:00:00. > :00:00.similar issues in our constituencies and I know that right across
:00:00. > :00:00.government officials and ministers are very sympathetic to these cases
:00:00. > :00:13.and do try to expedite them as quickly as possible. SPEAKER:
:00:14. > :00:15.Statement, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport,
:00:16. > :00:22.secretary Karen Bradley. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I came to this House on
:00:23. > :00:27.the 16th of March to confirm that I had issued a European intervention
:00:28. > :00:33.notice in relation to the proposed merger between 21st-century fox and
:00:34. > :00:37.Sky plc on the grounds of media plurality and commitment to
:00:38. > :00:41.broadcasting standards. That triggered a requirement for Ofcom to
:00:42. > :00:46.report, initially by the 16th of May but extended to the 20th of June on
:00:47. > :00:48.the media public interest considerations and for the
:00:49. > :00:52.Competition and Markets Authority, the CMA, one jurisdiction. I issued
:00:53. > :00:56.a statement last week to confirm that I had received those reports
:00:57. > :01:01.and undertook to both publish them today and to come to the House to
:01:02. > :01:05.set out my minded to decision on the next step in this process, which is
:01:06. > :01:11.whether or not to refer the merger to a fuller phase two investigation.
:01:12. > :01:15.In line with my commitments I am today publishing both documents,
:01:16. > :01:18.copies of which will also be deposited in the libraries of both
:01:19. > :01:24.houses. I will also publish later today the letter to both parties
:01:25. > :01:27.with my decision, which I sent to them this morning. Separately, Ofcom
:01:28. > :01:33.is today publishing its fit and proper assessment of the merged
:01:34. > :01:35.company. This reflects its ongoing responsibility as the independent
:01:36. > :01:37.regulator under the broadcasting Acts to monitor who is fit and
:01:38. > :01:48.proper to a broadcast license. Decisions made by the Secretary of
:01:49. > :01:51.State under the enterprise act or made on a quasi judicial basis. I
:01:52. > :01:58.want to be clear about what that means. When taking a quasi-judicial
:01:59. > :02:02.basis -- decision, I am tightly bound. I must take my decision only
:02:03. > :02:08.on the evidence that is relevant. My decision cannot be based on opinion,
:02:09. > :02:12.speculation or conjecture. Any decision must be objectively
:02:13. > :02:16.justified by the facts before me. I must set aside wider political
:02:17. > :02:20.considerations, going beyond the scope of the legislation. I must act
:02:21. > :02:26.independently and follow a process that is scrupulously and impartial.
:02:27. > :02:33.This is what I am doing. On the question of whether the merger gives
:02:34. > :02:37.rise to public interest concerns in relation to media plurality, Ofcom
:02:38. > :02:40.concludes, the transaction raises public interest concerns as a result
:02:41. > :02:45.of the risk of increased influence by members of the Murdoch family
:02:46. > :02:50.trust over the UK news agenda and political process. With its unique
:02:51. > :02:54.presence on radio, television, in print and online. We consider these
:02:55. > :02:57.concerns may justify reference by the Secretary of State to the
:02:58. > :03:03.Competition and Markets Authority. On the basis of Ofcom's assessment I
:03:04. > :03:10.confirm I am minded to refer to a face to investigation on the grounds
:03:11. > :03:14.of media plurality. The reasoning and evidence are persuasive. The
:03:15. > :03:19.proposed entity would have the third largest total breach of any news
:03:20. > :03:26.provider, lower the only than the BBC and ITV. It would span
:03:27. > :03:31.television, radio, newspapers and online. Ofcom's report says that it
:03:32. > :03:37.would give the Murdoch family trust material evidence over news
:03:38. > :03:41.providers. This potentially raises public interest concerns because in
:03:42. > :03:45.Ofcom's view, the transaction may increase members of the Murdoch
:03:46. > :03:50.family trust's ability to influence the overall news agenda and the
:03:51. > :03:54.ability to influence the political process, and it may also result in
:03:55. > :03:58.the perception of increased influence. These are clear grounds
:03:59. > :04:05.were by referral to a phrase two investigation are warranted. There
:04:06. > :04:08.is however a statutory process I must follow. I required by
:04:09. > :04:12.legislation to allow the parties the opportunity to make representations
:04:13. > :04:16.to me on this position before I reach a decision. I will now do that
:04:17. > :04:23.and have given them until Friday the 14th of July to respond. The second
:04:24. > :04:26.question concerns whether, after the merger, the relevant media
:04:27. > :04:34.enterprises would have a genuine commitment to broadcasting
:04:35. > :04:44.standards. Ofcom concludes that, in light of Fox's and Sky's business
:04:45. > :04:50.records, we do not consider that the merged entity would like a genuine
