Tag: Julia Lopez

The speech made by Julia Lopez, the Media Minister, at King’s Place in London on 9 May 2024.

Thank you very much, Damian and thank you, Richard. It’s really great to be with you this morning, and I think it’s a testament to the reputation of the DTG that so much of the industry is represented here today, particularly on a rail strike day.

Last time I was here I was heavily pregnant and now I’m just extremely tired.

I know there’s a lot of excitement here in this room for the future of television and some anxiety too, and I suspect we’ll be hearing a lot during the summit about how new technology like IPTV and generative AI will support that.

I think you’re right to be excited. If leveraged properly and responsibly, new technology offers us the opportunity to take our creativity to the next level – to make things that used to be difficult and frustrating so easy, and the impossible possible.

The UK has the chance to be at the forefront of this technological revolution.

With our world-class digital infrastructure…

…top notch engineers, like you and data scientists…

…and a set of creative industries impatient to innovate.

In her speech to the Royal Television Society last year, the Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer promised to give you the support you need as a sector to navigate this changing world. Not just to survive the current wave of innovation, but to drive the next one.

One advantage of being a joint Minister in both the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport is that I get chance to be involved in and drive that support.

So today I want to say a bit more about three of the remaining challenges you’ve told us about; how we as a Government are supporting you in meeting those challenges; and what we’re doing to make sure that audiences are at the heart of our plans for the future of television.

The first challenge is one of uncertainty. Not just the usual worries about which programmes will do well, but a more fundamental challenge about the where, what and why of TV.

The numbers speak for themselves. In the five years from 2017, the reach of broadcast TV fell from 91% to 79%, while the number of households subscribing to a video-on-demand service more than doubled.

And I’ve seen that change in my years as the Media Minister going through the pandemic and seeing the challenges coming out of that.

Of course such disruption isn’t new to this sector. The very existence of the DTG speaks to that, founded to help the industry navigate the arrival of DTT on the scene some thirty years ago.

But it comes at a time of significant financial pressures, particularly for those reliant on TV advertising.

In an industry experiencing near constant change, the important thing is that the sector is able to respond to that.

Too often innovative products and services are held back by self appointed gatekeepers. And I understand the commercial imperatives that many of you are governed by.

But the Government will continue to encourage long term thinking that recognises that, when it comes to innovation in TV, this doesn’t have to be a zero sum game.

Because the sector benefits most when audiences are able to choose the product that works best for them – to vote with their remotes.

I know this challenge is felt particularly acutely by our broadcasters.

You are being asked to serve an ever wide variety in the ways we watch TV. At home, on the go; on the small screen and the big. High end drama and lean back daytime. We as viewers want it all.

So we are pressing ahead with the pro-competitive interventions in both our Digital Markets and Media Bills.

And we will continue to champion, in particular, the vital role that our public service broadcasters play in bringing high quality public service content to our screens.

That’s updating our communications laws for the first time in two decades.

The second challenge is one of outdated and inconsistent regulation.

The message I hear from many of you is that you want a regulatory regime that is both fair but also consistent. One that encourages innovation – but gives audiences the confidence to adopt these new technologies.

To the majority of viewers, TV is TV – and they would expect it to always have the same regulation and protections. But we all know, it doesn’t.

Take, for example, Gordon Ramsey, a man known principally for two things: first being an award winning chef, and second, swearing a lot.

When his show Hell’s Kitchen airs on ITV2, it has to comply with the broadcasting code, and it’s no great shock that ITV chooses to air new episodes after the watershed.

But when ITV puts that previous episodes of the same show on their on-demand service, it doesn’t have to comply with that Code – and you can’t complain to Ofcom if you see something inappropriate.

Thankfully ITV have nevertheless voluntarily put robust audience protection measures in place.

From a compliance perspective, this is already starting to sound complicated. And that’s before we add in internet delivered television, like the Hell’s Kitchen FAST channel, which can be found on some smart TV’s electronic programme guides and broadcasts episodes “round the clock”.

I am not sure everyone in this room, let alone most viewers could say with certainty whether that has to comply with the Broadcasting Code or not.

It doesn’t, by the way – but the Homes under the Hammer FAST channel does.

Updating our regulatory regime to embrace the new ways that content is being delivered is necessarily a long term project.

