Jeremy Hunt Letter
Jeremy Hunt Letter
Jeremy Hunt Letter
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP London SW1Y 5DH Fax 020 7211 6309
Secretary of State www.culture.gov.uk
CMS 172104/asg
Ivan Lewis MP
House of Commons
LONDON
SW1A 0AA
19 April 2011
Dear Ivan
I think it is simplest if I answer your questions in order. Before doing so, though,
I should stress that we are still considering the representations on the consultation
and the details of the carriage and brand licensing agreements, and I have not reached
a final decision on this matter.
How the initial Board of Newco will be appointed is something that remains
to be determined. Going forward, the selection of the Board will be a matter
for the company to determine. As you will have seen, the UILs provide that
the majority of the board should be properly independent. The Interpretation
section of the UILs sets out in some details what is meant by independent
in this context.
It is not possible to predict with any certainty what the position will be in
ten years and whether Newco will enter into a new contract with News
Corporation or obtain new or additional sources of revenue/business.
You will recall that Ofcom advised me in its letter of 1 March that the
UILs, including the 10 year carriage agreement, addressed its earlier
plurality concerns.
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
5. How is the proposed remedy consistent with the OFT’s guidance that it
is rare to accept even interim purchase/supply arrangements between
merging partners and the divestment business given the requirements
for a clear cut remedy in lieu of a Competition Commission reference?
The OFT's guidance relates to different issues from those I have to deal with.
The OFT remedies are designed to solve competition concerns and the
guidance is tailored to those sorts of issues. Where merging parties and a
divested business are direct competitors, I can understand that it may be rare
for purchase/supply arrangements to be accepted. Here, however, I am
dealing with a plurality issues in circumstances where all of the competition
issues have been dealt with by the EU Commission, so the guidance is not
quite on point. In addition, it is worth noting that whereas with the OFT, if it
refers a competition case to the CC, that is the end of its involvement, with
plurality matters, the structure always leaves the final decision to me, even if
the CC were to be involved. In any event, I have taken into account the
advice of both the OFT and Ofcom in this process.
In the end, under the statutory scheme, I have to consider whether the
proposed remedy prevents, mitigates or remedies concerns about plurality.
The remedy in this case is designed purely to address the plurality issue. To
that extent I am conscious of ensuring the Newco is a viable provider of news.
Ofcom provided its report identifying its concerns regarding plurality which I
took seriously. Whilst there were issues in that Ofcom analysis about which
questions might have arisen, in reaching the view that I should consult on the
proposed remedy, I sought to ensure that the remedy dealt with the concerns
identified by Ofcom. I will, of course, consider carefully the issues raised in
the course of the consultation and will then reach my view whether the
proposed remedy will fulfil the relevant statutory test..
The directors of Newco have a duty to act in the interests of Newco. This will
clearly involve consideration of Newco's relationship with Newscorp as Sky
News' main customer, but decisions in each instance will depend on
individual circumstances. There could equally be circumstances in which
independent directors advise the board to pursue a strategy that makes
Newco less dependent on Newscorp. It is worth noting also that, as with any
other company, the directors of Newco will act in accordance with the Articles
of Association, which will have the provisions relating to independence
enshrined in them.
Department for Culture, Media and Sport