:04:51. > :04:53.commitment to the attainment of broadcasting standards. Therefore we
:04:54. > :04:57.consider there are no broadcasting standards concerns that may justify
:04:58. > :05:01.a reference by the Secretary of State to become additional markets
:05:02. > :05:05.authority. Ofcom's approach sought to measure commitment to
:05:06. > :05:10.broadcasting standards by reference to breaches of regulatory codes. It
:05:11. > :05:15.found that Fox's compliance with the UK's compliance code is in line with
:05:16. > :05:20.comparable broadcasters. North of their compliance record in relation
:05:21. > :05:29.to overseas jurisdictions give cause for concern. -- nor did the. I also
:05:30. > :05:33.asked Ofcom to consider any effect of corporate governors on this
:05:34. > :05:38.consideration. Ofcom did this in respect of its secondary
:05:39. > :05:47.consideration of whether Fox and Sky would be fit to hold broadcast
:05:48. > :05:51.license -- licenses. It held that -- these did not in its views
:05:52. > :05:55.demonstrate that the merged company would like a genuine commitment to
:05:56. > :06:01.broadcasting standards. In reaching a view, I have to be guided only by
:06:02. > :06:05.the evidence before me. As such, based on the Ofcom report, I am
:06:06. > :06:10.currently minded not to refer to a phase two investigation in relation
:06:11. > :06:14.to a general commitment to broadcasting standards. I am giving
:06:15. > :06:17.the parties and opportunities -- over Shittu to make representatives
:06:18. > :06:25.in relation to media plurality grounds. In the interest of
:06:26. > :06:30.transparency, I will also invite wider representations on the
:06:31. > :06:36.question is to represent -- broadcasting standards. Parties
:06:37. > :06:42.responding to the consultation should not simply duplicate any
:06:43. > :06:46.representations previously made to Ofcom. Instead, responses should be
:06:47. > :06:51.limited to setting out any new and substantial evidence and any comment
:06:52. > :06:55.to Ofcom's overall approach. Rather a strong feelings among supporters
:06:56. > :07:07.and opponents of this merger, in this quasi judicial approach, I can
:07:08. > :07:14.only be guided by evidence, and not by who shouts loudest. Under the
:07:15. > :07:19.process set out in the enterprise act, it is open to the parties to
:07:20. > :07:22.propose undertakings in view of a reference to the CMA for a more
:07:23. > :07:28.detailed investigation, in other words the parties May seek to avoid
:07:29. > :07:31.a phase two reference by proposing remedies to address the public
:07:32. > :07:36.interest concerns that have been identified. The decision as to
:07:37. > :07:41.whether or not to accept undertaking is for the Secretary of State alone,
:07:42. > :07:47.however, the parties proposed a set of undertakings to Ofcom and Ofcom
:07:48. > :07:50.commented on them. Proposed undertakings centred around Fox
:07:51. > :07:58.maintaining the editorial independence of Sky News. And any
:07:59. > :08:05.changes to Sky News editorial guidelines. The only -- also include
:08:06. > :08:09.a commitment to maintain Sky branded news for five years with spending
:08:10. > :08:16.similar levels to now. Ofcom's view were -- was that these measures
:08:17. > :08:19.would mitigate plurality concerns. They also suggested the remedies
:08:20. > :08:25.could be further strengthened. The parties last week without prejudice
:08:26. > :08:29.to my decision today formally submitted undertakings in largely
:08:30. > :08:34.the same terms to me. In accordance with the legislation, if I still
:08:35. > :08:36.intend to refer the merger after considering representations from the
:08:37. > :08:40.party, I required to consider whether or not these bodies are
:08:41. > :08:44.appropriate. Given the parties have offered these undertakings and Ofcom
:08:45. > :08:48.have commented, I have taken an initial view, and I have today
:08:49. > :08:52.written to the parties indicated that I am minded not to accept the
:08:53. > :08:56.undertakings that have been offered. While Ofcom suggests they may
:08:57. > :09:07.mitigate its concerns, it is for the Secretary of
:09:08. > :09:11.State to decide whether or not this efficiently mitigate awfully remedy
:09:12. > :09:13.what are serious public interest considerations. I know that Ofcom's
:09:14. > :09:15.report says we recognise that behavioural undertakings can be
:09:16. > :09:16.difficult to monitor, and that there are areas where the proposed
:09:17. > :09:19.undertakings could be strengthened. It cites questions regarding the
:09:20. > :09:23.ongoing arrangements for the appointment of independent members
:09:24. > :09:27.of the Sky News editorial board, and the period of Fox's commitment to
:09:28. > :09:37.maintaining its investment in Sky News. I also note the guidance of
:09:38. > :09:42.the markets authority, which says that in ordinary Kim -- cases it is
:09:43. > :09:46.highly unlikely to accept behavioural limitations -- remedies
:09:47. > :09:52.that phase one. I have given the parties ten working days to make
:09:53. > :09:57.representations on the decisions I have reached. If I receive further
