Oral answer to question provided on Tuesday, 28 November 2006 in the House of Lords, by Lord Truscott (Labour).

Television: Sky and ITV

Answer: My Lords, I do not agree. I do not know how other Governments would act but this Government abide by the law as it is set out. Let me explain to the noble Lord, Lord McNally, how it works. An intervention by the Secretary of State is available only if a relevant merger situation for the purposes of the Enterprise Act 2002 has arisen that is relevant to a public interest consideration specified under Section 58 of that Act. It would not be appropriate to comment further on whether those circumstances have been met in this case. That is the law and that is what the Government are abiding by.

This is an answer to the Oral question asked on Tuesday, 28 November 2006 by Lord McNally (Liberal Democrat).

Question: My Lords, the Minister has played a straight bat, as I imagined he would. However, as the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, indicated, the public interest part of the Act was put in, much against the will of the Government and on the insistence of this House, for just this circumstance. The noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, described BSkyB as having, "““pulled off a brilliant stunt””." If we are going to defend our broadcasting ecology, we have to be able to defend it against brilliant stunts, and Ministers have to take their responsibility. So far there is no sign of them taking that responsibility and every sign that they are prepared to hide behind regulators.

Secondary information

Type: Oral answer to question
Reference: 687 c651
Session: 2006-07
Chamber / Committee: House of Lords chamber
Subjects: Competition Sky Public interest Office of Fair Trading Ofcom Sales Shares Unfair practices ITV Network Television companies
Link: View this Oral answer to question on www.publications.parliament.uk