But I’m pleased to say that we’re addressing two of the most pressing issues: the creation of a new Video-on-demand Code, through the Media Bill, that mainstream VoD services must comply with, and consulting on updating the boundaries of linear regulation by designating additional electronic programme guides.

Together, these changes will give audiences more confidence in adopting new services, and give broadcasters the fair and level playing field they need to ensure that it is the best content that wins out.

So you’ve got good products and robust regulation, but third and finally we need to decide – collectively – on the mechanics.

How will audiences get their TV in the future? And that’s the question I want to turn to now.

It seems clear from everything I’ve heard from the sector over the last year that IPTV is going to be a big part of the way we get our television in the future.

At the heart of that future is a potentially amazing proposition for audiences:

Many more programmes, broadcast in ultra high definition…

…more features, better accessibility, greater personalisation…

…and almost limitless choice, both live and on-demand.

Is it any wonder that next year an estimated 99% of TVs sold will be internet enabled?

As Minister for Digital Infrastructure, I’ve been doing everything I can to ensure that both our fixed and mobile networks are ready for those extra demands that this change will make on them.

I am particularly pleased by the progress made over recent years to roll out gigabit-capable broadband and 5G mobile connectivity across the UK.

Driving the deployment of fixed and wireless broadband is the  centrepiece of the government’s work.

The pace of change is enormous. Working in partnership with industry and Ofcom, our policies have helped us collectively increase coverage of gigabit broadband to 82% – that’s up from just 6% in 2018.

Of course, the opportunity presented by this investment hasn’t gone unnoticed. Both Sky and Virgin have launched subscription-based IP propositions – and they are joined by services like LG Channels, Samsung TV Plus, and – most recently – Freely.

Free to view television, however delivered, is a really important part of our television landscape.

We in Government want to encourage the sector to keep embracing innovation and technological development, but we’re not going to pull the rug from under the devoted audiences of Freeview channels.

That’s why we’ve committed to the future of DTT until 2034.

I know many of you will be interested in what happens at that point. And you’re looking to us to provide the answer.

As the Culture Secretary has said: we will. But it’s not a decision we can or should take in isolation. We have to look at the evidence……not just what is happening now – but to look ahead to ten years’ time…

…not just a simple dichotomy between DTT and IPTV – but the potential to enable audiences to choose between multiple competing platforms, just as they can now…

…and not just what the government can do, but what industry can do as well.

I am very grateful to Ofcom for their early work in this space, and we will be considering the conclusions of their call for evidence carefully.

In parallel we have been working to identify and fill the emerging evidence gaps, by commissioning independent research on this topic.

This is going to be published shortly, demonstrating that many of us are already using internet-based services on our TVs – whether we realise it or not…

… that by 2040, 99% of homes will have an IP enabled TV…

…and that, on current trends, the number of homes without access to IPTV will fall to one and a half million by 2035 – but this still represents 7% of homes.

And as Richard said, we have to make sure that those audiences are not left behind.

Now we in government want to help you take advantage of these changes.

But we also have a responsibility to audiences – to ensure they continue to have access to reliable, free to view television in a format that’s familiar to them.

And the further and faster the transformation, the stronger this responsibility becomes.

So it’s clear we need to do more to understand what drives viewers’ decisions, and how we can help everyone to take advantage of these new technologies.

Giving them not just the tools they need, but a compelling reason to make the leap. And supporting them if they don’t want to.

This is something that industry, government and audiences will need to work together on – to ensure we collectively provide the best answer for your businesses and for the public.

So I can announce today the launch of an audience engagement programme to ensure that audiences are at the heart of our plans.

We will use this to engage audiences directly, understand their needs and preferences and make sure these are reflected as we develop policy.

I want to hear from the sector too.

So we’re going to be creating a new dedicated stakeholder forum, to support this project and ensure industry and audiences come together to deliver on the ambitions I’ve been discussing today.

We hope this will ensure we hear voices from across this industry. We’ll be setting out more detail on both of these in due course.

Because new ways of consuming TV should not come at the expense of those who still enjoy terrestrial television.

I am proud of what we’ve already achieved as a Government.