:09:58. > :10:01.offers of undertakings, I will keep the House informed on how I intend
:10:02. > :10:07.to structure the statutory process must follow considering them. As I
:10:08. > :10:12.have set out, I will now take representations on my positions. The
:10:13. > :10:15.call will remain open for ten working days, and they will then
:10:16. > :10:19.consider the evidence received before coming to a final decision on
:10:20. > :10:27.both grounds. To be clear, the minded to decisions are not my final
:10:28. > :10:34.decisions. A word before I close. As the independent regulator, Ofcom's
:10:35. > :10:38.fit and proper -- I have seen the report and no many members will want
:10:39. > :10:43.to comment on it. However, given my current role and the merger, I will
:10:44. > :10:47.not be commenting on its findings. It is rightly not for Government to
:10:48. > :10:55.determine who should and should not hold TV broadcasting licences. Ofcom
:10:56. > :11:00.has an ongoing duty to ensure all organisations are fit and proper to
:11:01. > :11:04.hold broadcasting licences. If evidence -- in the evidence comes to
:11:05. > :11:09.light, it is Ofcom's it is for Ofcom to consider it. I trust this
:11:10. > :11:11.statement gives an option to do to debate this position well at the
:11:12. > :11:17.same time respecting the limits of what I can say given my ongoing
:11:18. > :11:26.quasi judicial role. I commend this statement to the House. I thank the
:11:27. > :11:33.Secretary of State for her statement, albeit in redacted form,
:11:34. > :11:37.which is utterly ridiculous. This decision was delayed as a result of
:11:38. > :11:41.the unexpected General Election campaign. I help the party opposite
:11:42. > :11:46.found those weeks as productive as we did on this side of the House,
:11:47. > :11:52.but nothing about this decision is a surprise. It is the old playbook,
:11:53. > :11:59.the Secretary of State has known all along what wants to end up doing,
:12:00. > :12:03.but she has two establish -- follow the established dance steps. So let
:12:04. > :12:07.me make a prediction. The parties have proposed some pretty minor
:12:08. > :12:12.undertakings in you. They always knew they were not going to be
:12:13. > :12:16.enough to satisfy Ofcom, so the Secretary of State will demand extra
:12:17. > :12:20.conditions, as a result of which she will get written up as a tough
:12:21. > :12:23.operator. The parties will offer something new which they always had
:12:24. > :12:28.in their back pocket, the Secretary of State will accept them, and this
:12:29. > :12:34.merger will go ahead. Well, let me tell the Secretary of State the
:12:35. > :12:43.problem with Murdoch's undertakings. Not just these undertakings, but any
:12:44. > :12:50.undertakings in lieu which have never been undertaken -- offered by
:12:51. > :12:54.the Murdoch family. Ask Harold Evans or James Harding about the
:12:55. > :12:59.guarantees of a -- editorial or independence. Can the Secretary of
:13:00. > :13:03.State name any undertakings in lieu that the Murdoch family have ever
:13:04. > :13:08.made that have been respected? And if the current rules mean that James
:13:09. > :13:13.Murdoch can't pass a fit and proper test, given everything we know about
:13:14. > :13:20.his behaviour over phone hacking, and given everything we know about
:13:21. > :13:23.Fox's behaviour over the ongoing sexual harassment scandal and the
:13:24. > :13:30.United States, that says more about the rules than about Mr Murdoch. --
:13:31. > :13:37.can pass a fit and proper test. If the current Conservative Government
:13:38. > :13:42.will not risk -- rewrite the rules, the next Labour Government will.
:13:43. > :13:45.This company has been found guilty of significant corporate failure,
:13:46. > :13:49.and yet this bid process can go ahead. In fact over the next 12
:13:50. > :13:53.months the Labour Party will be reviewing media ownership rules in
:13:54. > :13:58.the UK, and let me put the media barons on notice. The days when
:13:59. > :14:02.citizens of other countries can dominate our media markets while
:14:03. > :14:08.paying their taxes overseas have got to end. The truth is, the world is
:14:09. > :14:13.changing. And it is time the Conservative Party realised it. We
:14:14. > :14:16.have seen what looks like an implicit bargain between the
:14:17. > :14:20.Conservative Party and the Murdoch Empire over recent years, the
:14:21. > :14:29.Conservatives will give Murdoch what he wanted, the Sky deal, and Murdoch
:14:30. > :14:33.would deliver Theresa May the landslide victory she craved. Well,
:14:34. > :14:40.it hasn't quite worked out that way, has eight? Rupert Murdoch has not
:14:41. > :14:45.delivered his side of the bargain, has he? His papers may have done
:14:46. > :14:51.their best to urge a Tory landslide, but he couldn't follow through. He
:14:52. > :15:00.is not what he was. It wasn't the sun that one it. The Sun told
:15:01. > :15:05.Britain, don't chuck Britain in the bin. But Britain and chucked the
:15:06. > :15:11.Tory manifesto in the bin instead. -- chuck Britain in the Corbyn.
