PN back-bencher on future role of political stations

Nationalist MP Charlo' Bonnici told Parliament yesterday that the country must take a fresh look at the role of political stations and take courageous decisions by which, while the political parties remained the owners of production houses, the formula must be moved away from the current system.

Speaking during the debate in second reading of the Broadcasting Act (Amendment) Bill, Mr Bonnici said the political broadcasting stations could still be used better for democracy.

He agreed with some of the points expounded by Labour media spokesman Evarist Bartolo, but said that Mr Bartolo was not the ideal person to speak about other points in view of broadcasting's unhappy past.

Broadcasting in Malta must not be dragged into politics; the sector was more free now than it had ever been. The Labour Party had been given more air-time in comparison with the Nationalist Party.

He had never been past proposing that the system of televiewers' contributions, through the TV licence, should be changed and the proceeds should go to more than one station.

The switch to digital transmission was all but complete, and the PBS portal should be modernised. The government had allocated more funds to PBS to partly make up for a drop in advertising revenue.

Mr Bonnici said things also bore changing when certain posts were being filled. The post of Programmes Manager had taken a lot of selection time, but it seemed that in the end it would be filled by an employee. It would have saved a lot of time if an internal call for applications had been issued.

The local audio-visual industry would find help in the EU directive's considerations in this sphere. Some of these were important to the benefit of the listener, especially children.

The local sector was small but important, especially with the high content of local productions and the pluralism in broadcasting. Local productions were of a higher standard, possibly even because they were produced on smaller budgets. The sense of commitment of local producing houses sometimes meant better productions even at some financial loss.

An audit report had recently found PBS was under-funded, especially in drama programmes which were not necessarily backed up by advertising, which had dropped by some 30 per cent or €3 million.

Product placement was important and should be interesting in Malta's particular scenario, but caution was very important especially on children's programmes.

Mr Bonnici said it was of concern that there was no quantification of sponsorships in farm-out programmes, and therefore the broadcaster had no knowledge of the producer's income. News and current affairs must definitely not be sponsored, even though some already were. The situation must change after the EU directive came into force.

PBS news bulletins were not financed by public funds but by advertising, which meant that some other model of financing should be explored. Such advertising constituted a conflict of interest, not only politically but also commercially.

Mr Joseph Falzon (PN) said broadcasting in Malta was free and for the past 20 years ago it had served as a basis of freedom of expression, especially through pluralism. This had led to strong political maturity.

There was a balance in the coverage of political parties' activities, and this led to respect. He acknowledged the good work being put up by journalists, but stressed that these should have the proper knowhow.

He said that for the present situation to come about, the PN had had to right the wrongs of the 1980s. This had led to a rebellion, on the basis of which a number of radio and television stations had developed.

What used to happen in the 1980s could in no way be compared to complaints registered against PBS today. A party which felt it was not given the proper transmission could well put matters right on its own stations.

Mr Falzon welcomed the cultural opportunities which the new media had opened up to talented youngsters. There was a further need of competition among the different stations themselves.

However, broadcasting should still have respect for the individual and the community. Certain discussions were allowed to make accusations against third parties who were not present and could not defend themselves.

Concluding, Mr Falzon augured that broadcasting would continue to contribute to more freedom and respect within the community.

Labour MP Joe Mizzi said everyone agreed that broadcasting was influential, and stations had to be autonomous and transparent.

Between 1996 and 1998 it had been the practice that whenever a Labour Minister read a statement in the House, the national station also broadcast the shadow minister's reaction. This custom had been stopped with the change of government.

Whenever PBS broadcast a minister's reply to an opposition supplementary question, no mention was made of the opposition.

Mr Mizzi said that a year ago, although PBS had taken his comments on oil exploration contracts that the government had signed, these comments had never been broadcast because they could have damaged the government's image. This was an everyday occasion.

He referred to the black-dust issue where PBS gave the impression that the government was doing its utmost to solve the issue without even asking the government on the information acquired in studies which had been undertaken.

He also criticised PBS for failing to ask Enemalta's chairman on the results of the inquiry which dealt with allegations of sabotage when the country suffered the recent power outage, even if it was at the forefront in broadcasting Enemalta's suspicions of sabotage by the workers.

Mr Mizzi said that there was a lot of confusion on the extension of the Delimara power station. PBS had the duty to inform the public that Malta had an energy crisis.

Another opposition MP, Helena Dalli, said that broadcasting should be the platform where everybody should have the opportunity to voice his or her opinion.

PBS was a state and not a public broadcaster. The opposition had every right to criticise the national station because certain things in the sector were worse than what had happened in the past.

Certain producers who were given prime time on the national station showed the government in a positive light because it paid them to do so.

PBS news always broadcast positive items about the government but rarely criticised it on its operations. It did not even report internal troubles within the party in government, when the public had every right to know such information. The government had taken certain decisions in an attempt to solve these internal problems.

Employees recruited by PBS were either PN supporters or journalists. Political affiliation was an asset in board appointments, in the news section and editorial board, with the government having overall control.

Ms Dalli said the 1996 Labour government had allowed certain known producers to continue to produce their programmes on the national station. It had given proof of its democratic credentials.

The government adopted a tribal system in national broadcasting. She referred to an e-mail sent by the Nationalist Party General Secretary to get information from government departments so as to satisfy people's individual needs.

PBS was an important tool to perpetuate a system which showed the government in a good light only. The government made promises which it did not deliver. It also adopted the system of bringing over Maltese living abroad to vote and leave the islands again, with no interest in what was happening here.

Nationalist MP Philip Mifsud said it was out of place for the opposition to compare PBS with Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation, when its record in the 1980s was nothing to boast about.

He said everyone must bear responsibility for their actions because broadcasting reached the whole spectrum of society. Experts dishing out advice should be more clear because they could be misinterpreted.

He referred to advertising and said certain programmes were not fit for certain ages. One particular programme, which he did not name, promised sums of money but the laws of probability were against the audience. Such rules ought to be fairer.

On Monday, Nationalist MP Edwin Vassallo said that the opposition was using the debate to criticise PBS, but in many cases, half-truths were said.

He was referring to what Owen Bonnici had said during the closing arguments of his contribution.

The Labour MP had said PBS had transmitted €3.5 millions' worth of advertising in a year, but had directly sold only 54 per cent of that amount. The rest had been sold by some 40 companies. If these were not vested interests, what was? he had asked.

Mr Vassallo said the Bill aimed to protect the consumer in what was being transmitted, in terms of race, sex, religion or ethnicity. Human dignity should be respected and values had to be given a good basis.

The EU directive emphasised that programmes should not subtly promote certain products or services pertaining to sponsors.

He said it was the broadcasters' role to see that their stations were financially sustainable by producing good programmes which led to advertising revenue.

However, PBS must strike a good balance between entertainment and education, between commercial and social sustainability. It was considered as a role model for public morality, and many took it that whatever was broadcast was dogma.

Mr Vassallo criticised The Times for not reporting his contribution on family values in the budget debate. The Times had only reported the speeches by the minister and the opposition spokesman on the sector, he said.

He warned the opposition to be wary of how to use the phrase that "truth will triumph" as this could lead the opposition to contradict itself.

Both sides of the House had to agree that broadcasting should emphasise respect, responsibility, fidelity, accountability and the value of truth.

He acknowledged that people were living in a secularised society, but priorities in broadcasting had to safeguard human dignity and common values. Broadcasters had an obligation to strengthen society.

The debate continues next Monday.