|
Column Number: 779
Standing Committee E
Tuesday 28 January 2003
(Afternoon)
[Mr. Roger Gale in the Chair]
Clause 307
OFCOM's standards code
Amendment proposed [this day]: No. 604, in
2.30 pm
Question again proposed, That the amendment be made.
The Chairman: I remind the Committee that with this we are taking the following:
Amendment No. 605, in
clause 307, page 266, line 10, at end insert—
'(6A) Standards set to secure the standards objective specified in subsection 2(k) shall, in particular, contain provisions designed to ensure that nothing shall directly or indirectly prevent, limit or restrict programme service providers from including in programmes material which—
(a) informs viewers and listeners of the benefits to the public from the National Lottery;
(b) informs viewers and listeners about the National Lottery and the features of licensed lotteries;
(c) educates viewers and listeners on how to participate in licensed lotteries;
(d) promotes the National Lottery and licensed lotteries.
(6B) In this section and section 312 ''National Lottery'' shall be as defined in section 1 of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993 and ''licensed lotteries'' means those lotteries licensed by the National Lottery Commission pursuant to section 6 of that Act.'.
Amendment No. 606, in
Brian White (Milton Keynes, North-East): This morning, the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley) outlined the reasons for moving the amendment and highlighted several of the current problems. If one looks at overseas lotteries as they develop, the relationship between ticket sales and the television show becomes more important. Such synergies are critical to why we tabled the amendment.
The hon. Gentleman outlined several restrictions and I am sure that the Minister will address them. If we do not get the suggested changes to the code, there will be a problem future-proofing the way in which the national lottery moves forward. As interactive programmes and channels such as Avago TV come online, which will take betting and entertainment forward, the national lottery's unique position must be further emphasised, which is one of the reasons why we tabled the amendment. Ofcom is the right body to resolve that and the code is the right way to do it. If we
Column Number: 780
are to get the content position right, including the national lottery in the Bill is the right way forward.
When we spoke to representatives of the national lottery about its experiences and experiences overseas, one of the places that they referred us to was California, where the lottery is called ''The Big Spin''. I am not sure whether it was helpful to suggest that politicians follow that example.
Mr. Richard Allan (Sheffield, Hallam): The Liberal Democrats support the amendments that relate to the national lottery. There should be a distinction between the status of the national lottery, which was set up by statute and raises money for charities and other good causes, and that of other organisations. People have attempted to set up similar operations with more or less success, and I understand that gaming law addresses that. It is important that we do not end up with a situation in which all similar ventures are treated equally because the national lottery is a first among equals that is different from the rest because of its statutory base. Other people may set up lotteries for perfectly good causes and we may wish to support them, but they should not have the same status as a national lottery that was set up by statute. It is helpful to consider amendments that would ensure that the distinction is clear.
Mr. John Greenway (Ryedale): One of the few things on which the Minister and Conservative Members would be absolutely certain to agree is the importance of protecting and boosting the national lottery's fortunes. Given that, I am sure that, like us, he will be sympathetic to the amendments' objectives, and we look forward to hearing whether he thinks that the changes are needed.
There are two issues to consider, although they are slightly contradictory. First, no member of the Committee would want to pass primary legislation to prevent future television-programme-style promotions of the national lottery that would play a role in maintaining the lottery's income base and the stream of money for good causes. I am satisfied by Camelot's arguments that the BBC and the ITV arrangements at present create problems in that regard. The Government have an opportunity to make a change.
The slightly contradictory caveat is that there is also no doubt that the rest of the gambling industry deserves some recognition of the fact that the lottery already has a substantial advantage in promotion. On balance, however, we would favour ensuring that the legislation does not prohibit or restrict Camelot—or any future lottery operator, because we are looking many years ahead with the legislation—from taking new initiatives through the medium of television. That is particularly important if we consider the development of the multi-channel digital age, in which it may be possible for people to play the lottery on an interactive basis through their digital television receivers.
I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire, who moved the amendment, will feel that those on his Front Bench generally support him. We in the Conservative party are very proud of having
Column Number: 781
created the lottery, and we wish it every success in the future.
The Minister for Tourism, Film and Broadcasting (Dr. Kim Howells): I confirm, in response to point made by the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire, that the Government accept that the national lottery has been specifically provided for by Parliament and that it has a public purpose in raising money for good causes.
I am happy to make it clear to the Committee that the Government believe that it would be entirely appropriate for Ofcom to recognise, in the application of their codes, the national lottery's distinctive place in the life of this country, and its enormous contribution to good causes. It would also be right for Ofcom to take account of the public good derived from the success of the national lottery in its regulation of licensed services.
However, I must resist the amendment. I do not intend to be derogatory but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes, North-East (Brian White) hinted, the amendment is rather convoluted and may be defective. Having said that, its general purpose is clear. It aims to provide more scope for education and information about the national lottery, and its promotion in the broadcast media.
The amendment does not operate directly on the application of Ofcom's codes to the presentation of the national lottery. It does not state that the codes should not restrict the appearance in the media of the national lottery. However, it seems to require Ofcom to prevent broadcasters from doing anything that restricts the appearance of programme material of the sort described. What the result of that would be in practice is unclear, but it would be an unacceptable intervention in the editorial responsibilities of the broadcasters.
The amendments seek to allow more scope for the presentation of the national lottery on television. We should, therefore, examine what is currently prevented.
The national lottery draw appears on the BBC, and its appearance is regulated by the BBC in accordance with the producers' guidelines. It would be wrong to seek to intervene in the way in which the BBC governors interpret and discharge their responsibilities under the charter. The producers' guidelines already give a special place to the national lottery: it is covered in chapter 23 of the current edition. It is quite proper for broadcasters, including the BBC, to make their own editorial decisions about arrangements for the appearance of, for example, ''Lotto'' logos, bearing in mind their overall responsibilities to viewers and, in the BBC's case, licence fee payers.
What restrictions are there on the appearance of the lottery on commercial channels? There are no statutory bars on the appearance of the lottery. However, there may be general obligations on the regulator, notably under the TWF directive, with regard to distinguishing programmes from advertising.
Column Number: 782
In addition, under UK legislation, specific responsibilities may be imposed by the Independent Television Commission and, in future, by Ofcom. The general standards objectives are set out in the clause. We believe that those high-level objectives are right. It is therefore a matter for the regulator's discretion to interpret those objectives to ensure that they are met. It would be quite wrong to exempt the national lottery from those requirements.
On the other hand, there is clearly a margin of discretion for the regulator in deciding how the objectives are best met. It is quite right for the national lottery to examine with the regulator and broadcasters how members of the public could learn more about the benefits of the lottery in ways consistent with the overall objectives. Camelot recently provided a list of things that it wanted to do but felt that broadcasting regulation prevented. Officials from my Department discussed the list with the ITC and it appears that there may be more scope for the national lottery to appear in licensed broadcasting channels than Camelot was perhaps aware of. However, Camelot must bring forward specific proposals.
To summarise, nothing in broadcasting regulation specifically stands in the way of more extensive use of the broadcast media by the national lottery. There may be scope for the national lottery to appear in broadcast media in new ways. We and the ITC believe that there is, but the lottery operator will need to come forward with proposals that appeal to broadcasters which do not breach fundamental broadcasting principles—such as the broadcaster's editorial control of content and maintenance of the distinction between programming and promotion.
|