Connecting more than 80% of homes to gigabit broadband…

…expanding our world-leading creative industry tax reliefs…

…and hopefully, passing a Media Bill – soon, I hope, to be a Media Act – that will protect the mixed ecology that has worked well for the best part of a century…

Setting the platform for an exciting future – with more to come.

It’s a busy agenda and one I am looking forward to working with the DTG and its members on.

I hope you enjoy the rest of the summit today

Thank you very much.

The speech made by Julia Lopez, the Minister of State at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on 29 March 2023.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I apologise for anticipating my cue when one was not given.

I thank the hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this debate on what is obviously a popular topic, and for highlighting some of the fantastic work that orchestras, choirs and opera companies are doing to bring classical music to people across the country. I too have been contacted by constituents about this issue. The hon. Gentleman is right to touch on the quality of our musicians as a selling point of our very successful film and television industry. The creative industries form part of my portfolio, and he is right to point out the contribution of film scores.

The hon. Gentleman covered a lot of ground, so I will try to cover the topics he included in his speech. As he said, classical music in Britain continues to be a source of national pride and inspires not just the people of our country but the entire world. As other hon. Members have pointed out, it feeds our souls. He rightly talked about the classical ecosystem. From the smaller but rapidly developing new orchestras, such as the Multi-Story Orchestra, to the long-established giants such as the London Symphony Orchestra or the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, the orchestras of this country have a rich history of excellence and innovation. That has a profound impact on the world of classical music.

The classical music sector creates jobs, supports local businesses and generates revenue for the local and national economy. It attracts tourists from across the world who come to see performances by renowned orchestras and musicians. More importantly than any of that, classical music, whether performed by orchestras, choirs, quartets or soloists, whether professional or amateur, has the ability to fascinate, inspire and enthral us. That is why it is an art form that this Government support consistently, gladly and proudly.

I welcome the birthing tips from the right hon. Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz). Classic FM got a lot of us through lockdown; I shall be thinking of it and perhaps playing it when the moment comes, hopefully not too imminently. We published the draft Media Bill today, which includes provisions on radio that a number of hon. Members are calling for. I hope the Bill will support the growth and future of our radio sector, including Classic FM, and that it will continue to be a means through which people can access classical music.

I want to address up front some concerns that have been raised about recent announcements by the BBC in relation to its symphony, concert and philharmonic orchestras. As hon. Members have noted, the BBC is an operationally and editorially independent organisation, and the Government have no role in its strategy for classical music, so any decisions on the matter are for it to take independently. However, of course I recognise how valuable the BBC orchestras and singers are to many individuals and communities across the UK. Having encouraged in this House a response—

Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 9(3)).

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Joy Morrissey.)

Julia Lopez

The choreography of tonight’s debate is intriguing, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is new to me, so I apologise if I am not playing my part very successfully.

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)

It is always a surprise when the motion lapses at 7 o’clock. I assure the Minister that many Ministers are caught out slightly.

Julia Lopez

I appreciate that reassurance, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is all good exercise for me as I try to maintain my mobility over the coming weeks.

I was about to say that I encouraged, on the Floor of the House, staff members to engage vigorously in the consultation that the BBC was running on the recent announcement. I was very glad that the BBC said last week that it will now undertake further work, in discussion with the Musicians’ Union, on the future of the BBC Singers. I also welcome the update that the BBC is engaging with the Musicians’ Union and other unions on its proposals on its English orchestras.

We agree, however, that the BBC should focus on prioritising value for licence fee payers. We welcome the intent to pursue greater distinctiveness while increasing the regional and educational impact of the BBC’s performing groups. As my hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr Lord) pointed out in relation to the licence fee, the BBC is required to deliver the remit set out in its charter, which includes a mission to serve

“all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain”.

We think that the BBC should be prioritising using its £3.8 billion annual licence fee income to deliver that remit, which includes culturally distinctive content.

The hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate laments the £3.8 billion that the BBC gets. We think that it is a substantial sum. Given the cost of living challenges that our constituents face, we did not feel it right to increase the licence fee by more. There is also a balance to be struck in maintaining consent for the licence fee. We think there was a risk that if the licence fee had been increased substantially, it would have reduced the public support for the organisation.

I highlight again the fact that today we published the draft Media Bill, which is about underpinning our public service broadcasters in an increasingly competitive media environment. We hope that in doing so we will in turn underpin the future of British creativity. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept and welcome those proposals, which are substantial.