:15:12. > :15:16.Murdoch wasn't any use to the Tories. They do not need to be any
:15:17. > :15:20.use to him any more. And if I was speaking to the Minister outside the
:15:21. > :15:26.chamber I would say to her, at long last, you are free. You can do the
:15:27. > :15:33.right thing. And one way of signalling that freedom would be to
:15:34. > :15:38.go ahead and order parte two of the liver some inquiry. Notwithstanding
:15:39. > :15:42.Ofcom's fit and proper investment, the only way to get to the bottom of
:15:43. > :15:49.corporate governance issues is that the Secretary of State should hold
:15:50. > :16:00.parte two of the inquiry. She doesn't have a mandate to drop
:16:01. > :16:04.Leveson two. Does the Secretary of State worry that given this autumn
:16:05. > :16:10.James Murdoch is facing a civil trial in the High Court over new
:16:11. > :16:13.allegations of hacking, and the destruction of evidence summary:
:16:14. > :16:19.does she think she might come out of this process with egg all over her
:16:20. > :16:24.face? How can this process possibly proceed, with these cases hanging
:16:25. > :16:29.over them? Before she makes her final decision, can she guaranteed
:16:30. > :16:32.to let the House now what the Prime Minister discussed with Rupert
:16:33. > :16:39.Murdoch at their private meeting in New York last year?
:16:40. > :16:47.Mr Speaker. I am disappointed at the honourable gentleman. I have come
:16:48. > :16:50.here to be fair and proper in a quasi judicial process and he is
:16:51. > :16:54.choosing to make it party political and that is a shame. It is very
:16:55. > :16:57.cynical of him. You should judge me on my record. Throughout this whole
:16:58. > :17:00.process I have been scrupulously fair and I have looked at the
:17:01. > :17:06.evidence and analysis available to me. He should not prejudge any
:17:07. > :17:10.decisions that I take. I will take them on the basis of the evidence
:17:11. > :17:15.and analysis given to me and that icy and I will make an appropriate
:17:16. > :17:19.judgment based on that evidence. Hope that he will give me credit for
:17:20. > :17:27.the fact that so far I have done that and will continue to do that.
:17:28. > :17:29.Mr John Whittingdale. Me I commend my Right Honourable
:17:30. > :17:33.friend on the scrupulous way in which she is both following the
:17:34. > :17:38.advice that she has been given and also giving the maximum opportunity
:17:39. > :17:43.for interested parties to comment at each stage. Would she also agree
:17:44. > :17:48.that the only thing on which the opposition spokesman was correct was
:17:49. > :17:52.in saying that when it comes to plurality it is becoming
:17:53. > :17:55.increasingly obvious, and the general election bears this out,
:17:56. > :18:02.that the printed press are a waning influence and the real media giants
:18:03. > :18:07.today are companies like Google and social media giants? My Right
:18:08. > :18:09.Honourable friend who has significant experience in this area
:18:10. > :18:13.and a great track record is absolutely right that we did see,
:18:14. > :18:16.particularly during the general election, the power and influence of
:18:17. > :18:21.social media companies, who simply do not have to abide by the same
:18:22. > :18:27.rules of impartiality, fairness and checking sources that the mainstream
:18:28. > :18:31.media do. I thank him for his comments about the approach I have
:18:32. > :18:35.taken to this merger. Whatever final decision I will take, I will take it
:18:36. > :18:38.on the basis of the evidence. I want to make sure that we are as
:18:39. > :18:42.transparent as possible because there is great public interest in
:18:43. > :18:48.this issue and I want to make sure whatever final decision I take it is
:18:49. > :18:51.understood by the public and respected. Brendan O'Hara. I thank
:18:52. > :18:57.the Secretary of State for the prior sight of her statement. Ofcom has
:18:58. > :19:00.serious concerns about the further concentration of media ownership in
:19:01. > :19:05.fewer and fewer hands and we welcome the fact she is minded to refer this
:19:06. > :19:08.to the Competition and Markets Authority on the grounds of
:19:09. > :19:13.diminishing plurality. In doing so she will bolster public confidence
:19:14. > :19:17.that recognising plurality and diversity are vital components of an
:19:18. > :19:25.independent media. In her statement she said that the guarantee she
:19:26. > :19:29.received from Fox that it does not go far enough. Should she outlined
:19:30. > :19:38.what it is she looking for from Fox to guarantee that independence of
:19:39. > :19:52.editorial standards? Issue satisfied the current arrangements,...
