Emily Thornberry MP
ITV News Programming
Mr. Eric Joyce (Falkirk, West) (Lab): The Scottish Media Group—SMG—is a highly successful independent media group, which is headquartered in Glasgow, but represented across Scotland. For my constituents, the assets most associated with the company are Scottish Television and Grampian Television. However, SMG is also well known for owning the Virgin Radio, Pearl & Dean and Primesite brands.
SMG has been on its own news recently for a couple of reasons; first, because of an active attempt by other interests to purchase Virgin Radio against the wishes of the present board—something that, if successful, some commentators have suggested would precipitate the break-up of SMG as a whole. Such a development might have implications for the quality of independent production and broadcasting, including news broadcasting, in Scotland. I shall briefly mention that later. However, my main purpose today is to deal with the main reason why SMG has been in its own and other broadcasters' news—the group's proposals to opt out of the main UK ITN news bulletin at 22.30, and instead produce a Scottish bulletin to go out on terrestrial television at the same time as the UK version.
The Minister's locus in all this is, as the House will be aware, that public sector service broadcasting obligations are regulated by Ofcom, and it is for my right hon. Friend to set the framework of that regulation. Ofcom exists under the Communications Act 2003 to ensure that the market delivers the right outcomes. The role of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport is to ensure that the 2003 Act continues to reflect the Government's intended policy.
Decisions taken by Ofcom, therefore, must be fully independent of the Government, but over time, it is for the DCMS to decide whether the pattern of Ofcom's decisions is in line not only with current regulation, but with what was intended in the current legislation. In addressing this issue, I am neither calling on the Minister to intervene in an area that is Ofcom's preserve, nor to legislate in any way. My intention is simply to ask for an assurance that the Minister and the Department will take account of the processes that are now under way when, in future, consideration is given to whether the legislation should be amended.
I want to set out the context of the SMG proposals and raise some of their implications for Scotland as a whole. At present, the ITN news bulletin at 22.30, which is fronted by Sir Trevor McDonald, is as much of an institution in Scotland as across the rest of the UK. The main bulletin is augmented by regional programmes, which are different for the two stations: Scottish Television, which covers central Scotland, and Grampian, which covers the highlands. Anyone lucky enough to live in Perth, where I grew up, has a dizzying array of two stations to flip between—a forerunner, I suppose, albeit fairly modest, of today's digital options.
As I understand it, ITN is the nominated news provider and is contracted to provide a main news bulletin service, which is networked across the independent stations in much the same way as BSkyB is currently contracted to provide the Channel 5 service. I have spoken to colleagues about their constituents' perspectives on the UK-wide bulletin, and on the whole, people seem to have a broadly positive impression across the UK.
The content of main ITN news bulletins is, of course, a mixture of international and national news stories. As hon. Members know, regional news programmes carrying regional stories augment the main ITN bulletin for each regional licence-holding station. The judgment on what kind of story, and how big a story, gets into the national bulletin, is, of course, an editorial one. However, in general, it is fair to say that, while regional bulletins will run follow-on stories if a nationally covered story happens locally, much of the regional content consists of stories of interest mainly—or only—to those who live in the local area.
I said earlier that people across the country have a similarly positive view of the main ITN bulletin, and that is true of the regional programme, too. Although that is true in Scotland, the implications of the mix of regional and national are different from those in the English regions, because of devolution. People in the English regions watch regional bulletins primarily because they are interested in what is going on at local level. However, they are less likely to see international and major news and current affairs through the prism of their localised regional identity.
Following devolution, with many important powers devolved to Edinburgh, things are different in Scotland. Indeed, in Scotland, Scotland is not generally considered to be a region, but a nation. That can be a little confusing because it is not, of course, sovereign. However, far from the small minority of the nationalist persuasion, many people view themselves as part of two nations: Scotland and, from a sovereign point of view, the UK. That means that there is greater likelihood today than heretofore that people will look out at the rest of the UK through a different lens than they did before 1999, when devolution was delivered by this Labour Government.
News and current affairs debates in Scotland, just like those about deeper matters of arts and culture, tend to take place along a continuum. At one end, people see everything through the prism of a Scottish identity, and at the other from a UK identity to the exclusion of the Scottish dimension. Some might consider those extreme manifestations of nationalism on one hand and unionism on the other, but the fact is that when considering such issues Scots tend to sit somewhere between the two, striking a good balance.
Devolution saw the Scottish Parliament take up many of the political issues that from a news bulletin point of view seem closer on a day-to-day, week-to-week and month-to-month basis to the lives of Scots. News and current affairs in Scotland have had to evolve to fit the new political ecology. That has meant, for example, a transfer of news gathering and reporting resources from Westminster to Edinburgh, although it should be said that new resources have been deployed and there has been significant growth in the amount of political news reporting in Scotland, in all types of the media but particularly on television.
On the whole, technical standards of news gathering and reporting, and all the associated skills of editing, producing and so on, are of a pretty high standard in Scotland. There is a thriving media community and there is a considerable focus in political stories on areas of policy that have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament.
In addition to legislative devolution and the new configuration of news professionals on the ground, the news agenda in Scotland has been greatly influenced by the creation of many jobs that interface with and inform it. Many of those new jobs are to be found in non-governmental organisations, non-departmental public bodies and of course the voluntary and private sectors. Those organisations have oftentimes up-scaled their Scottish media-orientated operations as a response to devolution. That has tended to create a culture in which people are more likely on a host of domestic issues to look in the first instance for a Scottish rather than a UK perspective.
