BA rejects PN, AD requests for EU spots on PBS

The Broadcasting Authority has turned down requests by the Nationalist Party and Alternattiva Demokratika to broadcast spots on the European Union on Public Broadcasting Services free of charge.

The two parties had made the request after they claimed that an imbalance was created when on June 6 the authority decided to allow the Labour Party to broadcast spots on the EU on PBS equivalent to a third of the time taken by spots produced by the Malta EU Information Centre (MIC). The MLP had complained that the facts in MIC's programmes were not correct and that it had the right to broadcast other facts that were also relevant.

The authority also said yesterday that it had rejected requests by the IVA Movement, CNI and FMI to be given the same facility to broadcast on PBS.

The authority said with regard to the PN and AD's requests that the remedy that had been given to the MLP was meant to make up for an imbalance in the facts which had resulted from the MIC broadcasts. The MIC spots expressed the facts relevant for those who considered "full membership" as the road which the country should follow. This was the declared policy of both the PN and AD. But as also confirmed by the courts, in the EU debate there were those in favour of membership and those against.

The Nationalist Party and Alternattiva had never complained that the MIC spots did not faithfully show the facts about this policy. Neither had this point been made after it gave its June decision.

Furthermore, while MIC was autonomous of the government and answered to MEUSAC (The Malta-EU Steering and Action Committee) there could be no doubt that its operations were approved by the government and faithfully reflected what would eventually be presented to the electorate for approval. It was difficult to argue that the PN had a policy which was substantially different from the government's at least on the basis of the facts, the Broadcasting Authority said.

It added that the remedy it gave the MLP was with regard to the MIC spots and it could not see how this remedy could create an imbalance with regard to the other two parties, which had certainly not been prejudiced by the MIC spots.

It said that Alternattiva Demokratika was also in favour of EU membership and had no alternative of its own. It had no reservation about membership, even if it was of the view that what was being negotiated (with the EU) could have been negotiated differently or better.

This was, however a matter of opinion which had to be considered as such. Indeed the authority was planning a series of discussion programmes which would give the political parties and other movements and individuals the opportunity to put their views across.

The authority said that once it felt that there was no need to give a remedy to the PN and AD, which were political parties recognised by the constitution and the Broadcasting Act as having a right to broadcasting in certain circumstances, the other movements had less of a right for such a remedy.

Th requests by IVA, CNI and FMI could not be upheld because the movements could certainly not expect to be treated as political parties.

The authority would give them the right to express their views in the same way as it gave such opportunities to other bodies, in line with its policy in favour pluralism on both the state and the private broadcasting media.

The authority said it would treat all movements equally and was preparing a scheme of programmes to this end.

The Labour Party said the authority's decision confirmed how right it had been in the past few months to demand a remedy for the MIC's spots.

The authority itself had now declared that the spots by MIC expressed the relevant facts for those who considered full membership in the EU as the road Malta should follow, which was the policy of the PN and AD.

This confirmed that for months, MIC, while being exclusively allowed to broadcast spots on the EU, had been broadcsting only the voice of those in favour of EU membership.

The decision showed the shameful decision taken by the Broadcasting Authority when under the chairmanship of Prof Joseph Pirotta, which had denied the MLP its right to broadcast its spots on PBS.

It said the decision also revealed the partisan policy adopted by PBS under the chairmanship of Anthony Tabone when it refused to broadcast the MLP spots for two months.

The BA's declaration that the MIC spots reflected relevant facts for those who favoured EU membership also showed the arrogance of the PN and AD, which had still demanded the opportunity to broadcast their spots.

In a separate development, PN Information Director Gordon Pisani yesterday wrote to the chairman of the Broadcasting Authority, requesting a right of reply to the MLP spots on the EU.

He observed that the authority, in its decision on June 6, granting the MLP the opportunity to broadcast its spots had laid down that they should only carry facts relevant to the alternative to EU membership, without giving opinions.

The MLP had so far broadcast spots on workers, the self-employed, prices, the shipyards and agriculture in which they showed what the MLP wished to achieve. This was different from explaining facts which could be carried out. Various commissioners of the European Union had said that what the MLP wished to achieve through a special arrangement or partnership with the EU was not feasible and achievable.

The outcome of the negotiations with the EU could not be put on the same plane as the wishes of the MLP. The negotiations had been held and represented real facts while what the MLP was saying in its spots were wishes which could not be achieved. Similarly, the impact of EU membership on member states and candidate countries was actual and different from the MLP's fantasy.

The spots the MLP was broadcasting did not present facts, which the authority itself had demanded, but wishes and opinions which were creating an imbalance against the PN in broadcasting.

The PN was therefore asking to be given the opportunity to reply to all the spots broadcast by the MLP.