:19:53. > :20:03.Mr Speaker, if I can take the latter comment about the fit and proper
:20:04. > :20:05.person test, I think it would be extraordinary to be in a situation
:20:06. > :20:12.where it was government ministers who had any form of say over who
:20:13. > :20:16.held a broadcasting licence. I think it is absolutely right that is with
:20:17. > :20:19.Ofcom and if he has questions about the Ofcom process and Ofcom report
:20:20. > :20:23.when he sees it then he should address those questions to Ofcom in
:20:24. > :20:30.order that they can give him that comfort that he needs. He asks what
:20:31. > :20:35.it is I'm looking for when it comes to undertakings. Again, it is not
:20:36. > :20:38.for me to prejudge that. I have set out today that I give all parties
:20:39. > :20:43.ten working days to come forward. That is, interested bodies who was
:20:44. > :20:46.do not wish to make further presentations on broadcasting
:20:47. > :20:50.standards and media plurality, and the parties themselves on the matter
:20:51. > :20:55.of further undertakings they may wish to make or other matters on my
:20:56. > :20:59.mind it too decisions and at that point I will make a decision. Damian
:21:00. > :21:03.Collins. In terms of media plurality what
:21:04. > :21:06.consideration has been given as the member for moulding raises, to the
:21:07. > :21:11.world in which we live today were increasingly people get news on
:21:12. > :21:15.Facebook, and in the future of the television market, the merger of two
:21:16. > :21:19.companies, being dominated by the financial power and influence of
:21:20. > :21:22.companies like Netflix and Amazon? Mr Speaker, my honourable friend
:21:23. > :21:25.will see the Ofcom report which should have been published now and
:21:26. > :21:33.will see the consideration taken. One of the points of note is that in
:21:34. > :21:36.terms of the Fox - Sky merger, the concern was this is a media company
:21:37. > :21:42.that has positions on both broadcast, radio, newsprint, and
:21:43. > :21:48.online, which is unique compared to other media organisations. He's
:21:49. > :21:51.right that we are in an ever changing media landscape and one
:21:52. > :21:57.that we need to be cognisant of when looking at how to ensure that the
:21:58. > :22:03.public receives a wide and diverse range of accurate and fair news. Ed
:22:04. > :22:07.Miliband. Can I start by welcoming the fact the Ofcom report says they
:22:08. > :22:10.should be a referral to the CMA on the grounds of plurality and urge
:22:11. > :22:15.the Secretary of State is not to do a grubby deal with the Murdochs. We
:22:16. > :22:19.know their history, as my Right Honourable friend on the front bench
:22:20. > :22:26.says, they break every undertaking they make to the Times to the Wall
:22:27. > :22:30.Street Journal. About broadcasting standards, what does it take to be
:22:31. > :22:34.declared on fit and proper to hold a broadcast license? Ofcom have
:22:35. > :22:37.apparently found a second significant corporate failure on the
:22:38. > :22:44.part of the Murdochs. In terms of her responsibilities in terms of
:22:45. > :22:47.broadcast standards, we have an entity found responsible for this
:22:48. > :22:58.second huge corporate failure at Fox News after News International.
:22:59. > :23:03.Regarding the fit and proper person is test I would ask him to put those
:23:04. > :23:10.concerns to Ofcom, they have the independent role. He will see their
:23:11. > :23:15.report later today. It ill behoves him to use the term grubby when it
:23:16. > :23:18.comes to the work that we will do. If undertakings are given, and if as
:23:19. > :23:24.a result of those undertakings I am minded to consider them, there will
:23:25. > :23:26.be a full statutory public consultation on those undertakings
:23:27. > :23:31.so that we can be as transparent as possible, so that they can be no
:23:32. > :23:40.allegations of anything being grubby at all. I'm glad that the Secretary
:23:41. > :23:44.of State has pointed to the need to make decisions on the basis of
:23:45. > :23:49.evidence. She will be aware that there was a long e-mail campaign of
:23:50. > :23:54.rather emotional e-mails on this. What role have they played in her
:23:55. > :24:02.thinking and how will that help to retain public confidence. I thank my
:24:03. > :24:04.honourable friend for the comments. The petitions and campaigns that he
:24:05. > :24:09.refers to have been considered as part of Ofcom's work. He will see in
:24:10. > :24:14.the report Ofcom have considered over 51,000 responses as part of
:24:15. > :24:19.their work. He is right that in my role, the quasi judicial role, I'm
:24:20. > :24:22.obliged to look at the evidence and analysis before me. I have made the
:24:23. > :24:25.comments in my statement that shouting the loudest is not
:24:26. > :24:31.necessarily the way to get the result of one wants. We are looking
:24:32. > :24:35.for evidence and we are looking for new substantive evidence that may
:24:36. > :24:39.make a change to this decision. Sir Vince Cable.
