DOCSLIB.ORG

Communications Act 2003: Tenth Report on the Secretary of State's

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Communications Act 2003: Tenth Report on the Secretary of State's COMMUNICATIONS ACT 2003 Tenth Report on the Secretary of State’s functions under the Communications Act 2003, the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006, the Office of Communications Act 2002 and the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996, by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport 8 July 2021 HC 290 Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Tenth Report on the Secretary of State’s functions under the Communications Act 2003, the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006, the Office of Communications Act 2002 and the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996, by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport For the period from 29 December 2012 to 28 December 2020 Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 390 of the Communications Act 2003 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 8 July 2021 HC 290 © Crown copyright 2021 2 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official- documents. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected] Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, 100 Parliament Street, London, SW1A 2BQ, United Kingdom ISBN 978-1-5286-2785-6 CCS0621725940 07/21 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office 3 COMMUNICATIONS ACT 2003 Report by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Introduction 1. Section 390 of the Communications Act 2003 requires the Secretary of State to prepare and lay before Parliament reports about the carrying out of the Secretary of State’s functions under the following legislation: The Communications Act 2003; The Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006; The Office of Communications Act 2002; and The Broadcasting Acts 1990 &1996 2. The First Report (HC 325 July 2005) covered the period from 19 March 2002 to 28 December 2004. Every subsequent report to the first report must relate to the period of twelve months beginning with the 4 end of the period to which the previous report related. This report (the “Tenth Report”) covers the period from 29 December 2012 to 28 December 2020. No report has been produced since 2014 which was an oversight, and is now remedied by this report. Previous Reports: First Report July 2005 HC 325 Second Report July 2006 HC 1445 Third Report July 2007 HC 594 Fourth Report Oct 2008 HC 1037 Fifth Report July 2009 HC 911 Sixth Report July 2010 HC 171 Seventh Report Nov 2011 HC 1613 Eight Report Dec 2012 HC 791 Ninth Report February 2014 HC 1057 Tenth Report July 2021 HC 290 5 COMMUNICATIONS ACT 2003: Report by the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Statutory Instruments: Power under which Date made Name of SI number Description of what the instrument does instrument made instrument Broadcasting Act 24 March 2015 Broadcasting Act 2015/904 These regulations amend the Broadcasting Act 1996 (“the Act”) to allow 1996: 1996 (Renewal of Ofcom to further renew local radio multiplex licences. s58A Local Radio Multiplex Regulation 2 amends section 58 of the Act which allows Ofcom to renew Broadcasting Act Licences) local and national radio multiplex licences on one occasion only. The 1990: Regulations 2015 amendment permits a further renewal for local radio multiplex licences s200 only. Regulation 3 inserts a new section 58ZA into the Act which sets out the procedure by which, and conditions under which, a further renewal of a local radio multiplex licence may be made. Communications Act 5 July 2016 Office of 2016/706 This Order increases the maximum membership of the Office of 2002: Communications Communications from ten to twelve. s1(7) (Membership) (Modification) Order 2016 Communications Act 12 February 2013 Community Radio 2013/243 This Order creates a regulatory framework for community radio services in 2003: (Guernsey) Order the Bailiwick of Guernsey, including modifications to the Broadcasting Act s262(1), (3) and (4) 2013 1990 as extended to Guernsey and to the Communications Act 2003. It revokes the Community Radio (Guernsey) Order 2012, in view of an error which took place in the making of that Order. 6 Power under which Date made Name of SI number Description of what the instrument does instrument made instrument Communications Act 5 June 2013 Electronic 2013/1403 Changes to the notice required to be given by Code operators to planning 2003: Communications authorities and landowners prior to the installation of certain types of s109(1) and (3) and Code (Conditions electronic communications apparatus. 402(3) and Restrictions) (Amendment) Regulations 2013 Communications Act 9 July 2014 Communications 2014/1825 This Order extends the circumstances in which information with respect to 2003: Act 2003 a particular business obtained by the Office of Communications in exercise s393(3)(i) and (4)(c) (Disclosure of of its functions under the Communications Act 2003(“the 2003 Act”) and Information) the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006 may be disclosed to another public Order 2014 body. Communications Act 24 November 2014 Broadcasting 2014/3137 This Order amends article 3 of the Broadcasting (Independent 2003: (Independent Productions) Order 1991 which defines “independent productions” for the s277(2)(b) and Productions) purposes of the licence conditions set under sections 277 and 309 of and 309(2)(b) of, and (Amendment) paragraphs 1 and 7 of Schedule 12 to the Communications Act 2003. paragraphs 1(2)(b) Order 2014 and 7(2)(b) of (Schedule 12) Communications Act 26 March 2015 Community Radio 2015/1000 This Order amends the Community Radio Order 2004 to allow community 2003: (Amendment) stations to raise a larger proportion of their funding from taking paid-for s262 and 402(3) of, Order 2015 advertising or sponsorship than previously allowed. It also amends the list and paragraph 11 of of persons who can hold a community radio licence, and updates the Schedule 14 Community Radio Order 2004 following changes made to the Broadcasting Act 1990 by the Digital Economy Act 2010. 7 Power under which Date made Name of SI number Description of what the instrument does instrument made instrument Communications Act 7 September 2015 Competition 2015/1648 The order revoked and replaced the Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) 2003: Appeal Tribunal Rules 2003. The SI removed the requirement for appeals cases to be s15(1) to (3) of, and Rules 2015 decided "on the merits", and instead requires the CAT to apply the same Part 2 of Schedule 4 principles as would be applied by a court on an application for judicial of the Enterprise Act review. Sections 192 of the Communications Act 2003 sets out the right of 2002 and sections appeal against decisions made by Ofcom, and the Secretary of State, 192(3) and (4) and using powers provided by the Communications Act and the Wireless 193(1), (2)(b) and (3) Telegraphy Act 2006. Section 193 of the Communications Act requires that where appeals relate to price control matters, the price control elements be referred by the CAT to the CMA. Communications Act 6 July 2016 Communications 2016/704 This SI amends existing legislation (the Communications Act 2003 and the 2003: (Television Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004) to extend the s365(1) and (4), 368 Licensing) scope of the TV licence so that, as well as for receiving live programmes, and 402, as extended (Amendment) a TV licence is required to stream or download any programmes in an on- by the Regulations 2016 demand programme service provided by the BBC (such as the iPlayer). It Communications also amends how the TV licence fee concessions set out in the 2004 (Jersey) Order 2003, regulations apply in the Isle of Man and to the Bailiwick of Guernsey, with the Broadcasting and the effect to remove the over 75s TV licence concession in the Isle of Man, Communications and to limit its application in the Bailiwick of Guernsey (excluding Sark). (Jersey) Order 2004, the Communications (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Order 2003, the Communications (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Order 2004 and the Communications (Isle of Man) Order 2003 8 Power under which Date made Name of SI number Description of what the instrument does instrument made instrument Communications Act 1 November 2016 Electronic 2016/1049 Made changes to the notice that Code operators are required to give to the 2003: Communications planning authorities and landowners prior to the implementation of certain s109(1) and (3) and Code (Conditions types of electronic communications apparatus. 402(3) and Restrictions) (Amendment) Regulations 2016 Communications Act 28 February 2017 Communications 2017/221 These regulations amend the Communications (Television Licensing) 2003: (Television Regulations 2004 to increase the level of the television licence fee in line s365(1) and (4) and Licensing) with the Consumer Price Index, as was agreed in the 2015 licence fee 402(3)(a) and (c), as (Amendment) funding settlement. The colour television licence is increased from £145.50 extended by the Regulations 2017 to £147, while the black and white television licence increased from £49 to Communications £49.50. (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Order 2003; the Communications (Jersey) Order 2003; the Communications (Isle of Man) Order 2003; the Communications (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Order 2004; the Broadcasting and Communications (Jersey) Order 2004 9 Power under which Date made Name of SI number Description of what the instrument does instrument made instrument Communications Act 12 July 2017 Electronic 2017/753 Amendments to the notice required to be given by Electronic 2003: Communications Communications Code operators to planning authorities prior to the s109(1), (2A), (2B) Code (Conditions installation of certain types of electronic communications apparatus.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Rebels As Local Leaders?
