By Torin Dougals media correpondent

If the new Communications Bill seems familiar, it's not surprising.

It's been longer in gestation - and involved greater consultation - than almost any bill in history.

First, after long discussion and a report by a select committee of MPs, there was a white paper.

Then, in May this year, came a draft bill, which - most unusually - has been subject to parliamentary scrutiny already, in the form of Lord Puttnam's joint committee of both houses.

Tessa Jowell remains resolute

And that committee's report - itself the subject of wide consultation - has made significant changes to the final bill.

It persuaded the government that the BBC should be fined if it broke taste and decency rules drawn up by the new single regulator, Ofcom, which will replace the "alphabet soup" of existing media and communications watchdogs.

The BBC had strongly opposed this proposal.

It instigated an inquiry by the Independent Television Commission into the programme production market, following complaints by independent producers that they were being treated unfairly by broadcasters such as the BBC and Channel 4.

The resulting report - due out later this month - is expected to lead to stronger safeguards for independents.

It has persuaded ministers to lift the ban on religious bodies holding digital radio licences and to allow greater self-regulation by the advertising business over TV and radio commercials.

The government has accepted more than 120 of its 148 recommendations, many of them concerned with the nitty gritty detail of the bill.

Rupert Murdoch may be blocked from buying Five

But the government's also made changes that the Puttnam committee did not recommend, such as loosening the media ownership requirements for commercial radio.

The draft bill said there must be at least three commercial radio operators plus the BBC in any city.

Following intensive lobbying by the radio companies, that's been reduced to two.

And the government turned down one of the committee's key recommendations, that it should delay plans to allow giant American media companies to take over ITV or Five until Ofcom had had a chance to consider the matter.

This issue of foreign ownership dominated discussion of the Puttnam report - prompting a fierce denial by Lord Puttnam that he was anti-American.

But the bill's joint ministers - Tessa Jowell from the Department of Culture Media and Sport and Patricia Hewitt of the Department of Trade and Industry - have remained resolute that this policy is not negotiable.

So is there anything left to argue about in parliament?

The American TV ownership issue will not go away.

Ms Hewitt says the policy is not negotiable

Several peers think the idea of Disney, Viacom or AOL-Time Warner owning ITV is unacceptable and are expected to try to persuade the government to change its mind. They won't succeed.

And some may try to block another key proposal that would allow big newspaper owners like Rupert Murdoch to buy Five.

Another important proposal - that the existing rules should be lifted to allow a single company to own ITV - is still being opposed by advertisers.

Many people - particularly the commercial broadcasters - think the BBC should be fully regulated by Ofcom.

And the independent producers will continue to lobby hard to be allowed a greater share of the distribution rights in their programmes.

The Puttnam committee said it had "made a good Bill better" and the government agreed.

But as the bill goes through parliament between now and next summer, many people will be arguing over how it could be made better still.