and genre to meet the needs
of all licence fee payers; specific targets for each channel in
terms of type of content and measures of success (along the lines
of service licences, for which the Trust has won praise); and
arrangements for periodic review of channels and other activities
of the BBC, whether commercial or funded by the licence fee. We
broadly agree with the Burns Panel's line of thought, though the
new Independent Panel we recommend should, of course, consider
the detail carefully.
"The new unitary BBC Board committed to fulfilling
its Charter and Framework Agreement obligations should set out
its priorities in a clear and transparent way so that others,
including the PSBC and licence fee payers generally, can effectively
judge its performance.
"The Director General, as the BBC's chief executive
officer and editor-in-chief, should be responsible to the BBC
Board for the BBC's content. He or she should be answerable to
the Board in respect of the BBC's delivery and performance and
the Board should be accountable to the PSBC, as the independent
representative of the licence fee payer. The BBC Board must through
all of its own efforts ensure that the BBC secures value for money,
irrespective of the PSBC's external oversight role, and it should
be answerable for the BBC's expenditure of the licence fee."—
(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 297 [now Paragraph 296] agreed to.
Paragraphs 298 to 302 [now Paragraphs 297 to 301]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 303 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph 303 and
insert:
"As noted above, the Burns Panel proposed a
formal role for the PSBC in not only subjecting to open and transparent
scrutiny the strategic plan prepared by the BBC Board, but in
agreeing that plan, approving or rejecting it, and monitoring
its execution. A major change, however, is that the Chair of the
PSBC would not be the Chair of the BBC, nor would it have the
responsibility of appointing the Director General of the Corporation
it is charged with regulating - all of which we discuss further
below. Unlike the Trust, therefore, it would be independent of
the BBC and not replicate the confusion of the roles of 'cheerleader
or regulator', over which the Trust has been rightly criticised.
Retention of its strong formal role, however, as envisaged by
Burns, would allow the PSBC to maintain aspects of the oversight
for which the Trust has been commended, such as agreeing service
licences and remits. Removing these roles from the PSBC on abolition
of the Trust, and making it largely an ex post regulator
with only backstop powers, would - we believe - be akin to throwing
the baby out with the bathwater. Clearly, however, the precise
detail of the role and powers of the PSBC in approving service
remits and individual budgets requires careful consideration in
the Charter Review process - and by the Independent Panel we recommend
- so that the boundaries between external oversight and operational
management are drawn appropriately." — (Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
| Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 303 [now Paragraph 302] agreed to.
Paragraph 304 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out "expectation"
and insert "requirement".—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 304 [now Paragraph 303] agreed to.
Paragraphs 305 to 307 [now Paragraphs 304 to 306]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 308 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from "A significant
change" to the end of the sentence.—(Philip Davies)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Philip Davies
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 308 [now Paragraph 307] agreed to.
Paragraphs 309 to 313 [now Paragraphs 308 to 312]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 314 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from second "The
Commission" to the end of the sentence and insert:
"The Commission would be supported by an administrative
staff and professional advisers. In this respect, during Charter
Review it is important that the process - and the Independent
Panel we recommend - considers carefully the make-up and performance
of the BBC Trust Unit hitherto, so that appropriate lessons can
be learned to guide the establishment of the PSBC's administrative
support function."—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 314 [now Paragraph 313] agreed to.
Paragraphs 315 and 316 [now Paragraphs 314 and 315]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 317 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph 317 and
insert:
"While we would expect the PSBC to produce an
annual report for Parliament, this would not negate the requirement
for the BBC to produce an annual report, as currently, and for
the Chair, Director General and members of the BBC Board to appear
in front of Committees such as ours."—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 317 [now Paragraph 316] agreed to.
