Editorial: Double bid won't amuse the taxpayers

The saga of Maori Television's bid for the Rugby World Cup's free-to-air broadcasts has taken a bizarre turn with the Government's decision to fund a higher bid by TVNZ. The International Rugby Board, seller of the broadcasting rights, must be wide-eyed in wonder and glee that it stands to gain from a contest between two bids financed by New Zealand taxpayers.

We taxpayers may be less amused. We are already paying the lion's share, $190 million, of the cost of upgrading Eden Park and will doubtless be asked to help cover the event's expected loss. That deficit, $30 million, could be much more if the organisers cannot make $280 million from ticket sales at prices likely to be around $800 a seat at the final.

At the rates likely to be charged for even quarter-final tickets, most of us will be watching the big games on television, either at home or at public venues set up for the purpose. The character and reach of the coverage is obviously important to the success of the event and the Government's interest in the chosen broadcaster can be understood.

But it has taken a quite disturbing degree of fright at the prospect of Maori Television winning the free-to-air rights. Certainly, the Government had a right to be aggrieved that its coalition partner, Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples, did not consult National ministers before approving $3 million from his department, Te Puni Kokiri, to finance the bid. But it must be wondered whether National's concern was only as stated, that Maori Television does not reach all households.

It reaches 83 per cent on the UHF frequency, or more pertinently, 90 per cent of those that do not subscribe to Sky, which has rights to all matches. If the Government's concern was only for the remainder, their needs could have been met by the Prime Minister's stipulation that the free-to-air broadcaster would have to guarantee 100 per cent reach.

That decree sent Maori Television back to the IRB seeking to amend its bid to remove the exclusivity sought and allow it to sublicense the rights. But evidently that arrangement would not satisfy all parties because now the Government has decided to give TVNZ a grant to enable it to outbid its rival in the state stable.

The IRB, no doubt gratefully, has postponed the decision it had planned to make this week. With "a couple of compelling bids on the table", it might as well let this contest run for a while yet.

TVNZ may be offering the higher bid and have greater reach, but what of the quality of its proposal. The fact that the premier state broadcaster, with full commercial earning rights over two channels, could not match a $3 million bid from its own coffers speaks volumes for its real interest in the event.

The truth is TVNZ lost live sport to Sky a long time ago and for good reason. Free-to-air commercial television needs to interrupt its programmes with frequent advertising to meet its costs. Not many sports, netball is an exception, lend themselves to such frequent breaks. TVNZ would need a subsidy to match the advertising it could not carry with live rugby.

But if the taxpayer must contribute, why not through Maori Television? It is building a strong presence as a public channel for ceremonial events such as Waitangi Day and Anzac Day. Its coverage of the funeral for Sir Howard Morrison was deeply admired by all who caught it. TVNZ seems no longer interested in this sort of occasion either.

Maori Television was offering World Cup commentaries in English and Maori, from familiar faces and new. It aimed to popularise some Maori phrases through the English telecast, meeting its state-funded mission. On recent evidence it would do a conscientious and fine job. Surely a free-to-air partnership can be forged that would meet all concerns and save the taxpayer this ridiculous double bid.