Skip to main content

1-20 of 207 results for subject:Teletext

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

More

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

Clause 3 agreed to, as amended. Clauses 4 to 10 agreed to. Clause 11 agreed to, as amended. Clauses 12 to 14 agreed to. Clause 15 agreed to, as amended. Clauses 16 to 19 agreed to. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clause 20, discussed with new clause 2 (Digital rights to...

Lead member
John Whittingdale
Answering member
Stephanie Peacock
Department
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Type
Debates on bills; Public Bill Committee proceedings
Committee
Media Bill Committee
Date
5 December 2023
House
House of Commons
Type
Unprinted command papers
Date
1 December 2010
House
House of Commons
Type
Public acts
Date
8 April 2010
Reference
CHAP 24 2010
Member
Ben Bradshaw (Labour)
Department
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Type
Government bills
Notes
Royal assent received.
Date
16 March 2010
Reference
Bill 89 2009-10
House
House of Commons

Digital Economy Bill (HL). Lords Committee stage sixth day. Clauses 19 to 30 agreed to, with clauses 19, 20, 21 and 28 agreed to as amended.

Department
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
Type
Committee of the Whole House (HL); Debates on bills
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c223-90
House
House of Lords

231: Clause 21, page 23, leave out lines 5 to 8

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c233
House
House of Lords

My Lords, again, these are probing amendments to clarify Channel 4’s updated remit with regard to film. Clause 21 establishes that Channel 4 must participate in distributing films by means of electronic communications networks. Does this mean that it is compulsory for Channel 4 to invest in streaming films over...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c233-4
House
House of Lords

My Lords, one of the most comfortable factors about speaking for the Government at the Dispatch Box is that one always knows that there will be some noble Lord who knows a great deal more about the issues than one does oneself, speaks with greater authority and is likely to...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c233
House
House of Lords

I thank the noble Lord for his remarks and the noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, for his reassurance that there will be no downgrading. This was a probing amendment. It was not there for any other purpose. There was just one small inconsistency by the Minister. If it is correct to...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c233
House
House of Lords

The noble Baroness is right that that is how Channel 4 operates, but I am trying to emphasise that we are not about the business of changing Channel 4’s position at all. I want to meet the anxiety on the Lib Dem Benches and those of the Official Opposition. That...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c232
House
House of Lords

Before the Minister sits down, I offer some reassurance to the noble Baroness, Lady Bonham-Carter, and give an example to the noble Lord, Lord Howard of Rising, of why the Government are creating a useful situation. I declare an interest as deputy chairman of Channel 4. During the four years...

Member
Lord Puttnam (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c232-3
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I start by reassuring the noble Lord that there is no intention at all of downgrading the quality of programmes for which Channel 4 is responsible. The amendment, which deletes the phrase "taken as a whole", arguably requires all such content to appeal to the tastes and interests...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c231-2
House
House of Lords

Is it the case that the PSB that the new Channel 4 remit is being asked to provide on the non-linear channels can be produced in-house, which goes against the spirit of the whole concept of Channel 4, which is that it is a publishing house that supports independent production...

Member
Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c232
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I hope that I am not suffering under any illusion as regards this being a probing amendment to identify the position relating to C4C and Channel 4. I make the obvious point that C4C can, and already does, provide a wide range of films, on Channel 4 and...

Member
Lord Davies of Oldham (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c234-5
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister. As he said, it is a probing amendment. The point of it is that Channel 4 should be allowed, and not compelled, to show these films. If they are compelled, it may put too great a burden on them. I am not sure whether the Minister...

Member
Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c235
House
House of Lords

229: Clause 19, page 21, line 33, leave out "or a county court"

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c229
House
House of Lords

This is another amendment where I hope I am being helpful in order that something inadvertent does not happen. It was pointed out to me that should there be an appeal and the courts end up taking an interest, the issue will probably have got quite complex and could be...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c230
House
House of Lords

My Lords, as I understand it, the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, is concerned that the instances where the Secretary of State may have to apply to the court for directions are too serious to fall within the jurisdiction of the county court. First, I should point out that the amendment...

Member
Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c230
House
House of Lords

I thank the Minister very much for that extremely comprehensive reply, which answers most of the questions. I see his point about the anomaly; that could be tidied up at Third Reading, should it be necessary. That is exactly what Third Reading is for, and I am sorry we missed...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c230
House
House of Lords

My Lords, I have tabled this terribly simple amendment to help the Minister have more flexibility. As it reads at the moment, should the manager have to go in and sort things out, there is provision for the registry’s directors to be prevented from exercising any of those functions. One...

Member
Earl of Erroll (Crossbench)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
3 February 2010
Reference
717 c229
House
House of Lords