A Bill to define public service content for the purposes of public service broadcasting
The Bill provides a definition of public service content for the purposes of public service broadcasting. Its provisions would require that no licence fee revenue would be paid for BBC services failing to meet this definition.Key areasDefines public service content in terms of: impartial, factual and objective news or current affairs; children’s programming; charitable or religious programming; or content unlikely to be supplied by the market Gives the National Audit Office a role in determining whether market failure exists in relation to some broadcasting contentRequires all public service content to meet prevailing standards of good taste and decency Repeals section 264 of the Communications Act 2003 which provides for Ofcom having to periodically report on the state of public service television broadcasting Prevents licence fee revenue being paid to the BBC for services not meeting the definition of public service contentGives the National Audit Office a duty to keep under review, and to conduct a value for money audit of the total cost of public service television broadcasting.
House of Commons
Sir Christopher ChopeConservative
9 November 2009
The bill would define what counts as public service content for public service broadcasting and would stop BBC licence fee money being spent on services that do not meet that definition. It gives the National Audit Office a role in deciding whether market failure exists and in carrying out value-for-money audits of the total cost of public service television. It also requires all public service content to meet standards of good taste and decency and would repeal Ofcom’s duty to report on the state of public service TV.
The bill is at the second reading stage in the Commons. It originated in the Commons and is sponsored by Sir Christopher Chope.
Generated 21 February 2026
This Bill was on the Order Paper 16 October, to resume the adjourned Second Reading from 12 June, but there was not enough time for debate on that day.
This Bill was on the Order Paper for a Second Reading on several Fridays before being dropped by its sponsor, Mr Christopher Chope.No recorded votes for this bill yet.
