Skip to main content

Broadcasting Act 1990

Volume 228: debated on Monday 12 July 1993

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

3.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to seek to amend the Broadcasting Act 1990.

As the stability of commercial television is now threatened by takeover mania, and as Granada has expressed an interest in taking over London Weekend Television, as has Carlton, and in taking over Central, Yorkshire and Tyne Tees, will the Secretary of State guarantee that there will be no change in the legislation to enable major regional companies to be taken over by national monopolistic conglomerates? Should not people like Jerry Robinson, the tea boy at Granada, concentrate on programme making rather than on pushing up Granada's share price for his personal benefit?

In answer to an earlier question, I paid tribute to the issue of regional quality and to the fact that the legislation is written in such a way that the Independent Television Commission can ensure that that quality is maintained. On the rest of the question, I have made it clear that the issues that we discussed at the meeting with the heads of the Channel 3 companies on 14 June covered a wide agenda. It was a lively but good-natured debate. All aspects of the issue were discussed constructively by all parties.

In any future amendments to the Broadcasting Act 1990, will my right hon. Friend consider introducing provisions to ensure that the Arts Council continues to fund excellent municipal theatres such as the Theatre Royal in Plymouth, which has attracted more people per £1 of grant—

Order. What has this to do with broadcasting? The hon. Gentleman is referring to an earlier question.

In any amendment to the Broadcasting Act, is it possible to include a provision whereby the Arts Council can be made to ensure that it supports mainstream municipal theatres—

Order. I understand the hon. Gentleman's enthusiasm, but I think that we should. now move on.

Does the Secretary of State accept that the fact that the heads of a number of major independent television companies seek to change the fundamental terms of their franchises and the fact that Richard Branson is seeking to alter the waveband on which he has received his franchise throw into question the whole operation of the Broadcasting Act? Is that not a comment on the fact that the legislation is so misguided that it is creating an absolute shambles in the broadcasting industry?

Taking the second premise relating to Virgin Radio and the waveband first, in any negotiation for an exchange of the waveband, it would not be within the gift either of Mr. Branson or of anybody with whom he sought to effect such an exchange to make that exchange. Control over the wavebands remains with the Radio Authority, with which he should therefore treat. The purpose of the meeting on 14 June—at which, I hasten to say, the smaller companies were as interested in being present as the larger companies were—was to discuss a way forward, looking at the larger objective of maintaining the quality and the production base of British television.