:24:40. > :24:44.Is it not the case that the Internet companies which have been referred
:24:45. > :24:47.to, are essentially aggregators of news rather than independent
:24:48. > :24:51.providers? A company that is the leading supplier of newspaper
:24:52. > :24:58.content, the second leading supplier of radio content, and the third
:24:59. > :25:06.largest provider of content is a threat to plurality? Mr Speaker, can
:25:07. > :25:10.I welcome the Right Honourable gentleman back to this House. He is
:25:11. > :25:16.right that there is much of the Internet news that we see which is
:25:17. > :25:20.content which has been previously written and owned by other
:25:21. > :25:24.providers, and he is right in his assessment of that. But in terms of
:25:25. > :25:31.the comments on media plurality, that is why I am minded to refer to
:25:32. > :25:36.a Phase inquiry. On the subject of phone hacking I would like to remind
:25:37. > :25:40.the House it wasn't just the News of the World that was guilty. The
:25:41. > :25:46.Mirror newspaper was found guilty of hacking. Back to the subject of
:25:47. > :25:51.evidence, and following on from the point my honourable friend full
:25:52. > :25:56.Hendley made, she will mow that there have been a number of
:25:57. > :26:01.identical e-mails from organisations -- Henley. Quite properly like 38
:26:02. > :26:06.Deg. From her statement she drew the difference between evidence and
:26:07. > :26:15.perception. Is it's not evidence which is now required? My honourable
:26:16. > :26:19.friend is right. It is evidence. I am sure there will be more e-mail
:26:20. > :26:23.campaigns. I can assure my honourable friend that my inbox is
:26:24. > :26:30.full completely to bursting of identical responses from around the
:26:31. > :26:35.world. But emotional perception is not evidence. What we need is
:26:36. > :26:42.evidence in order to enable us to make a decision in a quasi judicial
:26:43. > :26:46.way. Ben Bradshaw. She asks us to judge her on her record which I will
:26:47. > :26:53.happily do. When will she keep the promises made to the victims after
:26:54. > :26:56.the Leveson Inquiry? Both announce Leveson two and and Section 40 of
:26:57. > :26:59.the crime and Courts act, which disgracefully was passed almost
:27:00. > :27:05.unanimously by both houses and has to not been implement it by the
:27:06. > :27:09.government? Mr Speaker, we have had a consultation on what should be the
:27:10. > :27:16.next steps with regard to the second part of the Leveson Inquiry and
:27:17. > :27:20.Section 40. I will be publishing the responses to that consultation.
:27:21. > :27:24.There is a process that I need to go through as Secretary of State in
:27:25. > :27:29.order to take anything further. I think we need to remember that the
:27:30. > :27:33.Leveson Inquiry was 2011. Many things have happened, many things
:27:34. > :27:37.have changed in that time. We also have to think about how best we
:27:38. > :27:41.support local press and have a free, fair and vibrant local press. I will
:27:42. > :27:48.be looking at all of those points when considering responses to the
:27:49. > :27:52.consultation. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Secretary of State for
:27:53. > :27:54.her statement and fully recognise her quasi judicial role. During the
:27:55. > :27:59.election campaign on the doorsteps constituents raised with me there
:28:00. > :28:03.concerns about bias across various media and online platforms. The
:28:04. > :28:11.concern about value for money and about plurality. Easy for me to say!
:28:12. > :28:14.meanwhile, agree that this referral meanwhile, agree that this referral
:28:15. > :28:21.will give the public confidence when it comes to this and what they are
:28:22. > :28:25.actually taking out of the media or is it purely conjecture? I thank my
:28:26. > :28:27.honourable friend and I had a similar conversations on the
:28:28. > :28:31.doorstep in my constituency and other parts of the country. That's
:28:32. > :28:35.why it is important there is full public confidence and we have a
:28:36. > :28:39.transparent process the public can have confidence in. If she had sat
:28:40. > :28:44.in the High Court day after day as I had to do as a victim of phone
:28:45. > :28:47.hacking she would have heard endless examples and evidence, yes, real
:28:48. > :28:56.evidence heard in court before a judge, of the corruption that the
:28:57. > :28:59.Murdochs perpetuated deliberately in the British political system. The
:29:00. > :29:01.truth of the matter is you cannot possibly now make a proper final
:29:02. > :29:03.judgment on whether the Murdochs are proper people to have any broadcast
:29:04. > :29:10.license in this country unless you hear more evidence in court in
:29:11. > :29:14.Leveson two. Mr Speaker, the point is that that evidence was heard in
:29:15. > :29:17.court and Ofcom have looked at that evidence as part of all the work
:29:18. > :29:23.they have been doing and I suggest he takes his points about fit and
:29:24. > :29:28.proper person with Ofcom. Mr Peter Bone. Can I thank the excellent
:29:29. > :29:32.Secretary of State for coming to the House and making such a clear
:29:33. > :29:37.statement. One of the things that seemed to me in the statement was
:29:38. > :29:44.14th July cropped up as the date when responses could be given. We
:29:45. > :29:48.are going to be going into recess shortly after that date. Can the
:29:49. > :29:53.Secretary of State assure us we will not have a final decision while the
:29:54. > :29:58.House is not sitting? Can I just add to one thing one of my honourable
:29:59. > :30:03.friend said, that on the doorstep media bias came up a lot but I'm
:30:04. > :30:08.afraid it was media bias by the BBC. They suggested to me that they
:30:09. > :30:16.should be called the Brussels broadcasting Corporation.
:30:17. > :30:20.Mr Speaker, I am acutely aware of the Parliamentary timetable force on
:30:21. > :30:24.the 14th of July, I hope, will enable me to have time from that
:30:25. > :30:30.date to before the House rises to come back to the House with any
:30:31. > :30:33.further updates. But I will endeavour, as I have throughout this
:30:34. > :30:40.process, to ensure that the House is updated before anybody else. Hannah
:30:41. > :30:46.Bardell. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sky Television is the largest employer
:30:47. > :30:48.in my Livingston constituency, so can I ask the Honourable Lady that
:30:49. > :30:51.she make sure in any considerations she make sure in any considerations
:30:52. > :30:54.and discussions she has, that the workers of both organisations and
:30:55. > :30:59.their jobs are given full and proper consideration? And further to that,
:31:00. > :31:01.as my honourable friend tried to elicit from her, she seems to know
:31:02. > :31:05.what isn't good enough for the process, but surely she must know
:31:06. > :31:09.what will be good enough. Surely that should be written down,
:31:10. > :31:14.published and will be evidence presented and put forward so we can
:31:15. > :31:18.have confidence in the process. I do of course recognise the issue with
:31:19. > :31:21.regard to people working for the organisations and employees and we
:31:22. > :31:26.need to be mindful of that. That is why in many ways it's important that
:31:27. > :31:30.decisions are taken in as prompt a time as possible in order that
:31:31. > :31:35.uncertainty does not persist and pervade. But it would not be right
:31:36. > :31:40.for me to in any way try and set out today what I think would be
:31:41. > :31:43.appropriate or not. It is for the parties to come forward with their
:31:44. > :31:46.representations and for me to make a decision as to whether I think they
:31:47. > :31:50.are appropriate to stop they phased two referral.
:31:51. > :32:01.Is the Minister aware of her total failure to see the link between on
:32:02. > :32:05.the one hand a fit and proper test, and on the other hand regular
:32:06. > :32:14.arrangements with them that might lead to some reduction in the
:32:15. > :32:21.influence of market share? Unless they are fit and proper, they will
:32:22. > :32:28.never meet those regulations. We know the first is not there, why the
:32:29. > :32:34.second? In the process for the media merger, I have a responsibility, if
:32:35. > :32:40.quasi-judicial role, to ensure that the public interest test of the
:32:41. > :32:44.enterprise act 2002 are fully met, and that media plurality, which is
:32:45. > :32:51.the question he raised, is dealt with. That is an ongoing test for
:32:52. > :32:56.the independent regulator, Ofcom, and I would suggest he refers those
:32:57. > :33:00.comments to them. As to commitment to broadcasting standards, many of
:33:01. > :33:03.the same issues are considered as are considered for the fit and
:33:04. > :33:08.proper persons test, and he will see in the report exactly what Ofcom
:33:09. > :33:14.say. If he has further substantive comments to make, I suggest he makes
:33:15. > :33:20.them as part of that process. I thank the Secretary of State for her
:33:21. > :33:22.statement. I am sure she will be reflecting on contrasting the
:33:23. > :33:33.broadcasting regulations with what exists online, and a huge impact
:33:34. > :33:40.that has. Even a hypothetical Fox news UK would have to be very
:33:41. > :33:44.different to its US sibling. Any broadcaster in the United Kingdom
:33:45. > :33:49.has to comply with the broadcasting codes, has to meet our tests of
:33:50. > :33:55.impartiality, has to meet our tests of credibility and fair reporting,
:33:56. > :34:01.and that may be very different from the tests employed -- applied in
:34:02. > :34:07.other countries. While we welcome the Secretary of State is minded to
:34:08. > :34:11.refer the proposed acquisition for fuller investigation by the CMA, and
:34:12. > :34:18.we are pleased the statement does recognise the danger of too much
:34:19. > :34:21.power -- media power in the hands of too many individuals, we would ask
:34:22. > :34:26.her if in light of her previous references to failures of corporate
:34:27. > :34:30.Government -- governance, in reference to phone hacking, is she
:34:31. > :34:37.now believes a CMA inquiry will go far enough to tackle wholesale the
:34:38. > :34:45.problems at Sky? I welcome the honourable lady to hear. -- to this
:34:46. > :34:51.place. I am obliged under the process to comply with the terms of
