What is behind the Tory backlash against Channel 4 privatisation?
If the government is to get its way, it will have to work hard to assure MPs that jobs – especially those outside of London – will somehow be protected during the process, writes Adam Forrest
Privatisation. The very word “tinkles the ivories” of many people in the Conservative Party, according to the influential MP Julian Knight.
If culture secretary Nadine Dorries hoped to give Tories that tinkly feeling with the privatisation of Channel 4, she may be surprised by the scale of the backbench backlash against the sell-off.
Channel 4’s former head of news Dorothy Byrne suggested the move announced on Monday evening was designed to “throw a bit of red meat” to Tory supporters “at a time the government is in trouble”.
But Tory MPs are unimpressed. Some senior figures have already condemned the move as unnecessary, “unconservative” and at odds with the government’s levelling up agenda of job creation outside of London.
Some have pointed out that it was Margaret Thatcher – the Tories’ patron saint of privatisation – who set up Channel 4 in 1982 as a way of getting more competition and independent innovation into broadcasting.
Ms Byrne said Thatcher had invented Channel 4 “in order to invent the independent production company sector, which has made billions and billions for this country”.
It’s a point which many Tory MPs find persuasive. Jeremy Hunt, the former culture secretary, said he was against the sale for this reason.
“I believe in competition – I think one of the reasons that we have a really healthy, vibrant media is because we give the BBC a very good run for its money,” he said on Tuesday.
Former Tory minister Damian Green said ministers had made the error of “thinking they know more about a business than the people who run it … Thatcher, who created it, never made that mistake”.
Then there is the argument about it putting jobs at risk. Tory peer Ruth Davidson says Channel 4 has helped create a thriving independent TV sector in Scotland and cities in the north of England.
“This is the opposite of levelling up,” Baroness Davidson said on the contentious move announced by Ms Dorries as part of the government’s forthcoming media bill.
MPs remain puzzled by the real purpose of the sale. Although the government owns Channel 4, it gets its funding from advertising – receiving “not a penny” from the taxpayer, as Baroness Davidson put it.
There is some money to be made, of course. No price tag has been set by the government yet, but reports suggest the channel could be sold for as much as £1bn.
Ms Dorries says the government would look to “reinvest” the money from the sale in the creative industries.
Ministers insist it’s not about money, however – claiming privatisation was in Channel 4’s own interests. The culture secretary said public ownership was “holding Channel 4 back from competing against streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon”.
Sceptical? Mr Knight, chair of the culture and media select committee, is too. The senior Tory questioned the real motivation behind the planned sell-off.
“Is this being done for revenge for Channel 4’s biased coverage of the likes of Brexit and personal attacks on the PM?” he tweeted. “There is a feeling of payback time.”
However, Mr Knight has indicated he will back the government’s media bill, so long as the government “protects the prominence” of public service broadcasting.
Ministers appear to have started on the defensive with its plan for Channel 4. There is no breathless excitement about unleashing investment – no attempt to revive the swashbuckling days of privatisation which saw BT, British Airways, British Steel and British Gas flogged off.
If the government is to get its way, it will have to work hard to assure Tory MPs that jobs and production companies, especially those outside of London, will somehow be protected during the process.
There will also be huge questions about the potential for foreign ownership of Channel 4 – which has not yet been ruled out. If Boris Johnson wants to keep the Tory faithful on side, he may have to make sure a British broadcasting gem stays firmly in British hands.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments