| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
BBC: Chairman
11.29 am
Baroness Howe of Idlicote asked Her Majesty’s Government:
30 Nov 2006 : Column 848
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we will hold an open competition to select the next chairman of the BBC. The process will follow the Nolan principles, and the Commissioner for Public Appointments code of practice. After advertising in the national press, a selection panel will shortlist and interview candidates and make recommendations to Ministers. The appointment will be made by the Queen by Order in Council on the recommendation of DCMS Ministers through the Prime Minister.
Baroness Howe of Idlicote: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. I think we all hope that in future the process will be placed under the chairmanship of the independent Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments. Is the Minister as astonished as the rest of us that Michael Grade, as commander of the British flagship of public service broadcasting, is apparently free immediately to transfer his loyalty—if loyalty is the appropriate word—to the BBC’s principal competitor and, indeed, that he feels free to do so, in the apparent absence of any non-compete clause? What do the Government propose to do to prevent a similar situation arising with any future BBC chairman?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it is a free country. Michael Grade has made it absolutely clear that he left the BBC because he saw a career opportunity in ITV. I think there would be a fair amount of criticism from many parts of this House if that had been prevented.
Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: My Lords, what was the cost of the recruitment process for engaging the last chairman? If the figure is not available, why not? Will my noble friend ensure that the cost of this recruitment process is calculated and reported to the House? Furthermore, will he ensure that a clause is written into the next chairperson’s contract stipulating that in the event of failure to keep to that contract, they will pay the cost of the recruitment process for the subsequent chairman?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I do not have the figure for the cost of the recruitment process because I did not think that it was of major interest to the House. I respect the fact that my noble friend has raised the issue, and I will write to him with the cost, but in an appointment of such importance the cost is of limited significance. It is now right to get the best person equipped to lead the BBC through a very significant period over the next decade. There was widespread approval of the appointment of Michael Grade through the processes adopted, but nobody foresaw his abrupt departure.
Lord Fowler: My Lords, do I understand it correctly that Michael Grade was appointed by a government department without a contract, without any requirement to give notice or a non-compete clause, and that only three weeks ago this arrangement was confirmed so that he could take charge of the new trustee board which, against much advice, he personally had invented for the BBC? Given that the Government have now
30 Nov 2006 : Column 849
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the two chairmen have been lost in very different circumstances, and neither departure was foreseeable. I must point out that we are not talking about the director-general of the BBC, who has a contract, but about the chairman of a public body. The chairman of the BBC is appointed in the same way as are our other major appointees of this kind. What is clear, however, is that when someone takes up an appointment of this significance, he agrees to abide by the Cabinet Office rules for public appointments, and that means not making public or revealing to anyone else the confidential information he acquired in his role as chairman of the BBC.
Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury: My Lords, can the Minister assure the House that Mr Grade’s precipitate departure will not mean further delay in the licence fee settlement and that that settlement will be sufficient to cover the BBC’s many commitments under the new charter?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we need to have in place the process for the licence fee settlement by 1 April and we are on course to do so. The House will recognise that the chairman of the BBC has played a significant part over the past year in the discussions about the licence fee, but we are now in the concluding stages of those decisions, therefore his departure will have no impact on the timing.
Lord Luke: My Lords, is it possible that disappointment with the impending outcome of the negotiations could have hastened Mr Grade’s departure? Can the Minister guarantee that the new chairman will not be a politician?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I cannot guarantee the latter point. On the first point, Michael Grade made this statement on his departure:
“I would like everyone to understand this is a career decision. What it is NOT is a reaction to anything, internal or external. I was faced with the choice of getting back into programming or ‘governing’ the BBC from a distance”.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords—
Lord Morris of Aberavon: My Lords, should there not be a contract in future?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, as I indicated earlier, in public appointments of this kind we do not have a contract; the appointee has very clear obligations in regard to conduct. The appointment is for a considerable number of years and it is anticipated that the chairman of the trust will serve for a number of years—as has been the case with chairmen of the BBC in the past, with the exception of the two most recent appointments, where there were rather particular features.
