Public Service Broadcasting (Communications and Digital Committee Report) — House of Lords, 2021-05-27
Topic: Technology
Brinley Davies (Labour, Centre-left): My Lords, I welcome the report and endorse strongly its central conclusion, as expressed in its title, Public Service Broadcasting: As Vital as Ever. The report is comprehensive, dealing with the whole range of public service broadcasting in the context of what is referred to as the broadcasting market. I will focus on its application to the BBC and its independence Paragraph 184 of the report says that: "The BBC has a unique funding model based on the licence fee which is intended to safeguard its independence from the Government and the market." That is independence from, first, the Government, and, secondly, the market. As far as the market is concerned, I see a glimmer of hope in the Government’s response. In paragraph 2 of the response we read that: "The Government expects public service broadcasters to deliver high-quality, distinctive content for all audiences and licence fee payers across the UK. This is important in order to deliver … the wider objectives of PSB … In many cases this content would be underprovided or not provided at all by an unregulated market." So we are agreed that there is significant market failure that has to be addressed by public service broadcasters, although it would be good to hear from the Minister that this is still the Government’s view over a year later The news about independence from the Government is not so welcome. The BBC charter says in section 3, on the independence of the BBC: "The BBC must be independent in all matters concerning the fulfilment of its Mission and the promotion of the Public Purposes, particularly as regards editorial and creative decisions, the times and manner in which its output and services are supplied, and in the management of its affairs." The important words there, which are particularly apposite at the moment, are those in the reference to "editorial and creative decisions". You do not get to pick and choose what is meant by being independent; it is absolute. I would argue that the BBC’s independence extends to its ability to make its own mistakes This is certainly the position until the review of the charter in 2027. But what we now have is the introduction of the mid-term review of the charter, which has to be completed by 2024 and which is, in effect, being employed as a threat to the BBC’s independence. There was some indication of this in the Government’s formal response to the report, going back to February last year. Paragraph 21 says: "The Government believes that the Charter mid-term review, due to take place by the end of 2024, is the appropriate milestone to consider whether the current regulatory arrangements for the BBC are working effectively and whether any reforms are necessary." That was uncomfortable enough, but now we have Oliver Dowden’s recent tweet: "Lord Dyson’s report reveals damning failings at the heart of the BBC. We will now reflect on Lord Dyson’s thorough report and consider whether further governance reforms at the BBC are needed in the mid-term Charter review." Let us look at section 57 of the charter, which deals with the mid-term review. It says that "The Secretary of State may undertake a mid-term review", and that "The Secretary of State must determine the scope and terms of reference" So there is much power in the hands of the Secretary of State, without, it should be noted, any requirement for public consultation. Subsection (5) goes on to say that "The review must not consider … the Mission of the BBC … the Public Purposes of the BBC; or … the licence fee funding model of the BBC for the period of this Charter." If you analyse that, and compare it to what is said in the charter, it is quite clear that the BBC’s role as a public service broadcaster is not up for review in the mid-term review. That is outside its terms, so why does the Secretary of State refer to it in his original comments on the report and again in his recent tweet It is important to note, therefore, that Lord Dyson’s report covered events only up to 17 April 1996. Since then, the present Government have significantly changed the BBC’s governance in the charter that commenced in 2016. So the Secretary of State’s tweet should have said, "Lord Dyson’s report reveals damning failings at the heart of the BBC more than 25 years ago, since when we, the Government, have made changes in its governance." The tweet from the Secretary of State was totally out of order, a clear threat to the BBC’s independence and outside the terms of the objectives of a public service broadcaster.