Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Bishop of Manchester (Bishops (affiliation)) 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]

I thank the Minister for his response to this debate. I am also grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Clement-Jones and Lord De Mauley, and the noble Baroness, Lady Howe, who made very helpful comments. I welcome the Minister’s assurances about the continued provision for local stations to use the FM band. He said that we had been over this ground several times, but we have done so partly because of the seriousness of the issue and partly, as the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, said later in the debate, because of the need to pin the Government down to get the precise assurance that people need. I am sure that those who run and who listen to these media services will feel encouraged by the general direction in which all this is going. Again, the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, was absolutely right to say—it may have been a parlance, but it is a very good way of saying it—that these people really do need a clear signal from the Government that is very much along the lines of what the Minister has said. Having said that, I suspect that this needs to be repeated and to be made even clearer. As those of us who have the privilege of sitting on the House of Lords Select Committee on Communications know, there is a huge difference between the switchover to digital television—this has indeed gone very smoothly, although it is not without its teething problems—and the digitalisation of radio. It has been made very clear to us in the evidence that we have received that the whole business of the digitalisation of radio is much more complex. While the Government and all the digital facilitators need to be congratulated on what they have done in the switchover to digital television, let us not think that because that went so easily it will be the same for radio. There are some very different and deeper issues that we must look at. That said, I utterly agree with the Minister and all noble Lords who have contributed to the debate that we want to keep up the momentum. We really do want to go along with what the Digital Britain report has said and get ourselves going in the technological direction in which we are set. Unnecessary delays are certainly not welcome. Finally—I think the Minister alluded to this in an earlier debate—there is the issue of manufacturers moving towards products that use a combined station guide, rather as Freeview and satellite television do for television, so that people can choose stations by name, whatever the band they are using. This kind of mixed economy of stations, both analogue and digital, will be the simplest way of getting through the many complexities that are on our path. I am most grateful to the Minister, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 239A withdrawn. Amendment 240 Moved by


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
717 c280-1 
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