Beyond the recent discussion of the BBC’s strategy for classical music, I want to recognise the wider support that the Government give to the arts. As has been highlighted, it is primarily delivered by an arm’s length body, Arts Council England. The policy area is within the remit of the arts and heritage Minister, Lord Parkinson, on whose behalf I speak today; I know that he has engaged extensively with hon. Members’ concerns, and I shall raise with him the suggestions from my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) about the potential Arts Council review and about transparency.

To read some of the public narrative around the Arts Council, one would think that funding or support for classical music had ceased altogether, so I would like to put some context around some of the concerns that have been raised. In November last year, ACE announced the outcome of its major investment programme, which is known as the national portfolio. It is the largest national portfolio so far: 990 organisations are receiving funding, compared with 814 between 2018 and 2022, and 663 between 2015 and 2018.

Overall, the investment programme is good news for orchestras and for classical music. Investment remains high in classical music and particularly in orchestral music organisations: 23 orchestral music organisations are being funded—an increase from 19 in the last round—at approximately £21 million per annum, which is £2 million more than in the previous year.

Those statistics do not include some of the largest and best-funded organisations, including the Southbank Centre, which are not specifically focused on classical music but which play an important role in its success. Organisations including the Multi-Story Orchestra, Orchestras for All, Paraorchestra, the People’s Orchestra and Pegasus Opera are joining the national portfolio for the first time. We think that that will help to bring down barriers to classical music and celebrate the power that it can have in people’s lives, which several hon. Members have referred to this evening. We think that the new portfolio has particular strengths in supporting young people in classical music. It has new funding for Awards for Young Musicians and the National Children’s Orchestras of Great Britain. There is also an increase in funding for the National Youth Choirs of Great Britain and the National Youth Orchestra.

The Arts Council has been thinking about how to build a fairer, more diverse classical music sector, and has commissioned a study entitled “Creating a More Inclusive Classical Music” to help it to understand the workforce, examine talent pathways, and think about how we might improve inclusion. A great deal of work has been done, not least through the broadening of the national portfolio, but the Arts Council will produce an update on its plans in the coming months. Its support for classical music goes well beyond orchestras. Some recent Arts Council support through lottery money includes backing for the Schubert 200 project, which will see Die Schöne Müllerin, Winterreise and Schwanengesang—I apologise for my pronunciation; I am relying on GCSE German—performed in new arrangements using period instruments and animated with puppetry, and £50,000 for one of our leading professional chamber choirs, The Sixteen, to support its summer pilgrimage.

Concern has been expressed across the sector about the work of English National Opera and the outcome of the new portfolio. The Arts Council and ENO are working closely to reach an agreement on ENO’s future funding and business model. As I mentioned earlier, Lord Parkinson has met representatives of ENO and Members of Parliament to discuss this issue, the context being that the Arts Council made all its decisions independently of Government.

Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)

Let me say as a Mancunian that English National Opera would be more than welcome in Manchester, either to reside or to visit, but as a former director of the Hallé, I want to assure the people of this country that the classical ecosystem in our great city is well served. Will the Minister join me in welcoming Debbie Francis, OBE, as the new chair of the Hallé Concerts Society? She is the first woman to do that job in its 165-year history.

Julia Lopez

I do indeed welcome Debbie Francis to her position, and congratulate her on her success as the first female in the role.

Questions have been raised about the overall strategic direction from the Secretary of State. The view was taken that London has a huge number of incredibly important cultural organisations, but that the value to be obtained from them should be spread more fairly across the country. As a London Member, I am always anxious to ensure that levelling up does not necessarily mean removing a resource from London, which is a city of 8 million people consisting of a huge range of communities with different needs and different levels of wealth. I do not believe that this should be a zero-sum game. However, a range of organisations in the rest of the country do not have such a strong voice in this place, and I think it important that communities throughout the country are benefiting from this funding, some of them for the first time. We should accept that that will make a huge and enriching contribution to people’s lives.

