§ 15. Major Wallasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what positive action he proposes to take to prevent the spreading of false and seditious anti-British propaganda by Athens Radio.
§ The Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Alan Lennox-Boyd)I have been asked to reply.
I have no statement to make at present; but I must make it plain that Her Majesty's Government reserve the right to take any counter measures which they may consider necessary and justified to preserve Cypriot and British lives from outrages directly provoked by these broadcasts, which contain incitements without precedent between allies and for which it would be difficult to find a parallel in the history of broadcasting.
§ Major WallDoes my right hon. Friend not agree that this incitement to murder British troops is quite without parallel in time of peace? Does he believe that this propaganda is having any effect upon the more irresponsible of the Greek-Cypriot youths? If so, out of fairness to our own soldiers, must not every step be taken to stop it? Would not he consider jamming Athens Radio in the last resort?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydI agree with the question asked by my hon. and gallant Friend in relation to the dreadful effects of these broadcasts—and fifteen British soldiers and seven policemen have already been killed in Cyprus. With regard to the last part of the question, I can only say that a decision has been taken to prepare to take any measure we may consider necessary, including jamming—but, of course, we hope that the discussions which are now going on in Cyprus may lead to the end of these broadcasts and, consequently, the need for such measures.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsI join the right hon. Gentleman in deploring and condemning these broadcasts, but I should like to ask him two questions. First, have Her Majesty's Government taken this matter up with the Government of Greece? Greece is an ally, in N.A.T.O. Secondly, in view of the fact that we have all been encouraged by the resumed discussions, and in view of the important meeting which is to take place between Archbishop Makarios and the representatives of the Greek people this week, in the hope of reaching a settlement, will the right hon. Gentleman refrain from taking any action to prejudice the result for which we all hope?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydIn a matter of this kind the Government must retain their own freedom of action. Clearly, the Government are watching with the greatest care the talks which are going on in Cyprus. The right hon. Gentleman asked if we had told the Greek Government. We have made continuous representations to the Greek Government about these outrageous broadcasts, and we now feel that we must be free to act as we ourselves think necessary.
§ Mr. GriffithsIs there not the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to which the Government can take this matter if their direct negotiations with the Greek Government have failed?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydOur diplomatic experiences hitherto have made us a shade sceptical of approaches of that kind.
§ Mr. F. Noel-BakerIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that, whatever the likely effectiveness or ineffectiveness of this measure locally, it raises immense wider implications? Have the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friends really considered those implications? Have they consulted and informed the B.B.C, about this matter? Will not the right hon. Gentleman at least give an undertaking that until the return of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary from the United States he will postpone the introduction of this ill-considered, ineffective and humiliating confession of failure and be persuaded, in the end, to change his mind?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydWe have taken all relevant considerations into mind. We are fully aware of the views of the Director-General of the B.B.C. We know that 589 he is opposed to jamming in principle. In any considerations of the preparatory steps we are taking we have had to weigh the relative advantages and disadvantages, and the decision to be prepared to take any necessary measures has been arrived at only in the light of all those considerations. It is, of course, a decision with which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is fully associated.
§ Mr. Patrick MaitlandDoes my right hon. Friend agree that incitement to murder and disorder over the air is as much a breach of the right of freedom of the air as the publication of pornography would be of the freedom of the Press?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydI do indeed; and I would remind hon. Members—as we are quite properly conscious of the international aspect of these matters—that the Greek Government themselves signed a convention on the use of broadcasting under which they agreed that there would be no broadcasts to the detriment of international understanding, or involving the security of the territory of a high contracting Power.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanWould the right hon. Gentleman answer one question with a view to clearing up the general question of principle? Is it the view of Her Majesty's Government that a Government has the right to jam broadcasts from a foreign country when those broadcasts are directed to inciting disaffection— [HON. MEMBERS: "Murder."]—murder, civil war and the subversion of the existing Government? Do those qualities in a broadcast entitle the country against whom the broadcast is directed to jam those broadcasts?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydThis would depend, of course, upon the circumstances of the case. I can certainly say that, in the eyes of most civilised people, the voice that gives the broadcast is as much an accessory to the murder as the hand that strikes the blow.
§ Mr. F. Noel-BakerOn a point of order. Unless the right hon. Gentleman is able to say that he can give the House time to discuss this matter in its wider implications in the near future, may I give him notice that, at the appropriate time, I shall seek your leave, Mr. Speaker, to move the Adjournment of the House.
