HC Deb 27 July 1953 vol 518 cc861-3
4. Mr. Jay

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now make a further statement, following his inquiries from the British Ambassador in Washington, as to the alleged insertion of advertisements into the television broadcasts of the Coronation service.

Mr. Selwyn Lloyd

No information has been received from Her Majesty's Ambassador in Washington that would lead me to modify the reply given by my hon. Friend the Joint Under-Secretary to my hon. Friend the Member for West-bury (Sir R. Grimston) on 17th June.

Mr. Jay

As the right hon. and learned Gentleman now knows that his hon. Friend misled the House on 17th June in seeking to whitewash the American companies and to criticise the B.B.C., would not it be more handsome if he was candidly to withdraw the previous statement?

Mr. Lloyd

I do not accept for one moment that my hon. Friend misled the House. This Question deals with the views of the British Ambassador in Washington.

Mr. Jay

But does the right hon. and learned Gentleman deny that his hon. Friend has in fact, admitted, whatever the Ambassador said, that the statement made in the House on 17th June was incorrect and unfair to the B.B.C.?

Mr. Lloyd

I do not think that that is the position at all. Dealing with the wider aspects of the case, the fact is that the Ambassador said that the treatment of the Coronation in the United States was a most profound manifestation of sympathy and good will towards Britain, and we had much better leave it at that.

Mr. Morrison

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say whether they compared notes with the B.B.C. in the light of the statement of the Ambassador? Has he not seen the reports in reputable American newspapers, such as the "New York Times" and the "New York Herald-Tribune," which were critical of the way in which a number of American networks handled the Coronation? Is it fair that the Under-Secretary should have condemned the British Broadcasting Corporation when there is heaps of evidence the other way? Why does not the Government be really impartial and fair when dealing with the B.B.C? Ought not the Minister of State to impress upon the Ambassador in Washington, or upon the Embassy in Washington, that it is very important that they should give fair and impartial reports?

Mr. Lloyd

The suggestion that the Ambassador in Washington does not give fair and impartial reports is hardly worthy of the right hon. Gentleman. My hon. Friend, in his statement, admitted that there had been one or two isolated instances that might be regarded as lapses of taste. So far as representations to the B.B.C. are concerned, the right hon. Gentleman himself on the last occasion said that the Government should be very careful how they made such representations.

Mr. Shackleton

I appreciate that the right hon. and learned Gentleman wants to do his best to preserve Anglo-American relations, but should not the truth have precedence in this matter? The Under-Secretary said that there had been one or two isolated instances, yet the very reputable "New York Times" and other reporters made the categorical statement that they were callously repeated throughout the day in the interjection of "commercials."

Mr. Lloyd

I do not accept that for a moment. I think that the episode has to be taken as a whole, and the view of Her Majesty's Ambassador is one which appears to be justified by the evidence. Taking the thing as a whole, I think it was very well treated.

Mr. Morrison

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman admit that it is possible that the Ambassador may be mistaken? Are we to take it that, whenever an ambassador says something nobody may question it in the slightest degree?

Mr. Lloyd

The Question was with regard to the inquiries made of Her Majesty's Ambassador, and I am quite certain that he did make inquiries of the very important public officials present in the United States before coming to that conclusion.

Several Hon. Members

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. We have spent a long time on this Question.