HC Deb 04 March 1959 vol 601 cc443-5
34. Mr. Nabarro

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been directed to a breach of statute in respect of the programme "Quiz 21", by Granada, all of which has recently formed the subject of a report by the right hon. and learned Member for Chertsey, a summary of which Report has been sent to him; what action he now proposes to take to require that the Independent Television Authority secure from Granada full compliance with statutory provisions; and whether he will make a statement.

Mr. K. Thompson

I am aware of the Report to which my hon. Friend refers, but my attention has not been directed to any breach of statute. As regards action on the Report, the Independent Television Authority informs me that the Report's recommendations are being taken into account in connection with its current review of the arrangements for the proper conduct of all programmes with prizes.

Mr. Nabarro

Will not my hon. Friend concede to the House at once that the many unsavoury and insidious aspects of the conduct of this programme contractor, in the form of grave impropriety, represent a breach of the Statute? Now that we have seen Independent Television in action for a few years, is it not desirable that consideration should be given to the strengthening of the Statute in order to increase the powers of I.T.A. to deal with malpractices and defalcations of this kind?

Mr. Thompson

The Television Act gives the Authority perfectly adequate powers, and the Authority is quite ready to use them. I have dealt with the situ- ation relating to the specific programme to which my hon. Friend refers and to the general question of prize programmes. If my hon. Friend has any other specific complaints to make which appear to him to offend against the Statute, I should be grateful if he would let me know.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that this sort of thing has been going on for a long time? The Independent Television Authority was quite aware of it, but it was not until one of the programme contractors, under the pressure of public opinion, arranged that this inquiry should be held that the Independent Television Authority woke up. Is it not about time that we stopped the Director-General of Independent Television Authority cocking a snook at the House every time a complaint is raised?

Mr. Thompson

I have repeatedly warned the right hon. Gentleman against vague generalisations. [Interruption.] I repeat that I have warned him against vague generalisations.

Mr. Ness Edwards

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I understand that one's conduct in the House should be governed by warnings from the Chair and not from the Floor of the House.

Mr. Speaker

Hon. Members are in the habit of uttering exhortations and advice to each other in a way which I would not dream of doing.

Mr. Thompson

If the right hon. Gentleman wishes to go beyond the specific point raised in my hon. Friend's Question, which I have dealt with, —

Mr. Nabarro

You have not dealt with it.

Mr. Thompson

—he has a proper recourse by putting a Question on the Order Paper, when I will do my best to deal with it.

Mr. T. Williams

Will the hon. Gentleman consider for once in a while warning I.T.A.?

Mr. H. Morrison

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that two specific instances have been put before the House this afternoon, one from this side and one from the other side, where the I.T.A. or its constituent programme companies have not been behaving as they should? The hon. Gentleman says that the I.T.A. will now warn them, or has warned them, that this must not happen again. Can he tell us why the I.T.A. does not act in accordance with the principle of the Act of Parliament, which the House, I think wrongly, approved? Is it not time that he gave the I.T.A. a warning that they had better behave themselves?

Mr. Thompson

The I.T.A. is daily keeping its hand on the activities of the programme companies so far as it is required to do so under the Act. If now and then something happens which draws the attention of a wider audience, including Members of the House, to some incident which appears to them to offend, then we have this sort of situation.

Mr. Nabarro

A few moments ago my hon. Friend used the words "vague generalisations". Is it not the fact that this case involved financial dishonesty? As large numbers of competitors were involved and the general public have a direct interest, surely it is a Ministerial responsibility under the Act to take further action to prevent financial dishonesty of this kind?

Mr. Thompson

I have informed the House that the Authority is reviewing the whole structure of the prize programmes. Until we know what its proposals are, there is clearly no field for Ministerial intervention.