BBC ‘health check’ plan to be watered down

Government is ready to cave in to bosses who have criticised tougher rules for broadcaster, letter suggests

THE Government is facing accusations it has caved in to pressure from BBC bosses by watering down its new charter.

The draft charter, due to be published this week, will set out how the broadcaster is regulated, funded and run for the next 11 years.

But plans for a “health check” that would allow ministers to review the workings of the BBC after five years are being diluted, according to a letter seen by The Sunday Telegraph.

The letter says the “health check” will be “sensibly constrained”, potentially preventing a root-and-branch review of the BBC halfway through the charter.

Andrew Bridgen, the Tory MP who chairs the reform select committee, said: “I am concerned to hear that the minister has promised to ensure the review is ‘sensibly constrained’. This undermines the point of having such a health check in the first place.

“This review of the BBC charter must have teeth.

“If the ‘health check’ finds that the BBC is not being effectively regulated or is failing to deliver value for money or impartiality, the Government will have to intervene to take remedial action.”

Under the charter, ministers will directly appoint almost half of the BBC’s governing board.

But BBC bosses have been arguing for months over limiting the Government’s powers.

Lord Ashton of Hyde, the new culture minister, said he was working “extensively” with the BBC and Ofcom and that most of the issues were still under review.

MINISTERS are preparing to dilute plans for a crackdown on the BBC when the broadcaster’s new charter is published within days.

The Government is due to unveil the draft deal this month, setting out in detail how the broadcaster will be regulated, funded and run for the next 11 years. But a letter from a minister, seen by

The Sunday Telegraph, suggests that the Government is ready to cave in to criticism from broadcasting bosses and will “sensibly constrain” new rules that would put the BBC on a tighter leash.

Ministers announced in May that the 11-year charter would be subject to a “health check” after five years to ensure that tougher rules are working to prevent a repeat of Jimmy Savile-style scandals and to avert rows over the large management pay-offs that have dogged the corporation.

Under the plans, this wide-ranging mid-term review would give the Government the chance to intervene if the BBC is failing to deliver value for money or if new board members and regulators are not doing their jobs.

However, officials from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) have been holding talks over the summer with BBC chiefs over limiting the extent of the “health check”.

Andrew Bridgen, the Conservative MP who chairs the regulatory reform select committee, said he feared the review was being watered down. He warned that the mid-term check must be backed up by the threat of government intervention.

“This review of the BBC charter must have teeth,” he said. “If the ‘health check’ finds that the BBC is not being effectively regulated or is failing to deliver value for money or impartiality, the Government will have to intervene to take remedial action. It is in the interests of the licence-fee payer, the viewing public and the BBC itself to have a robust and effective governance system.”

Under the charter, the BBC would be run by a new board from next year and regulated entirely by Ofcom for the first time.

Broadcasters have also raised concerns over plans for ministers to directly appoint almost half the members of the BBC’s new governing board.

Lord Alli, a leading media industry figure who set up the television production company Planet 24, wrote to the Government about the draft charter earlier this summer, raising concerns over the two key issues.

Lord Ashton of Hyde, the new culture minister, replied that he was working “extensively” with the BBC and Ofcom, and that “most of the issues you raised” were “still under review”.

He said: “I believe that we will be able to reassure you that a health check can be sensibly constrained and can therefore contribute to the success of the next Charter.”

Mr Bridgen said he was worried that ministers were planning to limit the scope of the review. “I am concerned to hear that the minister has promised to ensure the review is ‘sensibly constrained’. This undermines the point of having such a health check in the first place,” he said.

A source said the BBC had been fighting plans to use the “health check” to review the way its profit-making arm, BBC Worldwide, operates.

Ministers had wanted to consider whether the BBC should be required to sell a stake in Worldwide if it was not delivering value for taxpayers.

A DCMS spokesman said: “Significant changes have been proposed to the BBC, making it much more effective and accountable in its governance and regulation. The health check will help make sure these reforms are on the right track.”

A BBC spokesman said: “The letter makes clear that the Government has consistently stated that the health check should be merely that – a health check – and not a charter review.”*

The BBC is on trial for its future. There are things the corporation does well: the excitement surrounding Helen Titchener’s court appearance in this week’s The Archers showcases its ability to produce thought-provoking drama. But in other areas the BBC has become shallow and spendthrift, churning out lightweight entertainment that could easily be produced by commercial broadcasters. The BBC has also expanded its remit into local news and lifestyle content – further squeezing its rivals out of the market. All of this has been protected by the licence fee, which – especially in the digital age – is hard to justify in its present form.

These were the challenges that the last government’s white paper on reform of the BBC were supposed to address. David Cameron’s administration chose mostly to kick the can down the road and to extend its charter for 11 years. But there is agreement to reform aspects of the corporation’s governance, embrace diversity and cut down on magazine-style online content. One crucial mechanism for ensuring that the BBC provides values for money was a mid-term review. But a letter from a minister, seen by this newspaper, suggests that this important health check might be significantly watered down.

That would be a serious mistake. The pace of change in the media is fast. Within five years it is conceivable that the audience for commercial television will have shrunk yet further – and it would be unfair if the BBC was able to build serious market dominance and avoid structural reform thanks to the licence-fee payer. Doubly unfair if it ignores advice to focus on doing things that commercial broadcasters cannot or will not do, and instead continues to pour cash into lightweight entertainment, online magazine content and stratospheric salaries.

The new Government’s draft deal with the BBC will be unveiled soon and we sincerely hope that it does not back down. The corporation has much to do to win back the public’s confidence – a confidence shaken by the Savile scandal, absurd pay-offs for former employees and poor programming decisions illustrated by the fate of BBC3. The success of The Archers, meanwhile, demonstrates that the success of a broadcaster is still found in good scripts and strong acting – and in the old Reithian aspiration of seeking to “educate, inform and entertain”.