Media Plurality: Communications Committee Report Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Stevenson of Balmacara

Main Page: Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Labour - Life peer)

Media Plurality: Communications Committee Report

Lord Stevenson of Balmacara Excerpts
Wednesday 14th January 2015

(9 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Stevenson of Balmacara Portrait Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, this is a really good report, which deserved a much better response than it received. I hope that the Minister, when he comes to respond, can help fill in the gaps.

There are some things we can agree on: we have a workable definition of media plurality and a definition of the desired outcomes of a plural market. We also agree on the need to centre plurality policy on current affairs and news, and on the need to centre it around the UK, not neglecting local and regional issues, national media and the devolved Administrations. We also agree on the need to take up a platform-neutral approach. But why did the Government not go further with the other recommendations? Why are they not willing to engage with the recommendations of the BBC? Why do they not accept the centrepiece of the committee’s work—the establishment of a statutory periodic review? Why do they not pick up the ground-breaking new relationship proposed for government, Ofcom and the Secretary of State in relation to transactional issues?

The Government simply note the committee’s ground-breaking recommendations on a dual competition and plurality review system. That seems to me to introduce a very unwelcome uncertainty and instability into the market. It is surely not acceptable for a Government to indicate that they are minded to legislate on an issue and then to dither about what they intend to do.