BECTU briefing Communications Bill: Non-EU ownership

12 March 2003

BECTU briefing on the UK Communications Bill: Non-EU ownership - Clause 340: Disqualification provisions (non EU/EEA ownership)

  1. BECTU strongly opposes the proposal, in Clause 340, to remove the bar on non-EU/EEA ownership of ITV and Channel 5.
  2. We believe this could hand ownership of significant parts of British broadcasting to global, especially American, corporate interests. We believe there is no significant support for this precipitate proposal within the industry. We further believe it will be productive of no significant economic benefits while leading to a clear cultural loss. It is also likely to inflate the already massive audiovisual trade deficit between the UK and US.
  3. American ownership is not synonymous with increased American investment.
    • We believe the motivation for a US company to take an ownership stake in UK broadcasting would be to increase their own profitability by exploiting more of their own programme stocks in the UK market rather than investing significantly in UK original production.
    • Large US-based corporations would be able to bring very significant lobbying pressures on UK regulators to lean in the direction of allowing a more international product mix rather than strong regional and original UK production. They will operate according to corporate and cultural priorities determined outside the UK.
    • There is no convincing evidence whatsoever of any necessity to import US management expertise in order to ensure the future of British broadcasting.
  4. There is absolutely no reciprocity in the sense of an equivalent opportunity for UK companies to take ownership stakes in US broadcasters. In the context of the current GATS negotiations, this would be seen as a huge concession by the UK. In normal trade negotiations, the US would be expected to make an equivalent concession.
  5. We recognise that Joint Committee chaired by Lord Puttnam recommended that there should be no lifting of the restrictions on non-EU/EEA ownership until OFCOM has reviewed the issue and has felt able to support such a move. We acknowledge this as a further indication of the widespread unease about this proposal. However, at the present time we believe the arguments are already clearly weighted against the lifting of restrictions, even without an OFCOM review.
  6. Furthermore, we believe that the requirement on OFCOM - in the event of a change of control of ITV or Channel 5 - to review the affects on regional production, original production and news, is entirely inadequate. This does not prevent undesirable changes of control and merely seeks to deal with problems after the event.
  7. We therefore propose the deletion of that part of the Bill which modifies the disqualification provisions in order to allow non EU/EEA ownership.
Proposed Amendments
Clause 340 (1) (a)
page 295, lines 7 and 8
Delete all
Last updated 17 March 2003