Sir Robert Neill

Let me add my congratulations to the Minister on what will happen in the coming weeks. I hope she will accept that there is a particular issue in relation to London, which professionals will clarify for anyone who talks to them. Most choristers in opera companies or orchestral players, for instance, will not rely entirely on their work for the opera company or orchestra concerned for their income; they top it up because they are able to do outside freelance work, such as session work, and also teaching work, sometimes at the colleges in London. There is an ecosystem that supports them and enables them to do their mainstream classical work, which is not the best paid. If they are taken out of the area where that ecosystem is, and where those alternative or additional employment opportunities are, it becomes much harder for them to survive. That is why plucking them out of London, or Manchester for that matter, does not work in practice in the way in which it may seem to work in theory.

Julia Lopez

I was going to make the same point about the importance of the ecosystem. However, these things can become self-fulfilling, and if we never attempt to spread the benefits of the arts beyond the capital city, they are always going to happen. This is about trying to achieve a balance. As London MPs, it is incumbent on us not to be over the top about the level of funding that has gone outside the capital. The capital still receives by far the lion’s share of arts funding and we are grateful for the richness it gives our capital, but we should bear in mind that a lot of communities have no arts funding at all and it is important they should have access.

Bambos Charalambous

The hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) and I made the point that many of these orchestras and opera companies tour, providing access to classical music in areas that would never otherwise have that access. By cutting or getting rid of some of these organisations, the Government are cutting back on the ability of people in other parts of the country to access the amazing classical work that they provide. It is not just about where the organisations are located; it is also about what they provide by touring.

Julia Lopez

I accept what the hon. Gentleman says about the importance of touring. I would also say that a lot of creators and musicians would like to have opportunities beyond London. London is not a cheap place to live, and they might welcome the idea that they might not have to concentrate their entire career in the capital, where housing is expensive and there are other challenges in relation to the cost of transport and so on. As the hon. Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane) said in that context, Manchester is not all that far away. It is important not to forget that a lot of people want opportunity to be spread across the country rather than concentrated in a single place—notwithstanding the fact that I am also a London MP and I totally understand the importance of our capital thriving, as it should.

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) highlighted the importance of early music education. That is something that Lord Parkinson and I are working on with the Department for Education. Classical music ensembles play a crucial role in cultural education and the development of young musicians. The inclusion of so many organisations that run music education programmes in the Arts Council portfolio speaks to the importance of providing a strong foundation in music from a young age.

We have a refreshed national plan for music education. It launched last June and it aims to provide music opportunities for all children and young people, regardless of background, circumstances, need or geography. As part of the commitments we have made alongside that plan, £25 million of new funding has been made available so that we can purchase hundreds of thousands of musical instruments and equipment for young people, including adaptive instruments for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities so that they, too, can share the joy that music can provide. The refreshed plan also renews its commitment to the music hubs programme, which is delivered by the Arts Council and provides £79 million every year until 2025.

Alongside these programmes, the Department co-funds the national youth music organisation programme with the Arts Council. All 15 national youth music organisations will receive Arts Council funding for the next three years, and earlier this week I was pleased to hear that the Department for Education had recognised this outstanding work and agreed to commit a further £1.5 million over the next three years as well. That is fantastic news because this programme will lead the way in developing young musicians and music makers.

Mr Lord

With the indulgence of the House, I would like to make a point about young musicians. Towards the end of last year I went to the final of the Woking young musician of the year competition. The standard was extraordinarily high, and it is a competition that does not cost the council or the taxpayer any money. It gives mentoring and advice to all the young musicians who put themselves forward for the competition. The big final had an extraordinarily high standard of musicianship. It has provided finalists and also a winner of the BBC musician of the year competition. I would encourage colleagues to encourage that sort of support locally.

One other thing I would like to mention is that last year I attended the 100th concert of the Breinton concert series, in which a local family open their house to fantastic young and up-and-coming musicians of enormous talent. They have classical concerts and little bits of operetta, and as they are blessed with good grounds, in the summer people come and hear these amazing, normally young, musicians. Again, it is entirely self-funding. I would like to congratulate the organisers of the Breinton concerts, and it would be lovely to see that happen elsewhere in the south-east and in the country at large.

Julia Lopez

My hon. Friend does a wonderful job of highlighting all the wonderful activity in his constituency, including Woking young musician of the year. He highlights the joy of music and its huge impact on communities.

The hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate raised the issue of tax reliefs. He will be aware that, in the spring statement, the Chancellor extended the higher rates of theatre tax relief, orchestra tax relief, and museums and galleries exhibition tax relief for a further two years. This will help to offset some of the ongoing economic pressures and boost investment in our cultural sectors, which we have been supporting substantially through some very difficult times, not least through covid and the energy challenges. This will ensure that they can continue to showcase the very best of British talent, not only in our recognised concert halls and theatres but in the many museums and other arts venues across the nation. The changes made in the Budget are estimated to be worth some £350 million, which is as strong a signal as we can send of the Government’s faith and support for our cultural sector.

A wide range of other topics have been raised, including grassroots music venues. Today I met Mark Davyd, who represents grassroots music venues, to discuss support for such venues. We are looking at a range of measures that we might be able to take to support him. He was particularly grateful for some of the things the Government did through the pandemic and beyond. We are also working closely with the Intellectual Property Office, and with the industry itself, on some of the streaming questions.

Exports have been raised, and we are considering the expansion of the music export growth scheme. We are also doing lots of work on touring, which was also raised in this debate. Discussions will continue on improving the touring offer, but we have already made quite substantial progress.

The hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) talks about the importance of soft power and our relationship with Ukraine. It may have escaped his attention, but we will shortly host the Eurovision song contest on Ukraine’s behalf. We also have a huge package of cultural partnerships with Ukraine, so we are already doing a lot in that space.

Of course, our flagship levelling-up fund is also supporting access to culture and the performing arts across the UK. The second round of funding was announced in January 2022, and it made 31 culture and heritage awards to projects across the country, to the tune of some £546 million. Chamber ensembles, soloists, orchestras and many more will now be able to perform in state-of-the-art spaces across our country, all because of that fund. This includes a new state-of-the-art site at Embassy Gardens in Nine Elms, which opened late last year and includes the first public concert hall to open in London in more than 13 years. We should recognise the huge investment we are making in our capital.

Our cultural development fund has just launched, and the right hon. Member for Walsall South (Valerie Vaz) will be pleased to learn that Walsall Council will receive £3.7 million in that round to refurbish a currently unused grade II-listed building in the centre of the St Matthew’s quarter, and to deliver a three-year cultural activity plan that we hope will enliven and invigorate Walsall town centre.

I hope Members will feel reassured by the support we give to classical music, which takes many forms. By investing in music education, supporting classical music organisations and promoting the industry, we are ensuring that classical music continues to thrive in this country. It remains an important contributor to our economy and to our cultural and social wellbeing. We hope that, now and for many years to come, people can continue to experience its many wonders.

Question put and agreed to.

The statement made by Julia Lopez, the Minister of State at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on 14 March 2023.

The BBC is a world-class broadcaster, a creative engine and a cultural institution producing some of the best television and radio in the world. The impartiality of the BBC, as a publicly funded broadcaster, goes to the heart of the contract between the corporation and all the licence fee payers whom it serves. That is why the royal charter, which is the constitutional basis of the BBC—along with the underpinning framework agreement—enshrines the need for the BBC to be impartial in both its mission and its public purposes.

The BBC’s mission and public purposes, as set out in the charter, require it to act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain, helping people to understand and engage with the world around them. The BBC’s first public purpose is to provide duly accurate and impartial news and information to help people to understand and engage with the world around them. It must also represent and serve the diverse communities of all the United Kingdom’s nations and regions. Both the charter and the framework agreement also explicitly guarantee the independence of the BBC. As such, the Government have no say in the BBC’s operational or editorial day-to-day decisions or staffing matters, including as they relate to the application of the requirement for impartiality.

The Government stand fully behind the requirements of the royal charter. We are clear that the BBC must truly reflect the nation and guard its impartiality in all of its output. The BBC’s director-general has repeatedly said that the corporation’s impartiality is a priority for him and must be protected. We welcome that the BBC accepted the findings and recommendations of the Serota review and is committed to reform through its 10-point impartiality and editorial standards action plan. It is Ofcom, established by the Government as the independent regulator of the BBC in 2017, that is responsible for holding broadcasters including the BBC to account on the impartiality of their news and current affairs coverage, against the broadcasting code under the Communications Act 2003.

