5
I have carefully dropped down the valuable suggestions raised by the Hon Mrs Selina Chow and would take them into consideration when we review the TV market in 1998. As to the Hon Samuel Wong's argument that some organisations were not disagreeable to the regulation of the video-on-demand under the Television Ordinance, we have reiterated our stand many times during a debate in this Council and in our discussion at the Bills Committee, I would not want to repeat it here. The Government is happy to accept these constructive proposals put forward by legislators and these are reflected in amendments to the Bill which I shall be moving during the Committee Stage.
We have accepted the Bills Committee's suggestion that, pending the review of the television environment which we plan in 1998, programme service licensees should not be permitted to compete directly with other television service providers by offering live programming. Accordingly, we shall be including a condition in the licences granted to programme service providers to this effect.
Thank you.
End
Committee stage amendments to TV (Amendment) Bill 1996
The following is a speech by Secretary of Broadcasting, Culture and Sport, Mr Chau Tak-hay, for committee stage amendments to Television (Amendment) Bill 1996 in the Legislative Council today (Wednesday):
Mr Chairman,
I move that clauses 3, 8, 9, 10, 17 and the Schedule under clause 19 of the Television (Amendment) Bill 1996 be amended as set out under my name in the paper circulated to Members.
Clause 3 of the Bill seeks, among other things, to extend the definition of "disqualified person" to cover newspaper owners to avoid the risk of an undesirable concentration of ownership of newspapers and television broadcasting licences. However, it has become clear that the wording in clause 3 needs to be amended to give effect to our policy of protecting the rights of newspaper publishers exercising control of a licensee as at 21 March 1996, while providing that they will become disqualified should they increase the level of their control thereafter. Equally, we wish to provide that if a publisher exercising control subsequently relinquishes control, for example by selling down his shareholding, he should not subsequently be able to increase his shareholding to 15% or more of a licensee whilst retaining exemption from disqualification. Accordingly, I propose amendments to sub-clause 3(1)(b)(iii) and the insertion of an additional sub-clause 3(1)(ba)(ii).