[CMA_Radioforum] Extending the pilots licences.

[Nicky Edmonds]

Desi Radio have asked me to send this to the list on their behalf to
inform discussion at the meeting in London next Wednesday and to find
out the views of other access radio pilots. If you would like to
respond, email  radioforum at commedia.org.uk  and it should go out to all
the other pilots.
Nicky


Our basic premise is that we would like our licence extended on a
reasonable and fair basis when judged against the sort of licences that
may be awarded in the future and also to give the current stations
suitable security beyond the end of the year.

Points for the CMA supporting an extension of the current Access radio
Licences


1.	All the current licensees went through a competitive application
process to win one of the original ‘experimental’ licences. There is no
reason to assume that this process was any less competitive than any
future round will be,

2.	It is likely that any new licence that is awarded will be for a
greater period, with greater certainty, than the experimental stations
had. This would seem to be unfair in the light of the above and
therefore all the current stations that wish to carry on should have
their licences extended so that they are at least as long as those given
to the next round of stations.

3.	Because of the delay in the creation of OFCOM, the current
fifteen stations have been in a state of limbo for some time, not being
able to plan for the future in terms of programming and funding. Some
consideration should be given to this when it comes to considering their
case against any new applicant.

4.	These fifteen stations were the pioneers as far as
Access/Community Radio is concerned. They have discovered opportunities
for funding, proved that there is any audience for this type of radio
and discovered new forms of programming, particularly based around
training schemes that have given opportunities and a voice to otherwise
disenfranchised sections of their respective communities. Their success
in this area should be recognised and in many cases the training schemes
that have been developed are too far down the line for the final part of
the training, i.e. the on-air part, to be cancelled with only a few
weeks notice, as might be the case if the licences are not extended
beyond the end of the year.

5.	Some recognition should be given to the investment made by the
original fifteen stations, both financially and personally. Whilst it is
appreciated that the stations are non-profit making, they should also be
non-loss making and by not offering a reasonable length licence which
will cover the not inconsiderable investment made by the founders of
these stations, the new stations will have a far more secure future
knowing over how many years they will be broadcasting and therefore
spreading their costs. The current stations have put in a lot of time
and money to get off the ground and their endeavours should be
recognised by awarding them a licence that will at least provide a
reasonable return to the charitable organisations that have supported
them. This return can be ploughed back into the radio stations or into
the other areas of that charities work, such as training.

6.	It could be pointed out to any station that says the original
fifteen have an unfair advantage that they could (and may have) applied
a at the same time, a couple of years ago had they wished. Many may not
have done so as they were not so well established as the current fifteen
and had not done the groundwork to lay the foundations that the
successful stations did. Why should they now be able to come in having
seen what is required from the incumbent stations and pull the rug from
under their feet?

7.	We do not know when OFCOM will be in a position to offer new
licences, or indeed what the terms of those licences will be – for how
long, how many, where and what format. Having laid the foundation for
community radio, we feel that the current stations have suffered for too
long, not being able to plan for the future, not being able to look at
new forms of programming, not being able to raise long term funding or
sponsorship, not being able to renegotiate with suppliers such as NTL
and BT for long term discounts on the services that they supply.
Short-term extensions are not a satisfactory way to reward these
stations and any extension to the licence, to cover the settling down of
the regulator, should be of a suitable duration to give the stations
some power for negotiation with its suppliers.

8.	We, at Desi Radio, would expect that a reasonable length for a
full Community Radio licence should be five years, therefore not as long
as a commercial licence but long enough for a station to reasonably
cover its costs and supply a service to the community. There should be
no reason why an incumbent station should not be able to reapply for its
licence at the end of this period should it wish. Some thought should be
given to the inequality between city stations, such as Desi, where there
will be great competition for the frequencies and stations in more rural
areas where the pressure on resources will be less. A station’s success
at providing a service to the community should be recognised and a
station should not be replaced because it is someone else’s turn. There
should be no confusion between being successful and the assumption that
a successful station is too commercial. Community radio can have
listeners too.

9.	We feel that any extension to the licence beyond the end of 2003
should be for at least eighteen months to cover the settling down period
for OFCOM and a reasonable period for the regulator to decide the
criteria for new applicants, the advertising of new licences, the award
of these licences and the setting up of new stations. If a licence
period for new applicants were decided early on (say five years), then
it would be reasonable that this eighteen-month period be extended at
the earliest opportunity to give the current stations at least a
five-year licence. It could also be suggested that the probationary
period that the current stations are going through should not count as
part of their time on air and they should be awarded five years from 1st
January 2004. This could easily be justified by the fact that any new
station, knowing that they had, for instance, a five year licence could
plan their programming, investment and aspirations accordingly. We have
never had that luxury, having had, at most a one-year future. Therefore
we have had to base our aspirations on what might be achievable in that
period. As an example, it has not been possible to recruit a full time
station manager on the basis of the short-term nature of the licence.
Therefore innovative production has been more difficult to achieve using
committed, but non-staff volunteers who inevitably have other jobs to go
to.

10.	Recognition should be given to the time as effort expanded by
the current fifteen stations to get the Access Radio experiment off the
ground. Without our research, lobbying and contributions to the Access
Radio Report, Community Radio might not now be so high up the OFCOM
agenda.







Community Media Association
Celebrating 20 years of Community Media
1983-2003

http://www.commedia.org.uk

Telephone 0114 279 5219
Email nicky at commedia.org.uk