Paragraph 318 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph 318 and
insert:
"Clearly, our model for oversight of the BBC
largely follows the recommendations of Lord Burns' Panel in 2005
and, had they been implemented then, some of the Trust's failings
since might have been avoided. Clearly, there could be other models,
which might not give an external regulator such formal ex ante
powers regarding the BBC, its strategy and broad expenditure on
services. We note, for example, that in the case of S4C, the BBC
Trust currently has a backstop power in that, as a last resort,
it has the ability to reduce or withdraw funding from the broadcaster
should it be in dispute over breach of the operating agreement
between the two bodies. We consider, however, that the BBC as
a whole is 'too big a beast' in the UK broadcasting sector for
its relationship with the PSBC to be governed by such backstop
powers, in extremis, alone. Relying, too, on the threat
of adverse publicity to alter the behaviour of such a large Corporation
in the event of a disagreement with a weaker regulator would also
be misplaced. During recent mistakes, the BBC has repeatedly demonstrated
its imperviousness to constructive criticism; in terms of its
public relations, too, there has often been concern over the sheer
amount of resources it deploys, which would always be far greater
than those at the disposal of a regulator. As we have stated,
we would also envisage the PSBC being in a position of advising
the Government on the level of the BBC's future funding, as well
as managing a fund which would be allocated on a contestable basis
for certain PSB content and genres, of which the BBC would be
a potential recipient. This would also strengthen the position
of the PSBC as the representative of the licence fee payer. We
have set out a comparison showing the Trust, Lord Burns' and our
own proposed models for oversight of the BBC as Annex A to this
Report."—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 318 [now Paragraph 317] agreed to.
Paragraph 319 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out "complete".—(Paul
Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 319 [now Paragraph 318] agreed to.
Paragraph 320 [now paragraph 319] read and agreed
to.
Paragraph 321 read.
Amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph 321 and
insert:
"We believe that an independent Public Service
Broadcasting Commission should take over the regulatory and oversight
functions that currently lie with the BBC Trust—as recommended
by the 2005 Burns Panel, with the exception of Ofcom becoming
the final arbiter of complaints about content."—(Paul
Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 6
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 321 [now Paragraph 320] agreed to.
Paragraph 322 [now Paragraph 321] read, amended and
agreed to.
Paragraph 323 [now Paragraph 322] read and agreed
to.
Paragraph 324 read and amended.
Further amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph
324.—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 324 [now Paragraph 323] agreed to.
Paragraph 325 read.
Amendment proposed, after "providing independent"
to insert "regulation and".—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 325 [now Paragraph 324] agreed to.
Paragraphs 326 to 337 [now Paragraphs 325 to 336]
read and agreed to.
Paragraph 338 read.
Amendment proposed, after "workload." to
insert "This is our principal departure from Lord Burns'
2005 model, but Ofcom is already well-versed in handling content
complaints. Giving the role to Ofcom would allow the new Public
Sector Broadcasting Commission to focus on its important, wider
regulatory role."—(Paul Farrelly)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 1
Paul Farrelly
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Philip Davies
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Further amendment proposed, to leave out Paragraph
338 and insert:
"We believe that the Public Service Broadcasting
Commission should also become the arbiter of complaints over BBC
content including matters concerning impartiality and accuracy,
but that complaints should be considered by the BBC in the first
instance. Given the nature of the BBC's funding - and the
fact that its income each year is guaranteed irrespective of how
it performs - we believe that the BBC should meet a higher test
than other broadcasters, and that the public have higher expectations
of it. Therefore we do not see that Ofcom is the appropriate
body to deal with complaints about the BBC as it would be left
in the invidious position of having to treat complaints about
various broadcasters differently which may undermine its more
general regulatory role."—(Philip Davies)
Question put, That the Amendment be made.
The Committee divided.
| Ayes, 1
Philip Davies
| Noes, 7
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Paul Farrelly
Mr John Leech
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
|
Amendment disagreed to.
Paragraph 338 [now Paragraph 337] agreed to.
Paragraphs 339 to 349 [now Paragraphs 338 to 349]
read and agreed to.
Four papers were annexed to the Report, as Annexes
A, B, C and D.
Summary read, amended and agreed to.
Question put, That the Report, as amended, be the
Fourth Report of the Committee to the House.
The Committee divided.
|
Ayes, 5
Mr Ben Bradshaw
Conor Burns
Tracey Crouch
Steve Rotheram
Mr Gerry Sutcliffe
| Noes, 3
Philip Davies
Paul Farrelly
John Leech
|
Resolved, That the Report, as amended, be the Fourth report
of the Committee to the House.
Ordered, That the Chair
make the Report to the House.
Ordered, That embargoed
copies of the Report be made available, in accordance with the
provisions of Standing Order No. 134.
[Adjourned till Tuesday 24 February at 10.00 am
| 