30 Nov 2006 : Column 850
Business
11.36 am
Lord Grocott: My Lords, with the leave of the House, a Statement on the NATO summit will be repeated later today by my noble friend Lord Drayson. We shall take the Statement after the debate on North Korea initiated by the noble Lord, Lord Alton of Liverpool.
Personal Injuries (NHS Charges) (Amounts) Regulations 2006
Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 (Consequential Provisions) (England and Wales) Order 2006
Scotland Act 1998 (Transfer of Functions to the Scottish Ministers etc.) (No. 3) Order 2006
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): My Lords, I beg to move the three Motions standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That the regulations and orders be referred to a Grand Committee.—(Baroness Amos.)
On Question, Motions agreed to.
Information Committee
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Brabazon of Tara): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That a Select Committee be appointed to consider information and communications services, including the Library and the Parliamentary Archives, within financial limits approved by the House Committee;
That, as proposed by the Committee of Selection, the following members be appointed to the committee:
L Brougham and Vaux,L Craig of Radley,B Greenfield,L Haskel,L Jones of Cheltenham,L Kalms,L Methuen,B Miller of Hendon,B Prosser,L Puttnam,L Renton of Mount Harry (Chairman),L Rodger of Earlsferry;That the committee have leave to report from time to time.—(The Chairman of Committees.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
30 Nov 2006 : Column 851
Joint Committee on Consolidation etc. Bills
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, I beg to move the second Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, in accordance with Standing Order 52, that, as proposed by the Committee of Selection, the following Lords be appointed to join with a committee of the Commons as the Joint Committee on Consolidation etc. Bills:
V Bledisloe,L Campbell of Alloway,L Christopher,V Colville of Culross,E Dundee,B Fookes,L Janner of Braunstone,B Mallalieu,L Methuen,L Razzall,L Rodger of Earlsferry.—(The Chairman of Committees.)On Question, Motion agreed to, and a message was sent to the Commons.
Joint Committee on Human Rights
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, I beg to move the third Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That a Select Committee of six members be appointed to join with the committee appointed by the Commons as the Joint Committee on Human Rights:
(a) matters relating to human rights in the United Kingdom (but excluding consideration of individual cases);
(b) proposals for remedial orders, draft remedial orders and remedial orders made under Section 10 of and laid under Schedule 2 to the Human Rights Act 1998; and
(c) in respect of draft remedial orders and remedial orders, whether the special attention of the House should be drawn to them on any of the grounds specified in Standing Order 73 (Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments);
(a) in relation to any document containing proposals laid before the House under paragraph 3 of the said Schedule 2, its recommendation whether a draft order in the same terms as the proposals should be laid before the House; or
(b) in relation to any draft order laid under paragraph 2 of the said Schedule 2, its recommendation whether the draft order should be approved;
and to have power to report to the House on any matter arising from its consideration of the said proposals or draft orders; and
30 Nov 2006 : Column 852
To report to the House in respect of any original order laid under paragraph 4 of the said Schedule 2, its recommendation whether:
(a) the order should be approved in the form in which it was originally laid before Parliament; or
(b) that the order should be replaced by a new order modifying the provisions of the original order; or
(c) that the order should not be approved;
and to have power to report to the House on any matter arising from its consideration of the said order or any replacement order;
That the following members be appointed to the committee:
L Judd,L Lester of Herne Hill,E Onslow,L Plant of Highfield,B Stern;That the committee have power to agree with the committee appointed by the Commons in the appointment of a chairman;
That the quorum of the committee shall be two;
That the committee have power to adjourn from place to place;
That the committee have leave to report from time to time;
That the committee have power to appoint specialist advisers;
That the evidence taken by the Human Rights Committee in the last Session of Parliament be referred to the committee;
That the evidence taken by the committee shall, if the committee so wishes, be printed.—(The Chairman of Committees.)
On Question, Motion agreed to, and a message was sent to the Commons.
Bangladesh: Elections
11.37 am
Lord Avebury rose to call attention to the role of the international community in the forthcoming elections in Bangladesh; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am most grateful for this opportunity to review the prospects for the forthcoming Bangladesh elections and the role of the international community in monitoring the process leading up to the polling day in January 2007.
