House of Lords Official Report

Vol. 730 Monday No. 201 10 October 2011 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT ORDER OF BUSINESS Questions Media: Ownership Economy: Tourism Banking: Quantitative Easing Death Penalty Business of the House Motion on Standing Orders Live Music Bill [HL] Report Armed Forces Bill Third Reading Localism Bill Report (5th Day) Grand Committee Welfare Reform Bill Committee (3rd Day) Written Statements Written Answers For column numbers see back page £3·50 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. The bound volumes also will be sent to those Peers who similarly notify their wish to receive them. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/index/111010.html PRICES AND SUBSCRIPTION RATES DAILY PARTS Single copies: Commons, £5; Lords £3·50 Annual subscriptions: Commons, £865; Lords £525 WEEKLY HANSARD Single copies: Commons, £12; Lords £6 Annual subscriptions: Commons, £440; Lords £255 Index: Annual subscriptions: Commons, £125; Lords, £65. LORDS VOLUME INDEX obtainable on standing order only. Details available on request. BOUND VOLUMES OF DEBATES are issued periodically during the session. Single copies: Commons, £105; Lords, £40. Standing orders will be accepted. THE INDEX to each Bound Volume of House of Commons Debates is published separately at £9·00 and can be supplied to standing order. All prices are inclusive of postage. © Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2011, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through The National Archives website at www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/our-services/parliamentary-licence-information.htm Enquiries to The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU; email: [email protected] 1315 Media: Ownership[10 OCTOBER 2011] Media: Ownership 1316 what she asked. The point was made by Ofcom that House of Lords media plurality public interest tests can be triggered only by merger and therefore do not cover growth, Monday, 10 October 2011. which is the area that she was talking about. 2.30 pm Lord Ryder of Wensum: My Lords, in view of the fact that the ownership of websites has been excluded Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Wakefield. from previous legislation, what steps have the Government taken, and will they be taking, to rectify this serious Media: Ownership oversight? Question Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, my noble friend 2.36 pm Lord Ryder asks a fascinating and important question. In determining the appropriate size of media ownership, Asked By Lord Fowler we will be considering the extent to which websites To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they should be included. The current rules are outdated have plans for changing the media ownership rules and do not even acknowledge the existence of websites, in the United Kingdom. yet websites could conceivably have an important role in controlling access to new sources and have implications Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, we need a full and for plurality. That is why the Secretary of State has thorough consideration of all aspects of media ownership asked Ofcom to look into this matter, and we will legislation. The Secretary of State has asked Ofcom to consider carefully the recommendations that Lord examine what are the best options for measuring media Justice Leveson makes in this area. plurality and to recommend the appropriate approach. We will of course be taking into account the Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve: My Lords, will the recommendations of the Leveson inquiry before any noble Baroness tell the House whether, in considering final decision is taken on media ownership. issues of plurality, the Government will also consider issues of diversity, as these are not the same? Plurality does not always guarantee diversity, which is what Lord Fowler: I thank my noble friend for that reply, citizens need. but is it not the case that too often in the past decisions on media ownership have been influenced by political Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, plurality in the context considerations? Given that, does my noble friend agree of media ownership refers to the number of owners that it is totally wrong that, as at present, politicians and size of ownership of different media outlets and should have the final say on who owns the media, and does not cover diversity, as the noble Baroness mentioned. that if we want to prevent too much power resting in I am sure all noble Lords agree that a healthy democracy the hands of one company that system should be needs correct information, and, in general, to be able changed—and changed as quickly as possible? to participate effectively in a political process, access is needed to all sides of the debate. However, this is Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, I would like to be unlikely to happen if the media are under the control able to give a more positive answer to my noble friend of a too tightly restricted number of owners. Lord Fowler but, as he and many noble Lords know only too well, we are at present having sensitive discussions. Lord Kinnock: My Lords, as the monopoly of opinion He is aware, too, that there is new legislation in the is the most fearful of all monopolies, is it not the case pipeline and we will be receiving a new communications that the accretion of power in the media should at Bill during this Parliament. However, I agree with least be subject to the same tests of competition as all him, as does the Secretary of State, that too much other forms of enterprise? political consideration has been taken, and as a result the Secretary of State said on 14 September at the Baroness Rawlings: The noble Lord, Lord Kinnock, Royal Television Society conference that he was looking makes a very valid point. In most cases, competition at whether we should have the same approach for rules will prevent unacceptable levels of media media plurality law as we do for competition law. It concentration. However, there is no guarantee of that, could be better for these decisions not to be taken by because competition rules address only the abuse of politicians, as my noble friend so rightly said, and we market power. It is possible for an organisation to are exploring this option. These are early days and no have a very large share of the market but not abuse its decisions have been taken. As I said, we will consider position for unfair competitive advantage. This would the recommendations on this. be acceptable in competition terms but it could still cause very real worries from the point of view of Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, why have media influence, as the noble Lord said. Her Majesty’s Government refused to use Section 58(4) of the Enterprise Act to fill the gaps that were Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury: My Lords, I clearly identified during the BSkyB bid? have just come from sitting on the Joint Committee on Privacy and Injunctions. Can the Minister reassure the Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, I am afraid that I House that the furore over the behaviour of certain cannot remember which section the noble and learned sections of the Murdoch press will not result in a Baroness was talking about, but we are fully aware of detrimental encroachment on press freedom? We do 1317 Media: Ownership[LORDS] Economy: Tourism 1318 [BARONESS BONHAM-CARTER OF YARNBURY] that tourism is the probably the number one industry not want hacking, but we do not want our press not in more parliamentary constituencies than any other being able to investigate. Perhaps I may remind noble private sector industry? Lords that it was not politicians or the police but the Guardian newspaper that exposed the hacking scandal. Baroness Garden of Frognal: Certainly my Lords. Visit Britain has created the You’re Invited programme Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, if there is a renewed to showcase Britain to the world and to attract more bid, it will have to be looked at on its merits. As with overseas visitors, and that is backed by a £100 million any other bid, on another occasion it could be possible marketing fund, funded by the Government and the to include additional grounds for intervention, such as private sector. Certainly that will be used to make the a genuine commitment to broadcasting standards. most of the international interest in the royal wedding, However, we are not proposing to frame legislation and to build on that for the major events, marketing with the aim of blocking any specific deal. If or when and PR activity that will focus on the diamond jubilee we come forward with proposals, they will have to celebrations as well as the London Games themselves. protect plurality in all circumstances. As regards the noble Lord’s second question, tourism is vital to the nation, but in particular parts of the Baroness Jones of Whitchurch: My Lords, does the country it is a major form of employment. Minister agree that, in the light of all that has occurred, it would be unwise for the Prime Minister or the Lord Harrison: Will the Government acknowledge Secretary of State to meet members of the Murdoch that inward tourism is the major export industry, and family privately? Can she give an assurance that it is a successful one, in the United Kingdom? When will now the policy that any such meetings will be attended the Government get rid of the pernicious air passenger by civil servants and properly minuted? duty which so inhibits visitors coming to this country and spending their money here? Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, I am sure that the noble Baroness knows that no meetings are allowed to Baroness Garden of Frognal: My Lords, we constantly take place without civil servants being present.

Load more