In November last year, Ofcom published its annual review of the BBC. It found the BBC’s impartiality to be a key area of concern among audiences and one where they consistently rate BBC news less favourably for trust and accuracy. Ofcom stated that addressing audience perceptions on this matter is challenging, and the regulator recognises that this is a complex area. It will continue to monitor the performance of the BBC and has urged the BBC not to lose momentum in its efforts to address this issue. It remains a priority for the Government to ensure that Ofcom delivers an effective and proportionate regulatory framework that holds the BBC to account while maintaining its creative freedom and operational independence.

In May 2022, the Government launched the mid-term review. This is a new mechanism established by the current charter, focusing on the governance and regulatory arrangements for the BBC, given the reforms that were introduced when the charter was granted. One area of focus in the MTR is impartiality, and it will assess the efficacy of the governance mechanisms and Ofcom’s regulation in ensuring that the BBC meets the high standards that licence fee payers expect of it. It is also an important milestone in our road map for BBC reform, and work is well under way. The charter specifies that the review must take place between 2022 and 2024, and we will publish our findings and conclusions in due course.

The BBC is respected globally. It reaches hundreds of millions of people across the world every week. No other country in the world has anything quite like it. We have been clear that the BBC must place a firm emphasis on accuracy, impartiality and diversity of opinion. It can never be the BBC’s role to judge, or appear to judge, the diverse values of the people from across the country it serves. In the era of fake news, public service broadcasting and a free press have never been more important, and the BBC has been and should be a beacon that sets standards to which others can aspire.

The statement made by Julia Lopez, the Minister of State at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, in the House of Commons on 1 November 2022.

I thank the hon. Lady for highlighting this news announcement that we learned about yesterday, as it gives the House an opportunity to demonstrate the value we all place on BBC local radio services.

We are currently celebrating 100 years of BBC radio. With its unique position in the radio market, the BBC has continued to develop and deliver high-quality and engaging audio services to the country and internationally over the years. BBC local radio is one of the BBC’s crown jewels. Developed in the late 1960s and 1970s, the BBC’s 39 local radio services in England still reach 5.7 million listeners each and every week. As hon. Members know, BBC local radio is highly valued outside London, where stations in Derby, Stoke, Humberside, Cornwall, Devon and elsewhere have higher reach or share numbers than the average.

Changes in patterns of listening mean that the BBC needs to look at its services, and the details about new investment in local investigative reporting are very welcome. But overall we do have concerns about the proposals, which we were not given notice of. I want to take this opportunity to stress that the BBC is rightly operationally and editorially independent from the Government, and that decisions on service delivery are ultimately a matter for it. However, the Government are disappointed that the BBC is reportedly planning to make such extensive cuts to its local radio output. We await to hear more from the BBC about how it expects those changes to impact local communities, including in respect of the provision of local news and media plurality.

At its best, as was particularly shown during the pandemic, BBC local radio is able to bring communities together and it plays a vital role in reflecting local experiences and delivering local news. For older residents living in rural areas, it can be a particular lifeline. The BBC must make sure it continues to provide distinctive and genuinely local radio services, with content that reflects and represents people and communities from all corners of the UK.

We recognise that in the current political context the BBC, like other organisations, is facing difficult financial decisions, but we are also concerned that the BBC is making such far-reaching decisions, particularly about its local news provision, without setting out further detail on how it will impact its audiences and the communities it serves. In the context of a £3.8 billion licence fee income, we do not have any details about how much this proposal is likely to save. The BBC board must make sure that the BBC complies with its charter duties. The Government are clear that Ofcom, as the BBC regulator, must make sure that the BBC is robustly held to account in delivering its mission and public purposes.

We note that as part of this announcement the BBC is also proposing establishing 11 investigative reporting teams across England. That will see the creation of 71 new journalism roles, delivering original stories across TV, radio and online services. As the House will be aware, we are currently undertaking a mid-term charter review, which we have set out and which will evaluate how the BBC and Ofcom assess the market impact and the public value of the BBC in an evolving marketplace and how that relates to the wider UK media ecology, including with regard to commercial radio and local news sectors. Handily, I am scheduled to meet the BBC next week, when I shall see the chairman and director general, and I shall raise with them the concerns that are brought to the Chamber today. We also expect the BBC to brief parliamentarians on its announcements shortly.