§ Mr. Tinker (Leigh)I want to call the attention of the House to a Question which I put to the President of the Board of Trade last week. Everyone is anxious to avoid redundancy as much as possible, and it is our duty as Members of Parliament to draw the attention of the Departments where we think there is something that can be saved. The matter that I then brought forward was with regard to newspapers. In my opinion, far too much time and material are wasted on the printing of newspapers. In time of peace everybody is allowed to do what he likes. He can waste as much material as he likes and can cause unemployment, and nobody can say him nay, but we have arrived at a time when, if there is any waste at all, it is our duty to call the attention of the House to the matter. The House has attempted to do this in several directions. We have set about the concentration of industry. It is said it is no use having plant running with extra overhead charges and a small personnel, when, by concentrating the plant and labour, better use can be made of it in the interests of the nation.
No one has as yet attempted to tackle the newspapers. Why? First of all, they are so powerful that any attempt by a Government Department to check their printing at all would be met with the remark, "You are stifling the free expression of opinion" That would be a very difficult matter for any Government Department to challenge. It would be said, "You are afraid of criticism, and, therefore, you are going to curtail news which might be detrimental to you and put you out of office." I do not support any idea for stifling opinion, but I find very scanty information in the newspapers at this time. It appears to be a question of trying to find sufficient with which to fill up. If that is the case, a thorough examination of the whole position ought to be made. I do not know how many newspapers and periodicals are printed. There must be a tremendous number. I do not know of any of these as having gone out of circulation since the commencement of the war, with the exception of the "Daily Worker," which was suppressed because of its activities against the State. I have not heard of any other paper going out of existence because of lack of circulation or for any other reason. 1180 It must be apparent then that all these papers in operation before the war are still in operation and are probably carrying on with the same personnel to do the printing, and yet we are asking all to do whatever they can to provide labour and material for the benefit of the State. Moreover, a big section are not being curtailed or challenged at all in their work.
It is for the benefit of the State that there should be an examination of this question, and the State ought to do it. I do not want it to be thought that I am a tempting to suppress any newspaper, but I want the House of Commons to appeal to the newspaper-owning fraternity to organise themselves and see, as we see when we look at the cotton industry, whether some curtailment is not required in the interests of the State. If they are satisfied, as they must be satisfied if it is brought to their notice, that there is little need for this tremendous number of newspapers and publications of all descriptions, let them say that they will try to cut them down and show what can be done.
We have, in this country at the moment, five or six political views. There are the Conservative party, the Labour party, the Liberal party, the Independent Labour party and the Communist party, and one would say that five leading newspapers, expressing their points of view, ought to be sufficient. It might be said that there are others, but these could be put under one head as being against the Government altogether. No one wants to suppress them, but there is no need to have scores of papers all saying what ought to be done and ought not to be done. I want newspapers, like other sections of the community, to be as loyal as others by saying that there is no need for all these publications. If it is said that expression of opinion will be curtailed, I would draw the attention of the House to a paper which I have in my possession. It is a daily newspaper, and one page is devoted to the silliest stuff imaginable. One can hardly believe that at a time like the present a daily paper would devote one page to this kind of trash. When you talk about the free expression of opinion, this is an example which makes you say that the whole thing ought to be put on one side altogether. I am bringing this matter forward in order to get the President of the Board of Trade interested in it. I 1181 want him, not to issue an order from the House as to what ought to be done, but to approach the leading newspapers, call p. conference and ask them whether it is necessary to continue all the publications that are brought out in peace-time. The nation is at war now and is asking for all the labour, factories and plant it can get for the war effort. I am satisfied there is a great reservoir of labour that could be turned to better use. I am satisfied there is much plant employed in the printing of these newspapers that could be more usefully used.
I want also to refer to another matter that comes under the head of printing. By nearly every post hon. Members get a great deal of printed matter dealing with various points. I do not. think there is one in a dozen hon. Members who attempts to read all this printed material. It goes into the wastepaper basket. Is it not time that the President of the Board of Trade watched that sort of thing? We have conferences among the miners and the cotton workers urging them that every ounce of labour is required for the public weal. Then we receive these publications that must require a great deal of labour in printing and use up a great deal of material. One is compelled to ask whether the State is organised as it ought to be. I believe the reason this matter has not been tackled is that we, and especially the Government, are afraid of what the Press may say about us. But whether the Press condemns us or not, something needs to be done about the matter. At the moment I cannot say to what extent something ought to be done. I have a Question on the Order Paper asking how many newspapers are printed. I feel sure that if the information can be obtained, the number will be a very big one. I have claimed the attention of the House for the purpose of asking the President of the Board of Trade and the Parliamentary Secretary to see whether something can be done in the matter. I believe that much can be done. In raising the matter, I believe I am raising something which has not claimed the attention of newspaper men so far. I believe they can be induced to come forward and help us. I have raised it also in the hope that I may get some assistance from other hon. Members.