590 Later——
§ Mr. F. Noel-BakerI beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 for the purpose of discussing a matter of urgent public importance, namely,
The decision of Her Majesty's Government to authorise in certain circumstances the jaming of certain programmes broadcast by foreign wireless transmitters.Having carefully studied the Standing Order in question, I would respectfully submit the following points for your consideration, Mr. Speaker. I have first to show that this is a definite matter of urgent public importance. I think it must be clear to the House from the answer given by the Secretary of State for the Colonies earlier this afternoon——
§ Mr. SpeakerPerhaps the hon. Member will give his notice of Motion to me.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerYes, Sir, I will do so.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Member for Swindon (Mr. F. Noel-Baker) asks leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9 for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely,
The decision of Her Majesty's Government to authorise in certain circumstances the jaming of certain programmes broadcast by foreign wireless transmitters.It is not necessary for me to pursue the merits of this Motion, because I understand that the Adjournment is about to be moved immediately before the Orders of the Day and a discussion on this matter would be as much in order on that Motion as it would be if the Motion were moved at seven o'clock.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerWhilst thanking you for that Ruling, Mr. Speaker, which I had not altogether failed to anticipate, might I ask what situation would arise if I were to get up and make a speech about jamming of broadcasts and expect a reply from the Government Front Bench? May I ask you in what way it is possible for hon. Members of this House interested in this matter to find out whether and when the Government intend to give us adequate time to discuss this extremely serious and grave matter?
§ Mr. SpeakerIn reply to the first question of the hon. Member, I am concerned only with the rules of order, and there cannot be two Motions for the Adjournment before the House. As to what 591 would happen if the hon. Member were to raise this question on the Motion that is about to be moved, I think that possibly different views of his action might be taken in Wales and in Greece, but he would undoubtedly be in order in so doing.
§ Mr. Noel-BakerWhilst thanking you for that further answer, Mr. Speaker, may I ask if I would be within the rules of order if I were to seek to move this Motion again, for example, tomorrow, when the Adjournment of the House is not to be moved from another quarter?
§ Mr. SpeakerAt least by tomorrow I should have had an opportunity of considering the question which the hon. Member has put to me. Of course I would have to take into account that, as I have told him, an opportunity does exist today by the rules of order.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanMay I draw your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the fact that it is becoming very frequent nowadays for Government business to be discussed, not on a Motion by the Government, but on a Motion for the Adjournment of the House? That very often is for the general convenience of the House. The purpose of the Standing Order which my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon (Mr. F. Noel-Baker) has in mind was, of course, to interrupt the agreed business of the House on a particular day, with your leave and with the support of the House, at a particular time and a particular period in order to discuss something else. In view of the frequency with which Government business is now discussed on a general Motion for the Adjournment of the House, would it not be convenient on a suitable occasion in suitable circumstances to allow this special Adjournment to be moved nevertheless?
§ Mr. SpeakerThat raises a large question. The purpose of the Standing Order is to provide an opportunity where none otherwise exists for the immediate discussion of some urgent matter of public importance, and it is always a bar to the application under the Standing Order if another opportunity does, in fact, exist. Beyond that there is nothing I can say. I apprehend that there is difficulty sometimes when there is a Motion for the Adjournment of the House, when, as I understand it, the main difficulty is that the extension of time which would operate under Standing Order No. 9 in the case 592 of an ordinary Order of the Day does not apply; but I have no power to make any alterations to those matters.
§ Mr. SilvermanWhilst obviously not wanting to pursue the matter further, I would draw your attention to the fact that whilst theoretically it is possible for my hon. Friend to raise this matter if he were fortunate enough to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker, and he would not be out of order in talking about Cyprus or the particular question he has in mind, nevertheless for practical purposes when the two sides of the House have agreed to devote the Adjournment Motion to a particular subject, in spite of the theoretical possibility, there is no practical opportunity for my hon. Friend to raise any other matter.
§ Mr. SpeakerI have known in the past when a debate has been arranged on a Motion for the Adjournment, and some event has supervened which, in the view of both sides of the House, demanded instant discussion, arrangements have been made to make use of the opportunity; but the opportunity does exist.
§ Mrs. CastleMay I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker? According to a report in the Daily Mailon Saturday last jamming of these broadcasts is already taking place, both jamming of broadcasts from Athens to Cyprus and from Cairo to Jordan. According to this newspaper report, that has only been possible because special sets have been made by the British Government which have been flown out there and, according to the Daily Mailcorrespondent, Mr. Noel Monks, he was present in Amman when the actual interference with the broadcasts was taking place. I have tried on several occasions during Question Time to get in a supplementary question to ask whether this was so. I tried to get in, as did my hon. Friend, on the question of Jordan, to ask whether jamming was part of our counter-propaganda work there, but received no reply. If we could get an answer as to whether the report is factual, this might govern the attitude of many of us on this side as to whether we wanted to make this a priority matter on the Adjournment today. I am wondering, Mr. Speaker, whether you can give facilities to the Minister either to accept or reject the report.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am afraid I cannot intervene in that matter.