:34:52. > :34:58.the enterprise act 2002, and I am following those processes
:34:59. > :35:06.scrupulously. In terms of broadcasting standards, does she
:35:07. > :35:11.recall the anger over the Fox news broadcaster claimed that birds --
:35:12. > :35:16.Birmingham is a city where Muslims simply cannot go? If she approves
:35:17. > :35:23.this merger, what assurance can she give us that she can event that kind
:35:24. > :35:30.of offensive knowledge -- nonsense being allowed on a Sky News
:35:31. > :35:34.broadcast in this country? Any broadcaster in the UK has to comply
:35:35. > :35:44.with broadcasting codes. And those codes are different to those in
:35:45. > :35:48.other countries. I welcome the Minister's statement. The merger
:35:49. > :35:51.test busby fit and proper, there are many concerns that this fit -- there
:35:52. > :35:57.are doubts that the new service will be impartial. Is it right that one
:35:58. > :36:02.body controls so much of the media outlet, too much control in the
:36:03. > :36:08.hands of too few is surely a danger? And that is why I am minded to refer
:36:09. > :36:14.to a face two inquiry to ensure that we do have full confidence in
:36:15. > :36:20.whatever decision I finally take. -- a phase two inquiry. In coming to
:36:21. > :36:23.its view on their commitment to broadcasting standards, did Ofcom
:36:24. > :36:29.take account of the new civil case in which the judge, on phone
:36:30. > :36:36.hacking, has required James Murdoch to surrender his personal laptop? I
:36:37. > :36:40.would have to ask the honourable lady to wait for the Ofcom report
:36:41. > :36:46.and to look at that, but I would remind her that the duty on Ofcom on
:36:47. > :36:49.fit and proper person is an ongoing duty, Iniesta because of the
:36:50. > :37:00.reviewed and reflected upon, and that is for Ofcom to do. -- it needs
:37:01. > :37:03.to be reviewed. Union-macro our predecessors determined that the
:37:04. > :37:12.broadcasters should have a duty of balance in our news, as a result of
:37:13. > :37:16.which we trust the broadcasters to a greater or lesser extent than the
:37:17. > :37:23.press which carried out a campaign of character assassination on the
:37:24. > :37:31.leader of my party in the election. And rightly, the views of the BBC
:37:32. > :37:37.trusted the truth rather than the propaganda. But don't we have --
:37:38. > :37:43.aren't we in a world where fake news is a real danger, and activities
:37:44. > :37:50.that are invisible and outside the nature of all the controls we have?.
:37:51. > :37:55.We need a new charter for all news? -- do we not need? We announced in
:37:56. > :38:00.the Queen's Speech that we are looking to construct a digital
:38:01. > :38:05.charter which will look at the way that people access information off
:38:06. > :38:10.the Internet. And he right, I think we were all victims in this House of
:38:11. > :38:16.what appeared to be an echo chamber of people who would put something
:38:17. > :38:19.completely vile and false on social media, and it was reinforced and
:38:20. > :38:23.repeated time and time again, that is simply not acceptable, it is
:38:24. > :38:30.something I have raised with the social media companies and will
:38:31. > :38:38.continue to do so. The Conservative Party has blocked never said two.
:38:39. > :38:42.How can we respect the quasi-judicial role of the Secretary
:38:43. > :38:45.of State when she is closing of the hearing of additional evidence that
:38:46. > :38:52.was promised by the Prime Minister David Cameron would be heard to the
:38:53. > :38:58.victims of phone hacking? -- the Conservative Party has blocked
:38:59. > :39:02.Leveson two. These are different matters, and I am bound by the
:39:03. > :39:08.evidence before me. I'm sure the Secretary of State sees through some
:39:09. > :39:11.of the humbug on the Labour benches concerning the former leader who
:39:12. > :39:23.warmed the bed of the media mogul who became the godparent to James
:39:24. > :39:26.Murdoch's stepsister. But can I congratulate the Minister for the
:39:27. > :39:31.way she has conducted herself today, in the handling of this report? And
:39:32. > :39:34.look forward to being able to make representations. What MPs be able to
:39:35. > :39:43.meet her personally or will we have to write to her to make their case?
:39:44. > :39:52.-- will they be able to. I am happy to meet members, but can recommend
:39:53. > :39:53.he makes requests through the official line. Before they come to
:39:54. > :39:54.points