§ Mr. Mathers (Linlithgrow):My hon Friend the Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) has stated his case in his usual forceful 1182 and yet moderate manner. His remarks, in the main, appeared to deal with national newspapers. I do not wish in the slightest degree to take away from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade the opportunity of replying on that aspect of the matter, but my hon. Friend indicated that he is raising the whole question of news publications that circulate throughout the country. I have risen merely to say I think that, in respect of local newspapers which circulate within the boundaries of a county or of several counties, it would be, in my judgment, a serious and a regrettable thing to interfere with those well-known organs of public opinion, which I believe are in many ways more valuable from the point of view of the expression of public opinion than are the great national newspapers. The great national newspapers carry the day-to-day records of news. They are read for their news value. But much more in the way of the formation of opinion gets into the local newspapers which I have in mind. They are much more closely and carefully read than the national daily newspapers. From that point of view, certainly they have much more influence. From my knowledge of them—and I have a fair knowledge of quite a number of publications of this sort —they have in past years done their job of creating and informing public opinion very well indeed. At the present time they are performing a very useful function in maintaining the morale of the people of this country. When my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh makes reference to cutting things out and asks for a greater concentration, I hope that suppression in that respect will not cause the Minister to think of suppressing weekly newspapers.
§ Mr. TinkerI had no idea of suppressing anything. What I want to see is a more concentrated effort. Where that might lead, I do not want to say at the moment.
§ Mr. MathersIn that event I am sure that the remarks I have made will not in any way cut across the purposes which the hon. Member for Leigh has in view, and I am quite willing to leave the matter there.
§ Mr. Gordon Macdonald (Ince)It is not a waste of time to discuss this question. 1183 which is exercising the minds of many whose industries have been concentrated. Only last week I received a letter on this question from the Minister, and I thank him for his prompt reply, although I regard it as unsatisfactory. It is in that spirit that this question was put on the Order Paper. My hon. Friend simply asks that this question be examined to see whether it would be in the national interest to deal with this matter by concentration. We feel that this industry is not being looked into with the same vigilance as is the case with other industries. We think it might be. No one is suggesting suppression. The hon. Member feels, like myself, that there are many newspapers in the country which could well afford to use less space by not publishing things which are not in the national interest. I am surprised to see the number of advertisement columns to-day, advertising things which are of no earthly use to the nation. I cannot understand why space is used for this purpose, other than for purely financial reasons. I can understand the owner of a newspaper wanting profits from the advertisements. The Government must look at this question sooner or later. Another thing which is exercising our minds is the reservation age which applies to the newspapers and printing world. I am told there is some preferential treatment in regard to the age of reservation. That ought not to be so. I agree that the printing industry is important, but so are the mining industry, the cotton industry and many other industries. Could not the Minister consult the Post Office with reference to some of these papers, which I am certain are simply put into the waste-paper basket by the majority of Members who receive them? Something needs to be done at a time like this, when we in the mining industry have agreed to an order, which in ordinary conditions we would never have consented to, because of the needs for labour in this great struggle confronting us.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Captain Waterhouse)The Board of Trade have certainly no reason to complain of the way in which this case has been put. I was relieved to find that my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) made it very clear that he did not wish to suppress the free ex- 1184 pression of any views, provided they did not directly conflict with the war effort. It is hard to see how one can shut down, as he suggested, any section of the Press without running the risk of curtailing in some way the free expression of opinion. He showed us a sheet from a newspaper, and asked whether it was really necessary to the war effort. I do not know whether it is or not, but I am quite certain that newspapers with their restricted space do not publish things the public do not want. I do not say that my hon. Friend is amused with that particular page. Obviously it has its use, otherwise the papers would not publish it, and it is not unreasonable to allow a paper to have some discretion as to what it shall give its readers. The hon. Member for Ince (Mr. G. Macdonald) asked about the age of reservation of printers. It is now 35. At stage B, which will be declared to be operative very shortly, there will be no reservation. I entirely endorse what the hon. Gentleman on the Front Bench said about local papers. They have a real value which cannot be over-estimated in maintaining the national morale. I am certain that the hon. Member for Leigh had not in mind, when he talked of the concentration of all papers into five, that it should include the widespread suppression of local papers.
