Proceeding contribution from Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 3 February 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].
Digital Economy Bill [HL]
My Lords, the purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the introduction of new arrangements for independent news in the nations and regions proceeds in a spirit of partnership and agreement between the Government, the regulator, and Channel 3 licensees. That has been the way in which the policy has been developed so far, and the way in which the arrangements for the independently-financed news consortia pilots, due to start in April, are proceeding. The programmes that emerge from these independent news consortia will be shown on the Channel 3 network. Should funding become available to support their full rollout across England, Scotland and Wales, we would hope that the process for establishing these services continues to involve the agreement and support of the relevant ITV Channel 3 licensees. I have always understood that that was the purpose, and intent, of the Government’s policy—not to force IFNCs on ITV and STV, but to make them available on the basis that there was no longer sufficient value in the Channel 3 licensees to support the existing nations and regions news services. As currently drafted, however, Clause 28 does not fully capture that intent. It would instead entitle Ofcom to select an appointed independent news provider and to impose that provider on an existing Channel 3 licensee. This is despite the fact that the licensed broadcaster would continue to carry all the statutory obligations and the necessary compliance risk for the continuing provision of the service, including legal and technical risks. There is also the matter of editorial control. Channel 3 has to protect its brand and to keep its audience. When ITV commissions a programme from an independent production company, it is an ITV executive who has the final say in what is broadcast. This must be so with the news programmes that it carries as well. It is therefore only right that decisions on the approach and implementation of the IFNC schemes should continue to involve broadcasters and proceed only on an agreed basis. My amendment is designed to encourage the continuation of such a collaborative approach. I hope that, in responding to what I have said, the Government will undertake to give further consideration to the current drafting of Clause 28, and look to revise it to take account of the points that I have raised. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 717 c252
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Children BBC Broadcasting Computer networks Broadcasting programmes Commercial broadcasting Channel Four Television Communication Digital technology Hearing impairment Finance Fees and charges EU law Film Equipment Internet Journalism Motor vehicles Public appointments Older people Recycling Political impartiality Public service broadcasting Ofcom Radio frequencies Radio Local broadcasting Visual impairment Registration Road traffic Waste disposal Television channels Satellite broadcasting Teletext Channel Three Digital switchover help scheme Global navigation satellite systems Television licences
- Legislation
- Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:39:29 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_619040
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_619040
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_619040