A SENIOR Conservative MP has suggested that the privatisation of Channel 4 is “revenge” for the channel’s “biased coverage … and personal attacks on [Boris Johnson]”.
Julian Knight, who chairs the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport select committee at Westminster, questioned the timing and intent of the announcement made on Monday night.
It was confirmed that the UK Government will push ahead with the plan to sell off the broadcaster, which is publicly owned but does not receive public funds.
READ MORE: How is Channel 4 funded and why are the Tories selling it off?
Although the Conservatives have had public issues with Channel 4 previously – such as when a 2019 election debate saw Johnson replaced with a melting ice sculpture when he failed to participate – the Government insisted the sale would benefit the broadcaster.
In a statement, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport claimed the decision would allow the channel to “thrive in the face of a rapidly-changing media landscape” and compete more easily with the big streaming platforms.
Now, Knight has questioned this official reasoning for the plan – writing on Twitter about the “elephant in the room”, but making clear that his views do not represent those of the committee he chairs.
Nadine Dorries's department confirmed its plan on Monday night
The Tory MP for Solihill wrote: “It is certainly true that Channel 4 will have greater freedom to compete once privatised and if managed well it should be able to continue to innovate and crucially appeal to young audiences – a real usp in today’s broadcast landscape.
“However, this is a big risk. The question has to be, do you think a restricted but brilliant small state broadcaster will part compete with the likes of Apple and Amazon or does it need to be able to borrow and grow in a way only privatisation can unlock?
“In all this, it’s crucial the Government protects the prominence of all public service broadcasting through the new media bill, in order to give the likes of a new privatised Channel 4 a head start.”
READ MORE: Channel 4: SNP criticise plans to take broadcaster out of public ownership
However, he went on: “Now, elephant in the room time – is this being done for revenge for Channel 4’s biased coverage of the likes of Brexit and personal attacks on the PM? The timing of the announcement 7pm, coinciding with Channel 4 news, was very telling…
“Undoubtedly, across much of the party – there is a feeling of payback time and the word privatisation tickles the ivories of many. The money is irrelevant – equivalent to four days’ national debt interest – so it must be used to support skills in creative sectors.
READ MORE: Petition against Tory Channel 4 privatisation explodes in popularity - how to sign
“So, to sum up. Privatisation – even for some wrong reasons – can work for C4 but must be part of a thorough overhaul of all public service broadcasting. If this is in the media bill I will support the Government. Finally, these are my views not those of the Committee more generally.”
Similarly, former Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said the announcement marked the “opposite of levelling up”.
In a tweet, Baroness Davidson added: “Channel 4 is publicly-owned, not publicly-funded. It doesn’t cost the taxpayer a penny.
“It also, by charter, commissions content but doesn’t make/own its own. It’s one of the reasons we have such a thriving indy sector in places like Glasgow.”
Former culture secretary Jeremy Hunt told Times Radio he is “uneasy” about the Channel 4 privatisation.
“I’m not against privatisation of big national monopolies. But I believe in competition.
“I think one of the reasons that we have a really healthy, vibrant media is because we give the BBC a very good run for its money when it comes not just to the big commercially successful programming, but also things like news and documentaries, and Times Radio is very important in that respect, but I think Channel 4 is as well.
“I wouldn’t like to see that competitive pressure on the BBC reduced.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel