A fresh look at national broadcasting

In Parliament we are currently discussing amendments to the Broadcasting Act. Basically we will be transposing the EU Audiovisual and Media Services Directive into our Law as all EU member states are duty-bound to do by 19^th December, 2009. The parliamentary debate has served as a rare occasion for us members of parliament to debate broadcasting and possibly come up with fresh ideas as to how this sector could be looked at from a new perspective.

Personally, I have been pushing for a mature discussion on this subject for quite some time now. The situation at PBS may not resemble the state of broadcasting in Mugabe's Zimbabwe as Labour MP Evarist Bartolo has stated in the current debate, but still I believe PBS should become a national institution, run independently of government, assume a torch-bearer role in so far as standards in broadcasting are concerned, be an incubator for prospective broadcasters, producers and TV directors and generally serve as a voice people trust without as much as a blink of an eye.

Unfortunately, broadcasting in Malta has a very unhappy past. What happened in the seventies and the eighties is hopefully dead and buried. However, I fear that this era has a bearing on the present situation. On one part, labourites feel that the state broadcaster has become a mouthpiece for the Government albeit with a more sophisticated approach than what used to happen in the past, when a Socialist government was in government. On the other hand, nationalist sympathisers, particularly those aged 50 and over are still trounced by the shameful manipulation and censorship that took place under the socialists.

Against such a scenario coming up with fresh ideas as to how shape broadcasting for the years to come becomes a harder task. But we should not give up. I still believe that the climate is right to at least discuss this subject in a very mature manner. I do not wish to discuss details as to how things should be done. Some of the ideas exposed by the Hon. Bartolo make sense, others a little bit less. There are other experts who could contribute to this discussion. Let's hear them out. Ultimately, this is a subject that should best be discussed by the House Select Committee of which I am also a member. Hopefully, the two main parties represented in parliament should reach an agreement as to how PBS could become an institution respected by all irrespective of which party is in government.

For months now I have been pushing the idea of replacing the present anachronistic TV licence fee with a new contribution aimed at securing a sound financial backing for PBS which would hopefully do away with any other funds forked out by government. This, together with the necessary reform in structure and operation, would ensure that the station gets a new owner - the public.

This change of direction should be accompanied by other decisions on situations which are currently shackling not just the station but also the whole audio-visual industry in Malta. Should PBS be competing for advertising with the same producers that supply it with content? Should it be buying programmes off the shelf from these producers and sell advertising itself through a reformed advertising department? Should PBS invite producers to submit programme so late in the day leaving them just one month in which to produce and sell the programmes aired by the station?

The time is right. The climate is perfect. Let's take the plunge and break public broadcasting from the ghost of its past which has been haunting it for many years.