    Rebels as local leaders? The Mayoralties of Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson Compared Ben Worthy Mark Bennister The Mayoralty of London offers a powerful electoral platform but weak powers to lead a city regarded as ‘ungovernable’ (Travers 2004). This paper adapts the criteria of Hambleton and Sweeting (2004) to look at the first two Mayors’ mandate and vision, style of leadership and policies. Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson were both party rebels, mavericks and skilled media operators. However, their differences are key. As mayor, Livingstone had a powerful vision that translated into a set of clear policy aims while Johnson had a weaker more cautious approach shaped by his desire for higher office. Livingstone built coalitions but proved divisive whereas Johnson was remarkably popular. While Livingstone bought experience and skill, Johnson delegated detail to others. Both their mayoralties courted controversy and faced charges of corruption and cronyism. Both mayors used publicity to make up for weak powers. They also found themselves pushed by their powers towards transport and planning while struggling with deeper issues such as housing. In policy terms Livingstone pushed ahead with the radical congestion charge and a series of symbolic policies. Johnson was far more modest, championing cycling and revelling in the 2012 Olympics while avoiding difficult decisions. The two mayors used their office to negotiate but also challenge central government. Livingstone’s Mayoralty was a platform for personalised change-Johnson’s one for personal ambition. Directly Elected Mayors were introduced to provide local leadership, accountability and vision to UK local government. Beginning under New Labour and continued under the Coalition and Conservatives, directly elected mayors were offered initially by referendum, and later imposed, up and down the country beginning with London 2000 and then in 16 cities and towns including Bristol and Liverpool.
    [Show full text]
  • A Supreme Court's Place in the Constitutional Order: Contrasting Recent Experiences in Canada and the United Kingdom
    A Supreme Court's Place in the Constitutional Order: Contrasting Recent Experiences in Canada and the United Kingdom Paul Daly" In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss 5 and 6 that its position at the apex of the judicialsystem was constitutionally entrenched. It did so by interpreting its own history and developing a narrative that emphasized both the critical importance of section 6 in protecting Quebec's distinct interests and legal tradition, and the Court's position as domestic rights protector. The author analyzes this narrativeand argues that the Court'sentrenchment within the Constitution Act, 1982 was not as inevitable 2015 CanLIIDocs 5258 as its reasoning suggests. The article then turns its attention to the newly established United Kingdom Supreme Court and its role pre-and post-adoption of the Human Rights Act 1998. The authorpulls out themes in the Court's recent judgments-which suggest a move awayfrom the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Strasbourg Court and a desire to return to British common law traditions-andan emerging narrativethat resembles that of its Canadiancounterpart. The author then compares the narrativesdeveloped by the two courts to predicthow the United Kingdom Supreme Court might in the future interpret its own role as the guardian of its legal tradition. * Associate Dean and Faculty Secretary, Faculty of Law, University of Montreal. Special thanks to Marie-France Fortin and Matthew Harrington for discussion. I am indebted to the two anonymous reviewers and fear only that my revisions do not do justice to the excellent and thoughtful comments they produced.
    [Show full text]
  • Television and Media Concentration
    •• IRIS Special Edited by the European Audiovisual Observatory TelevisionTelevision andand MediaMedia ConcentrationConcentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level TELEVISION AND MEDIA CONCENTRATION IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2001 ISBN 92-871-4595-4 Director of the Publication: Wolfgang Closs, Executive Director of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Editor and Coordinator: Dr. Susanne Nikoltchev (LL.M. EUI and U of M) Legal Expert of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Partner Organisations that contributed to IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration IViR – Institute of European Media Law EMR – Institute of European Media Law Rokin 84, NL-1012 KX Amsterdam Nell-Breuning-Allee 6, D-66115 Saarbrücken Tel.: +31 (0) 20 525 34 06 Tel.: +49 (0) 681 99275 11 Fax: +31 (0) 20 525 30 33 Fax: +49 (0) 681 99275 12 E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] CMC – Communications Media Center MMLPC – Moscow Media Law and Policy Center New York Law School Mokhovaya 9, 103914 Moscow 57 Worth Street, New York, NY 10013 Russian Federation USA Tel./Fax: +7 (0) 503 737 3371 Tel.: +1 212 431 2160 E-Mail: [email protected] Fax: +1 212 966 2053 [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] Proofreaders: Florence Pastori, Géraldine Pilard-Murray, Candelaria van Strien-Reney Translators: Brigitte Auel, France Courrèges, Christopher