His main argument was that time and materials were being wasted, and he said that trade had fallen off in many directions when the Board of Trade produced its concentration scheme. That is not quite true. We have introduced our concentration schemes only in a comparatively limited area. Our object in limiting it and in selecting the particular trades are threefold. The first is that, owing to the general reduction in the trade of the country, it would be impossible, as the war went on, for manufacturers to earn a decent livelihood if all those at present engaged continued to try to eke out an existence on very short running. In order to preserve them for the rehabilitation of trade after the war, we said that some measure of concentration was necessary. Our second point was that we wanted factory-trained labour, and our third was that we wanted to make available as much factory space as we could for storage and munition work. Clearly the factory-trained labour employed on papers is comparatively limited. 1185 I suppose those actually engaged in printing would be useful, but the vast administrative staffs and editorial staffs of newspapers would not be so available. These form a considerable proportion of the staff of a newspaper. I can assure the hon. Member that the papers have already considerably reduced the amount of labour that they are employing. I have endeavoured to get some figures from them, but I was unsuccessful except in one case, which I believe is typical, where there has been a reduction of 25 per cent. of the labour employed since the war started. The third point was factory space. Many newspapers are printed in premises which are ill-suited either for storage or for turning into munitions factories. Their vast printing presses would take a lot of moving, and the floor space made available by any suppression of papers would be of very small use in the war effort.
Let us look at the question of materials. The amount of newsprint consumed in September, 1939, was 11,100 tons per week. During the last six months that has been reduced to 3,200—a reduction of 75 per cent. That is a very large reduction.
§ It being the hour appointed for the interruption of Business, the Motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
§ Question again proposed, "That this House do now adjourn" —[Mr. Whiteley.]
§ Mr. TinkerThe consumption of paper has fallen from 11,000 tons to 3,000. Has the working staff fallen in the same proportion? If not, why?
§ Captain WaterhouseI have pointed out that I was unable to get the figures, but the fall has not been in anything like that proportion. In the case I mentioned it was 25 per cent. My hon. Friend asks why. Although I am not a newspaper man and do not know the inside of newspaper offices, the answer probably is that the editorial staffs and the staffs for the compilation of news have to be very much the same whether one is dealing with a paper of eight or ten pages, or a paper of 1186 four or six pages. You cannot get a pro rata reduction. There has been a genuine effort, however, by those engaged in the production of newspapers to meet the present emergency. My hon. Friend dealt with the number of "odd" publications that are sent to Members of Parliament. We all suffer from them and I agree that our lives would be much happier if they did not come to us. We can drop them into the waste-paper basket, but we have the satisfaction of knowing that the paper is now re-pulped so that there is no real loss. I am informed that there is definite rationing in that direction.
When we come to the concentration of the small presses which produce that sort of publication, we are faced with a tremendous problem because the vast majority of them have less than 10 men each. There is an average of six or seven in the ordinary little printing works, and they are spread all over the country. I do not see how we could attempt to concentrate an industry as widely spread as that. The President of the Board of Trade, when he introduced his concentration scheme, laid it down that very small units of production would be disregarded. These printing works are par excellence an example of very small units of production. I hope I have said enough to show that the Board of Trade has not been oblivious of the points that my hon. Friend has put forward. We have had them under review before. We are satisfied that it is all important, at this time especially, that we should have a free, frank and virtually unhampered expression of opinion. We are satisfied, too, that at the moment there are not too many copies of papers being published, because my hon. Friend and I know full well that if we go to a railway station at noon, on any day, we are lucky if we can get a morning paper of any description. I hope that for all these reasons my hon. Friend will be content to leave this problem to the good sense of the newspapers. They will have heard his views and if any of them, of their own accord, can make any such arrangements as he suggests nobody will be more satisfied than he and I.
§ Question, "That this House do now adjourn," put, and agreed to