UKTV to drop judicial review

MATHEW HORSMAN

Media Editor

UKTV, the rejected high bidder in the controversial auction for Channel 5, has thrown in the towel. It announced yesterday it would not seek judicial review of the decision, having taken legal counsel on the issue.

But Virgin TV, a rival bidder also rejected on the grounds that its proposed programming failed the quality threshold established by the Independent Television Commission, was still reviewing its options last night. Robert Devereux, its chief executive, was scheduled to meet legal counsel again on Monday, with other consortium partners.

It is understood that the consortium, which bid pounds 22m for the 10-year terrestrial licence, has identified several points in the ITC decision that it believes to be inaccurate or inconsistent.

A formal rebuttal will be published early next week. In what it will call its "biggest complaint", Virgin TV is understood to be concerned that other bidding groups received an opportunity to clarify contentious points, and will ask why the ITC did not ask for clarification on key issues prior to failing the bid.

More specifically, Virgin TV is concerned about criticisms of its news coverage, which the ITC deemed to be indequately resourced and supervised. Virgin TV will respond that it offered a staff of 25 dedicated staff, five for each shift, and that Reuters would provide supervision, working closely with the relevant Virgin TV news editor.

On supply of programming, Virgin, backed by ITV company HTV, Associated Newspapers, Paramount and other partners, argues that ITC criticism of the number of independent suppliers it had lined up was "inaccurate".

Virgin TV will claim that it secured 41 suppliers, compared with 39 at winning consortium Channel 5 Broadcasting, led by Pearson and MAI.

The consortium is also concerned about ITC's criticisms of its plans to repeat programmes in the week, claiming that Virgin TV would produce just as many ours of original drama as the winning consortium, but had chosen to repeat the material rather than to fill the screen with old series from the BBC and other suppliers.

On diversity of programming, signalled by the ITC as one reason for failing the bid, the consortium is expected to be particuarly blunt. In response to criticisms that it had scheduled no factual programming in peak viewing hours, it will claim that the invitation to apply for the licence contained no such requirement, and will ask whether the ITC is changing the rules as it goes along.

A final decision on whether to proceed with legal action will be taken on Monday.

UKTV, meanwhile, also criticised the ITC's decision, and was particularly blunt in responding to the commission's concerns about the "ability of UKTV to secure sufficient programming of high quality".

The consortium said: "The ITC's view of [the work of its suppliers] is not only dismissive but ignores some of the most creative and successful producers in British broadcasting."

But in a concilatory tone, UKTV's key backer, the Canadian broadcaster CanWest, confirmed it had intentions of expanding into the UK broad- casting market.