    [Show full text]
  • Shadow Cabinet Meetings with Proprietors, Editors and Senior Media Executives
    Shadow Cabinet Meetings 1 June 2015 – 31 May 2016 Shadow cabinet meetings with proprietors, editors and senior media executives. Andy Burnham MP Shadow Secretary of State’s meetings with proprietors, editors and senior media executives Date Name Location Purpose Nature of relationship* 26/06/2015 Alison Phillips, Editor, Roast, The General Professional Sunday People Floral Hall, discussion London, SE1 Peter Willis, Editor, 1TL Daily Mirror 15/07/2015 Lloyd Embley, Editor in J Sheekey General Professional Chief, Trinity Mirror Restaurant, discussion 28-32 Saint Peter Willis, Editor, Martin's Daily Mirror Court, London WC2N 4AL 16/07/2015 Kath Viner, Editor in King’s Place Guardian daily Professional Chief, Guardian conference 90 York Way meeting London N1 2AP 22/07/2015 Evgeny Lebedev, Private General Professional proprieter, address discussion Independent/Evening Standard 04/08/2015 Lloyd Embley, Editor in Grosvenor General Professional Chief, Trinity Mirror Hotel, 101 discussion Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 0SJ 16/05/2016 Eamonn O’Neal, Manchester General Professional Managing Editor, Evening Manchester Evening News, discussion News Mitchell Henry House, Hollinwood Avenue, Chadderton, Oldham OL9 8EF Other interaction between Shadow Secretary of State and proprietors, editors and senior media executives Date Name Location Purpose Nature of relationship* No such meetings Angela Eagle MP Shadow Secretary of State’s meetings with proprietors, editors and senior media executives Date Name Location Purpose Nature of relationship* No
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Non-Executive Directors of Channel 4 1981–92
    Appendix A: Non-Executive Directors of Channel 4 1981–92 The Rt. Hon. Edmund Dell (Chairman 1981–87) Sir Richard Attenborough (Deputy Chairman 1981–86) (Director 1987) (Chairman 1988–91) George Russell (Deputy Chairman 1 Jan 1987–88) Sir Brian Bailey (1 July 1985–89) (Deputy Chairman 1990) Sir Michael Bishop CBE (Deputy Chairman 1991) (Chairman 1992–) David Plowright (Deputy Chairman 1992–) Lord Blake (1 Sept 1983–87) William Brown (1981–85) Carmen Callil (1 July 1985–90) Jennifer d’Abo (1 April 1986–87) Richard Dunn (1 Jan 1989–90) Greg Dyke (11 April 1988–90) Paul Fox (1 July 1985–87) James Gatward (1 July 1984–89) John Gau (1 July 1984–88) Roger Graef (1981–85) Bert Hardy (1992–) Dr Glyn Tegai Hughes (1983–86) Eleri Wynne Jones (22 Jan 1987–90) Anne Lapping (1 Jan 1989–) Mary McAleese (1992–) David McCall (1981–85) John McGrath (1990–) The Hon. Mrs Sara Morrison (1983–85) Sir David Nicholas CBE (1992–) Anthony Pragnell (1 July 1983–88) Usha Prashar (1991–) Peter Rogers (1982–91) Michael Scott (1 July 1984–87) Anthony Smith (1981–84) Anne Sofer (1981–84) Brian Tesler (1981–85) Professor David Vines (1 Jan 1987–91) Joy Whitby (1981–84) 435 Appendix B: Channel 4 Major Programme Awards 1983–92 British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) 1983: The Snowman – Best Children’s Programme – Drama 1984: Another Audience With Dame Edna – Best Light Entertainment 1987: Channel 4 News – Best News or Outside Broadcast Coverage 1987: The Lowest of the Low – Special Award for Foreign Documentary 1987: Network 7 – Special Award for Originality
    [Show full text]
  • Boris Johnson
    DEC-01/08 REPORT OF AN INVESTIGATION BORIS JOHNSON MAYOR OF LONDON CHAIRMAN, METROPOLITAN POLICE AUTHORITY BY JONATHAN GOOLDEN, BA(LAW) SOLICITOR 24th February 2009 SCHEDULE OF EVIDENCE jonathan goolden SOLICITORS PO Box 117 Louth LN11 0WW Tel 0845 370 3117 Fax 0845 370 3118 [email protected] www.goolden.co.uk regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority 1 This page is intentionally blank 2 Schedule of evidence Page Number Description 5 JTG 1 Letter dated 5th December 2008 from Len Duvall to Fiona Ledden, GLA – complaints against Boris Johnson 8 JTG 2 Biography of Boris Johnson 9 JTG 3 Home Secretary’s statement to the House of Commons on Home Office leaks 28 JTG 4 Times article – 29th November 2008 29 JTG 5 Transcript of London Assembly Plenary – 3rd December 2008 47 JTG 6 House of Commons Home Affairs Committee press announcement of inquiry into policing process of Home Office leak inquiries – 11th December 2008 48 JTG 7 Home Affairs Committee – uncorrected transcript of oral evidence – Rt. Hon. Jacqui Smith MP and Sir David Normington – 20th January 2009 75 JTG 8 Home Affairs Committee – uncorrected transcript of oral evidence – Mr. Boris Johnson – 3rd February 2009 88 JTG 9 Home Affairs Committee – uncorrected transcript of oral evidence – AC Robert Quick – 10th February 2009 120 JTG 10 Statement of Len Duvall – 11th February 2009 3 123 JTG 11 Statement of Catherine Crawford – 13th February 2009 127 JTG 12 First Statement of Guto Harri – 10th February 2009 135 JTG 13 Statement of Sir Paul Stephenson – received 19th February 2009
    [Show full text]