In June 2005, the House debated the levels of political and religious violence in Bangladesh, the precarious situation of minorities and the threat to democracy which had been highlighted then by the UN special procedures, international NGOs and the media including the Economist, and the donor forum. Seventeen months on, and with the election due in 47 days, the prospects for a free and fair election are bleak.
30 Nov 2006 : Column 853
Some progress has been made in dealing with the menace of terrorism and sectarian violence against minorities by extremists such as the notorious Khatme Nabuwwat. There have been fewer of these attacks recently, and the police have dealt firmly with threatened attacks against the Ahmadiyya community in particular. But the crimes of the past few years, including the brutal assassination of the elder statesman Shah AMS Kibria and the murder of 12 people who were attending a rally addressed by the leader of the opposition in an attempt on the life of Sheikh Hasina herself, have not been properly investigated and remain unsolved. If the state fails to guarantee the security of elected members and is not seen to be actively pursuing the terrorists who attack them, democracy will be fatally undermined. We should continue to emphasise that whenever we have the opportunity.
At a packed conference held a fortnight ago by Policy Exchange and co-sponsored by the Hudson Institute and the International Bangladesh Foundation, of which I am president—I declare that interest—the continuing threat of violence arising from the present political deadlock, including acts by the forces of law and order themselves, was highlighted.
Saber Hossain Chowdhury, the political secretary to the leader of the opposition who was himself beaten unconscious a few weeks ago in a gratuitous attack by the police, spoke about the 800 extra-judicial killings by the paramilitary Rapid Action Battalion, or RAB. The editor of Dhaka’s Daily Star referred to the connections between the Jamaat, the Islamist party which was part of the outgoing coalition Government and the violent extremists whose aim is to capture power by force and turn Bangladesh into a Taliban state. The Islamists and their fringe terrorist allies have gained political space, he thought, because of the dysfunctional nature of the conventional political parties. The strong democratic culture and tradition may protect Bangladesh against Talibanisation, but not, as one speaker put it, against Pakistanisation, with the Islamists undoing the gains made by the people when they gained independence in 1971.
These problems will not be solved over the next six weeks, but the maintenance of law and order during the campaign and the protection from harm of candidates and election workers is an essential precondition for the exercise of the people’s democratic rights. The FCO reports that since the end of October, there has been widespread civil unrest in Bangladesh, particularly in the capital Dhaka, which has resulted in up to 14 deaths and some 2,000 injuries.
Unfortunately, over the past four and a half years, 27,000 police have been recruited from the ranks of the BNP and Jamaat activists so that the force consists almost entirely of officers who are loyal to the outgoing Government. That Government cut the basic training of police from a year to six months and promoted 820 officers to the rank of sub-inspector after less than a year in the force in the rush to get them in post in time for the elections. These are not matters which can be addressed by the outside world, but we could suggest that orders be given to the police and RAB to protect meetings and rallies and to prevent the use of intimidation and violence.
30 Nov 2006 : Column 854
During the campaign, the outgoing Government relinquish power to a supposedly neutral caretaker Administration, the head of which is called the chief adviser. The idea of this unique Bangladeshi institution is that an outgoing Government should not be able to monopolise state resources with a view to influencing election results. But the Government have manipulated the appointment of the chief adviser so that one of their loyalists got the job. Controversy raged over this for months until, at the last moment, the appointee resigned, only for the job to be taken over, in a totally unconstitutional move, by the president, himself a party nominee, who now holds both posts of president and chief adviser. He immediately showed his colours by confirming the party officials who were already heading up key ministries and by appointing loyalists to command the police and the RAB. The 14-party opposition have been demanding his resignation; they have been joined in this by the Liberal Democratic Party, formed recently by defectors from the government party, the BNP.
There has also been a last-minute switch in the key post of chief electoral commissioner, formerly held by MA Aziz, a well known former BNP activist. Mr Aziz had defied a ruling of the high court to revise the electoral register back in January with the aid of two new commission members who were appointed to give him a majority on the commission. He went on to ignore the Supreme Court when it upheld the high court decision, but such was the outcry that he suddenly went on three months’ gardening leave, only to be replaced by Mahfuzur Rahman, one of the two loyalists who had given him his majority last January for defying the courts.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |