Legislation that could change the way broadcasters and communications providers are regulated passed its first test in the House of Keys on Tuesday.

But assurances had to be given that the fine details would not be debated until after a select committee report on public service broadcasting was debated by Tynwald in December.

On Tuesday, Dr Alex Allinson (Ramsey) brought the Communications Bill forward for a second reading - when its principle is debated.

Dr Allinson, who is guiding the Bill on behalf of Communications Commission chairman Bill Malarkey, who was unable to attend, said: ’While local radio stations will continue to be licensed as they are now, the Bill also provides for regulation of TV provided by satellite or distributed by an electronic communications network.’

There was a built-in flexibility on the broadcasting regulations.

’As with telecoms, the legislation will provide the framework upon which the detailed regulations can be built,’ he added. ’Indeed the ongoing work of the Tynwald select committee on public service broadcasting demonstrates the continuing interest that exists in this space.

’It also emphasises the importance of the bill having provisions to deal with issues in the broadcasting sector in a proactive way.’

Although some MHKs questioned the timing, after Dr Allinson gave the assurance that it was not planned to debate the clauses of the bill until after the select committee report was debated, the bill was granted its second reading.

Some also queried why the new legislation brought telecommunications and broadcasting under one umbrella. At present there are separate Telecommunications and Broadcasting acts.

Dr Allinson said the Bill still recognised them as two distinct sectors.

’This bill brings together telecommunications and broadcasting, previously dealt with separately in the Telecommunications Act 1984 and the Broadcasting Act 1993 and ensures the provisions in the legislation are appropriate for our modern society,’ he said.

’While the current legislation has largely stood the test of time it is apparent that a new approach is required. In 1984 the telecoms sector was still in its infancy in comparison to what exists today.

’The island has moved from having a monopoly provider of voice services to having a sector which enjoys healthy competition for all services.’

Some MHKs expressed disappointment that although the Bill dealt with aspects of the Communications Commission, it did not address whether it should continue have a political head, unlike other regulatory bodies, such as the Financial Services Authority, which do not.

Dr Allinson said there was ’no evidence’ to support the argument that having a political chairman affected the independence of the board.

responsibility

’A statutory board is a body corporate and all the members share collective corporate responsibility for the decisions of the board,’ he said. ’While the chair does have a vote, all views from the board have equal value and influence.’

Bill Shimmins (Middle) said: ’This is an especially sensitive issue given the Communications Commission’s role in overseeing public sector broadcasting.

’Is it appropriate that there is a political chairman?’

The bulk of the Bill actually addresses telecommunications.

Dr Allinson said: ’The Bill supports a new landscape of consumer choice and technological change that could not have been envisaged when the original legislation was enacted.

’In order to provide the regulatory and legislative certainty needed to help foster investment, the bill has adopted a technology and service neutral approach.’