  • THE OFCOM BROADCASTING CODE (With the Cross-Promotion Code and the on Demand Programme Service Rules)
    THE OFCOM BROADCASTING CODE (with the Cross-promotion Code and the On Demand Programme Service Rules) January 2019 The Ofcom Broadcasting Code January 2019 1 (with the Cross-promotion Code and the On Demand Programme Service Rules) Contents Part One: Part Two: Broadcasting Code Cross-promotion Code The Legislative Section Nine: Introduction Background to the Code Commercial References in Television Programming Legislative background to How to use the Code the Code Section Ten: Principles Section One: Commercial Protecting the Under- Communications in Radio Rules Eighteens Programming Guidance Section Two: Appendix 1: Harm and Offence Extracts from Relevant UK General guidance on the Legislation Cross-promotion Code Section Three: Crime, Disorder, Hatred Appendix 2: and Abuse Extracts from the EU Part Three: Audiovisual Media Services On Demand Programme Section Four: Directive Service Rules Religion Appendix 3: Introduction Section Five: European Convention on Due Impartiality and Human Rights Legislative background Due Accuracy and Undue Prominence of Views and Appendix 4: Administrative Rules Opinions Financial Promotions Editorial Rules and Investment Section Six: Recommendations Elections and Referendums Appendix 5: Section Seven: Extracts from BBC Charter Fairness and Agreement Section Eight: The Ofcom Broadcasting Privacy Code Index 2 Part One: Broadcasting Code The Legislative Background to the Code1 Ofcom is required under the Communications Act 2003 (as amended) (“the Act”) and the Broadcasting Act 1996 (as amended) (“the 1996 Act”) to draw up a code for television and radio, covering standards in programmes, sponsorship, product placement in television programmes, fairness and privacy. This Code is to be known as the Ofcom Broadcasting Code (“the Code”).
    [Show full text]
  • An Opportunity Lost: the United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 49 Issue 3 Article 4 4-1997 An Opportunity Lost: The United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law Douglas W. Vick University of Stirling Linda Macpherson Heriot-Watt University Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the European Law Commons Recommended Citation Vick, Douglas W. and Macpherson, Linda (1997) "An Opportunity Lost: The United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 49 : Iss. 3 , Article 4. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol49/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. An Opportunity Lost: The United Kingdom's Failed Reform of Defamation Law Douglas W. Vick* Linda Macpherson** INTRODUCTION ..................................... 621 I. BACKGROUND OF THE ACT ....................... 624 I. THE DEFAMATION ACT 1996 ...................... 629 A. The New Defenses ......................... 630 B. The ProceduralReforms ..................... 636 C. Waiving ParliamentaryPrivilege ............... 643 III. AN OPPORTUNITY LOST ......................... 646 CONCLUSION ....................................... 652 INTRODUCTION The law of defamation in the United Kingdom remains
    [Show full text]
  • The Mayoralties of Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Birkbeck Institutional Research Online Rebels Leading London: The Mayoralties of Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson Compared This article compares the mayoralties of the first two directly elected Mayors of London, Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson. The position offers a commanding electoral platform, but weak powers to lead a city regarded as ‘ungovernable’ (Travers 2004).The two mayors had some obvious points of comparison: both were party rebels, mavericks and skilled media operators. Both also used publicity to make up for weak powers, but courted controversy and faced charges of corruption and cronyism. Utilising Hambleton and Sweeting (2004), this article compares their mayoralties in terms of vision, leadership style and policies. Livingstone had a powerful vision that translated into clear policy aims while Johnson was more cautious, shaped by a desire for higher office. In terms of style, Livingstone built coalitions but proved divisive whereas Johnson retained remarkable levels of popularity. Where Livingstone bought experience and skill, Johnson delegated. In policy terms, the two mayors found themselves pushed by their institutional powers towards transport and planning while struggling with deeper issues such as housing. Livingstone introduced the radical congestion charge and a series of symbolic policies. Johnson was far more modest – championing cycling, the 2012 Olympics and avoiding difficult decisions. The two used their office to negotiate, but also challenge, central government. Livingstone’s rebel mayoralty was a platform for personalised change, Johnson’s one for personal ambition. Keywords: Mayors, political leadership, London, comparative, Boris Johnson, Ken Livingstone 1 Directly-elected mayors were introduced to bring new leadership, accountability and vision to English local government.
