14. Sir HENRY COWANasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that this country is the only part of the Empire without a State censorship of films; and whether he will consider the desirability of transferring this function from the hands of the film trade to the State?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe statement contained in the first part of the question is, I understand, substantially correct. As regards the second part of the question, the change suggested could not be made without legislation, and, as I have stated in reply to similar questions, there is not sufficient evidence that the present system of censorship (which I would point out includes an important element of control by local authorities) fails to secure on the whole an adequate standard.
Sir H. COWANWould my right hon. Friend say whether it is not the case that the present Censor is both appointed and paid by the film trade?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThat is true.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that there will be very great opposition in this House to the Government, and especially this Government, having this power in its hands?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThat is true, as far as I am concerned—unless the hon. and gallant Gentleman brings in a Bill.
§ Colonel DAYIs it not a fact that the present censorship has worked very successfully up to the present time?
§ Mr. SOMERVILLEDoes my right hon. Friend not think that legislation is necessary, in view of the fact that the present censorship is largely exercised in the interest of foreign exhibitors?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI was not aware of the latter point. The question is a difficult one, but I thought that on the whole there wasp a desire not to impose too much restriction, and that the present system was working fairly well—I do not say more than that.
§ Mr. MACLEANOn a point of Order. Is it not a serious allegation against what is practically a national censorship to cay that it is used mainly in the interests of foreign exhibitors; and should not the hon. Member have bad the decency, which is usual among colleagues in this House, to have notified the right hon. Gentleman who is Censor of films before making that allegation? It is an abuse of privilege.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYAnd the Father of the House too.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI thought the suggestion inadvisable.
§ At the end of Questions—
§ Mr. SOMERVILLEMay I ask your permission, Mr. Speaker, to say a personal word? There was a question on the Paper asking the Home Secretary to transfer the film censorship from the film trade to the State, and on the spur of the moment when I asked a question I had forgotten that the head of the censorship was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. T. P. O'Connor), the Father of the House for whom we all feel so much respect and affection. The facts on which I base my question are these. The staff of the censorship is paid by the trade and 92 per cent. of the capital of the film trade in this country is American. If the House does not think that these facts justify my question, I beg to express my sincere regret.
Sir H. COWANReferring to my hon. Friend's remark about the supplementary question which he put arising out of a question put by myself in regard to the film censorship, I should like to say that, in suggesting that the Film Censor should be appointed and paid by the Government, I did not intend for one moment to reflect upon the present Censor, the Father of the House, a Member whom we all respect and admire.