The Media Workers Association of Grenada (MWAG) is calling for fundamental changes to be made to a proposed Broadcasting Act and Policy being put together by the Keith Mitchell-led government in St. George's.

The group which represents media workers on the island and is headed by Michael Bascombe believes that the composition of the governing board is weighed too heavily in favour of government. According to MWAG, the proposed bill clearly "provides a monopoly for the Minister (of Information) to control and dominate (the) media under the cover of an authority".

The organisation has planned a meeting later this month for its membership and managers of media houses on the island to further discuss the impending legislation. Following is the full text of a release put out by MWAG on the proposed Broadcasting Act:

A broadcasting policy along with an Act to govern the industry is fundamental. Media Workers and all Grenadians are urged to support both, once they provide for accountability and transparency.
In addition, we strongly recommend that along with the Broadcasting Act and Policy an Access to Information Act be a third component of the process.

Our Association can recommend competent people as well as receive assistance from regional experts in drafting an Access to Information Bill. The importance of an Act to govern the Broadcasting Industry cannot be overemphasized.  Among other things, it will set standards for everyone in the industry and ensure their ethical practice; furthermore, it will set policies and guidelines for operating and owning a Radio/TV station; minimum standards for the broadcasters; and minimum standards for programs.

However, the executive of the MWAG is strongly opposed to some sections in the Bill which is being circulated to some people for discussion. These sections run contrary to good governance and democracy. In fact, it provides a monopoly for the Minister to control and dominate media under the cover of an authority.

For example, Part III of the Bill which sets up the Board speaks volumes of Government control.

"The Chairman shall be appointed by the Governor General after consultation with the Prime Minister and the Opposition leader. In the Grenada we are living , consultation means to inform the other parties. Our Recommendation is that the Chairman be appointed by the Government".

The Bill recommends that the other members of the Board - are the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry, who is a government appointee; the Solicitor General - Government; the Chairman of the National Telecommunication Authority, who is chosen by government; one person nominated by the Minister from among three recommended by the Broadcasting community.

Who is the broadcasting committee in Grenada? Will the Minister determine the members? What's his criterion?  Why not the local Association?

It also calls for two persons appointed by the Minister upon the nomination by the minister from among four person recommended by the Chamber of Commerce, and one representative from the Consumers - " no such organisation exists in Grenada?

Absolutely no representation from the Media Workers Association, the Trades' Union Council, The Conference of Churches, and NGOs. Media Workers and Grenadians ought not to support this composition because quite clearly it lacks credibility. It's a selection of government officials.

The Media Workers Association calls for a Board constituted as follows:-

Chairman appointed by Government, one representative from the Conference of Churches; one representative from the Media Workers Association; one representative from the Trades' Union Council, one representative from the Cultural Foundation, one representative from the Ministry of Legal Affairs, one representative from the Chamber of Commerce/Employers Federation, one representative nominated by the Leader of the Opposition.


The MWAG also strongly objects to the controlling power given to the Minister.

For example Part V Licensing section (2) page 28:  "Pursuant to section 41, the minister may grant a license subject to such terms and conditions as he or she thinks fit to impose....."

MWAG draws attention to the Complaints Committee, section 53 (1), which shall be appointed by the Minister."The Minister also selects whom he wishes?" The same Minister decides who gets a license and the same Minister appoints a complaints committee.

Even more frightening is that the same Minister then appoints an Appeal Tribunal to hear appeals against decisions of the Minister and the Broadcasting Authority. Political patronage in Grenada is overwhelming and MWAG strongly objects to giving any one person absolute power.

With regards to license - a clearly defined criteria and procedure should be established for the Minister to follow. The renewal of a license should also have clearly defined procedures as well as for the revocation.
MWAG recommends that the Minister appoints the respective committees, but on the recommendations of various civil society organisations with a government representative.

Part VI "Standards for Broadcasting and Contents of Program Page 34 - who determines what's in the code - again the power seems to be with the government appointed people and the minister having final say.

MWAG again objects and recommends that what is accepted internationally be our guide. Section 51 on page 33 gives special exemption to GBN:- "The Authority shall issue to the Grenada Broadcasting Corporation at the commencement of this ACT a license which shall be valid for a period of ten years......"

All other stations, though, six months after the Act takes effect must apply to the Authority and the Minister for a license. Why the double standard?

You cannot tie journalists/newsrooms into an agreement to hand over their sources/information on the request of a broadcasting authority.

This section has major implications for press freedom and independence. The clause that can be inserted here could read something like "with the exception of matters pertaining to news programming."

Section 9 sub section (2):   

Under this section a $200,000  fine is being suggested for a licensee convicted for refusing to provide requested information. This fine has to be reduced significantly to may be about 25,000 dollars. Sometimes the reason information is not presented as requested has nothing to do with one's refusal to hand it over.

Section 14:  This issue of remuneration for board members has to be agreed up front. It cannot be left up to the minister to determine the amount.

If that is the case, then it gives the Minister/government a financial leverage over board members and that amount to influence. So this section has to be modified to read something like "A member of the board shall receive such allowance or remuneration as a majority of the board membership may determine."

Section 53:   Complaints Committee.....

Section 2:  It must be clearly stated here that the media workers association has to be responsible for nominating a member to sit on the complaints committee. The media workers association must also be given the opportunity to object to members being proposed to this committee and outlining clear reasons for the objection.

Also, the chairperson DOES NOT have to be a lawyer. It would make more sense to select a retired media worker with a programming/news or technical background but include a lawyer as an ordinary member.

The minister cannot be responsible for selecting the entire complaints committee. The media association and the Chamber of Commerce must be allowed to nominate one each.

Section 57 (1):  "Term of imprisonment" has to be completely removed.

We want to urge managers and media workers to carefully read this Bill and to join us at a meeting later this month to further discuss all the concerns.

In the meantime we are sending our preliminary concerns to the Minister of Information as well as to all members of parliament and civil society.

We are concerned that this BILL could be taken to the Parliament without any serious stakeholder input. The drafting lacks serious stakeholder input.