    [Show full text]
  • The Broadcasting Act 1990 (Jersey) (No
    Status: This is the original version (as it was originally made). This item of legislation is currently only available in its original format. STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 1991 No. 1710 BROADCASTING The Broadcasting Act 1990 (Jersey) (No. 2) Order 1991 Made - - - - 24th July 1991 Coming into force - - 1st August 1991 At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 24th day of July 1991 Present, The Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty in Council Her Majesty, in exercise of the powers conferred upon Her by sections 174 and 204(6) of the Broadcasting Act 1990(1), is pleased, by and with the advice of Her Privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered, as follows: 1. This Order may be cited as the Broadcasting Act 1990 (Jersey) (No. 2) Order 1991 and shall come into force on 1st August 1991. 2. In this Order “Jersey” means the Bailiwick of Jersey. 3.—(1) The following provisions of the Broadcasting Act 1990 shall extend, with the modifications specified in the Schedule to this Order, to Jersey— (a) in Part I (independent television services), sections 1 to 13, 23 to 35, 37 to 45, 48 to 55, 65 and 67 to 71; (b) Part III (independent radio services), except Chapter III; (c) Part V (Broadcasting Complaints Commission), except section 149; (d) Part VI (Broadcasting Standards Council); (e) Part VIII (provisions relating to wireless telegraphy), except section 174; (f) in Part X (miscellaneous and general), sections 177, 178, 181, 182, 185, 186, 195 to 197, 199, 201 and 203; and (g) Schedules 1 to 3, 5, 7, 8, 13, 14, 16 and 21.
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcasting Committee
    Broadcasting Committee Alun Davies Chair Mid and West Wales Peter Black Paul Davies South Wales West Preseli Pembrokeshire Nerys Evans Mid and West Wales Contents Section Page Number Chair’s Foreword 1 Executive Summary 2 1 Introduction 3 2 Legislative Framework 4 3 Background 9 4 Key Issues 48 5 Recommendations 69 Annex 1 Schedule of Witnesses 74 Annex 2 Schedule of Committee Papers 77 Annex 3 Respondents to the Call for Written Evidence 78 Annex 4 Glossary 79 Chair’s Foreword The Committee was established in March 2008 and asked to report before the end of the summer term. I am very pleased with what we have achieved in the short time allowed. We have received evidence from all the key players in public service broadcasting in Wales and the United Kingdom. We have engaged in lively debate with senior executives from the world of television and radio. We have also held very constructive discussions with members of the Welsh Affairs Committee and the Scottish Broadcasting Commission. Broadcasting has a place in the Welsh political psyche that goes far beyond its relative importance. The place of the Welsh language and the role of the broadcast media in fostering and defining a sense of national identity in a country that lacks a national press and whose geography mitigates against easy communications leads to a political salience that is wholly different from any other part of the United Kingdom. Over the past five years, there has been a revolution in the way that we access broadcast media. The growth of digital television and the deeper penetration of broadband internet, together with developing mobile phone technology, has increased viewing and listening opportunities dramatically; not only in the range of content available but also in the choices of where, when and how we want to watch or listen.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of the Evolution of Make/Buy Contracting for Uk Independent Television
    A STUDY OF THE EVOLUTION OF MAKE/BUY CONTRACTING FOR UK INDEPENDENT TELEVISION (ITV): 1954-2001 Lynne Nikolychuk Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirement of The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Interdisciplinary Institute of Management London School of Economics and Political Science August 2005 UMI Number: U214955 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U214955 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 VjS*. F 5 0 1 « 1 - U- PREFACE The establishment of UK Commercial television and the ongoing programme supply make/buy arrangements of its main terrestrial operator ITV (Independent Television) has been studied as part of a broader social and business history pertaining to the emergence and development of both commercial and public service UK television broadcasting. Briggs (1970, 1995), Briggs and Spicer (1986), Briggs and Burke (2002) provide illuminating, general accounts of how socio-political concerns have interacted with economic interests in this industry. Descriptive accounts from industry insiders (Potter 1989,1990; Sendall 1982,1983) and others (Bonner & Aston 1998) richly supplement these academic business histories.
    [Show full text]