At one level, that can be technically very straightforward. For example, debate and development of secondary school curriculums will be conducted on the basis that people are primarily interested in what is going on in Scotland. In the past short while, there has been a great deal of debate about the Tomlinson review, which covered England, but the reportage on the UK bulletins did not always reflect the fact that that had direct implications only for England. Of course, the review will have indirect implications for Scotland, because we hope to share best practice in all professional spheres.
Against that background, SMG has made a series of proposals. The proposals take into account the fact that some issues in Scotland are not always best covered through a UK lens. It is a moot point whether we can change the way that the bulletins are produced and edited at a UK level so that they are more sensitive. To be honest, that has been the case for some time. However, they cannot always be exactly right; the flavour and tastes will be different, and there is something to be said for proposals that might lead to a greater sensitivity in news values. SMG says that its proposals would produce the benefit that UK bulletin stories that are essentially English could be replaced altogether, or in some cases qualified. So, if there were a 22.30 opt-out bulletin, some stories would not run in Scotland. Other stories would run in Scotland and have their terminology altered.
The tailoring that SMG proposes in opting out of the 22.30 bulletin and producing its own version would apply also to the next level, and Scottish regional programmes would be produced. Scottish Media Group once owned Scottish Radio Holdings, and thus local radio stations across Scotland. Tailoring of a locally produced Scottish bulletin could broadly reflect the regions, including Edinburgh, Tayside and Grampian.
My understanding is that Ofcom takes a generally benign view of the proposals to have a greater degree of local variation and to opt out of the 22.30 news—although it would still be edited in London, it would be produced and delivered in Scotland. In principle, I regard the proposals as positive. SMG has a strong track record in news and current affairs production. Any misjudgments regarding the purpose or the operation of a new news configuration would probably result in a loss of revenue as fewer viewers switched on and advertising revenue fell. My main concern is to ensure that, as with the BBC Scotland proposals, quality is at the centre of the equation.
Let me briefly describe the BBC's proposals for the "Scottish six"—the 6 o'clock news. There was a great deal of debate in Scotland about whether Scotland should have its own 6 o'clock bulletin and opt out of the UK one. On one side, people argued that to opt out would be to yield to a nationalist perspective; on the other, people said that the standard UK bulletin could be seen as unyielding in the context of devolution. In the end, BBC Scotland decided not to opt out, but its decision was based on resources: it thought that an excessive amount of resources in Scotland would be required to deliver a bulletin of the same quality. Quality was the key variable, and I generally agree with the decision.
Angus Robertson (Moray) (SNP): I am following the hon. Gentleman's argument with close interest, as one who used to report for the BBC and is keen to see the best news agenda delivered to all viewers, regardless of where they live. Is he saying that, in principle, if there were no technical objection and no financial impediment and if Ofcom and the BBC agreed that all bulletins could be produced with Scottish viewers in mind and with the right news order for Scottish viewers' interests, all bulletins in Scotland should be assembled in that way for both the ITV network and the BBC?
Mr. Joyce: That is a perfectly reasonable comment. In my view, such decisions are for professionals to take—the judgment is an editorial one. I am not hung up on the precise configuration. What I want is the right kind of service to be provided to my constituents. BBC Scotland's decision was essentially correct, but ultimately it was an editorial judgment made by the experts in the field, not a political judgment.
I shall not attempt a comprehensive definition of quality. Suffice it to say that it should cover the standards of news gathering and reporting, as well as some sense of perspective. If an unintelligent approach were taken to changing the configuration, some vested interests might, in particular political contexts, take advantage. Quality must be safeguarded; it sits at the heart of the issue.
As a commercial organisation, SMG must square its obligations to produce quality news programming with its obligations to its shareholders. It may well be that in discussions with Ofcom about licence renewal, SMG will seek to acquire additional resources or to recoup some of its losses—the costs will increase considerably—through negotiation of the price of the renewal. I do not know what position Ofcom will take in that respect. I have an open mind. I realise that Ofcom has to be even-handed across the network, but I believe that SMG should be given a chance to put its case. Public money—or, if the price is lowered, public money forgone—is involved, but if SMG makes creative proposals, which I believe are worth examination, albeit with some caution, there should be the possibility of Ofcom considering the price of renewal. I believe that there are other devices that could help to establish a new system, but it is technically possible for Ofcom to accept a lower price for the licence.
My final point is not tangential—I am sure that you would call me to order if it were, Mr. Deputy Speaker—as it concerns output in Scotland. SMG faces a hostile bid for one of its important assets, and some people are concerned that a successful takeover of Virgin Radio by a single interest could precipitate the break-up of SMG. SMG stations deliver about five and a half hours of news output every week, which is well above the average. In England, it appears that news output will be reduced, which would be a pity. SMG, however, is committed to maintaining its output. It is not for politicians to make unnecessary interventions in the market, but I would like to be confident that if SMG were broken up—I do not think that that will happen soon—the new owner would maintain the obligation to produce a high news output in Scotland. There is great appetite in Scotland for news, not least because of devolution. That is a positive development, and I hope that whether or not the SMG empire stays together—conflicting views on the issue are expressed in the financial press every day—total news output across Scotland will remain the same.
Much of this is initially in the domain of Ofcom, but it is for the Minister for the Arts and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to watch what happens carefully to see if there are dysfunctions resulting in undesirable outcomes for people across Scotland and the country. Such things should be taken into account when legislation is introduced. I should therefore be grateful for an assurance from the Minister that notice will duly be taken of the matters that I have raised.
Click here for Hansard
