§ 40. Sir L. Plummerasked the Postmaster-General what consultations he has had under Section 4 (5) of the Television Act, 1954, with the Independent Television Authority concerning the nature of the newspapers and other journals whose advertisements may or may not be accepted.
§ Mr. BevinsNone, Sir.
§ Sir L. PlummerWill the Postmaster-General discuss with the Independent Television Authority the gross political discrimination shown by it in refusing permission to the programme company to accept advertisements of the Daily Worker on the grounds that its pages are mainly of a political nature? Will he ask the Authority, if it accepts the advertisements of practically all the other newspapers, why, in the interests of the freedom of the Press, the Daily Worker should be denied rights given to other newspapers?
§ Mr. BevinsThe hon. Gentleman's Question refers to Section 4 (5) of the Television Act. That Section does not in any way prejudice the duty of the I.T.A. under Section 4 (3) which says that no advertisements shall be permitted by any body the objects of which are wholly or mainly of a political nature. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is arguing that the objects of the Daily Worker are not wholly political, but in any event, the responsibility of deciding whether a body is wholly or mainly political is firmly on the shoulders of the I.T.A. After taking legal advice, the Authority made its decision, and it is not my responsibility to interfere.
§ Mr. MayhewCan the Postmaster-General give any other instance where the Television Act has been strictly enforced?
§ Mr. BevinsI think I can best answer the hon. Gentleman by asking him—[HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."]—whether he is prepared to name a newspaper that is as wholly political as the Daily Worker.
§ Sir L. PlummerIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.