HC Deb 20 July 1960 vol 627 cc480-3
22. Mr. Woodburn

asked the Postmaster-General whether, before appointing the members of the Committee to inquire into broadcasting and television, he will satisfy himself that they themselves possess television sets, and ascertain how long, respectively, they have held television licences.

Mr. Bevins

No, Sir.

Mr. Woodburn

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that people greatly resent superior people coming on television and flaunting their superiority by saying that they have no television set? Will he not agree that such people are not fit either to supervise or even take part in television programmes?

Mr. Bevins

I have much sympathy with what the right hon. Gentleman says. I have been reading the report of a recent debate in another place when a noble Lord used the words: I need not say that I do not have a television set of my own and I do not think I shall ever have one. As the House knows, that gentleman was appointed the chairman of a previous inquiry into broadcasting—by the Administration of which the right hon. Gentleman was a member. I agree that a knowledge of television is very important for the members of this Committee, but, as about three out of four households in the country possess both sets, and, I hope, licences, I do not think that we are in very much danger.

Mr. Ellis Smith

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Will it be in order in future to quote from speeches made in another place?

Mr. Speaker

It is not really in order to criticise individuals in another place, but it sounded fairly genial, so I thought that I would not notice it.

Mr. Ellis Smith

This is a serious matter. I remember the Rulings given in the past, and I want to ask whether in future it will be in order to follow the precedent of quoting what is said in another place.

Mr. Speaker

I would rather rule on the particular case, because while large quotations from a debate in this Session in another place would clearly be out of order, I am not sure that one would want to pounce on a single sentence. I would rather rule on the particular case.

Mr. Ness Edwards

So that we may realise how the right hon. Gentleman has exercised his discrimination in this matter, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman when he will be able to tell us the names of the people who have been appointed to this Committee?

Mr. Bevins

I hope to be able to announce the names of the rest of the Committee some time in August.

Mr. Ness Edwards

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Do I understand the Postmaster-General to say that he proposes—[Hon. Members: "That is not a point of order."] The Postmaster-General has made a declaration that when the House is up he will announce something which affects the House. I want to know whether it is in accordance with the traditions of the House for appointments of this nature to be made when the House has risen.

Mr. Speaker

I do not think that that would be a point of order for me.

26. Sir R. Grimston

asked the Postmaster-General if he has requested Sir Harry Pilkington to make a report from the Committee of Inquiry into the future of sound and television broadcasting by any particular date.

Mr. Bevins

Sir Harry Pilkington knows that the Government would like the report as quickly as possible and the has told me that he will do his utmost. It would be unreasonable to stipulate a precise date.

Sir R. Grimston

Can my right hon. Friend tell me why, in this matter, the Government have not assumed what is properly their own responsibility, and, after debate in this House, laid down the broad lines of policy and then framed the terms of reference of the Committee to provide for its considering how that policy could best be carried out, instead of farming out the whole question to yet another Committee? Is it not likely that, after the experience with the Beveridge Committee and in view of the fact that this Committee is being asked to formulate Government policy, these gentlemen will be wasting a great deal of time, and there will be great delay in letting the industry know what its future is to be?

Mr. Bevins

No. I do not agree with my hon. Friend. This Committee is not being asked to formulate Government policy at all. It is being invited to carry out an objective and impartial survey of the whole field of broadcasting and television, and at the end of the day it will be for Parliament to make the decision.

Mr. Ness Edwards

As the question of lineage, colour, and the allocation of wavelengths are matters of very great importance on which we ought to have much more information, will the right hon. Gentleman advise Sir Harry Pilkington that he ought to take sufficient time to provide the House with a full survey of the whole field?

Mr. Slater

Can the right hon. Gentleman say who will be the No. 2 to Sir Harry Pilkington to carry out these investigations? In view of the large amount of publicity the right hon. Gentleman gave in the House regarding Sir Harry Pilkington being attached to industry, would it not be as well if the No. 2 came from the other side of industry?

Mr. Bevins

It is not the practice or convention to have what the hon. Gentleman referred to as a No. 2 on a Committee of this kind—

Mr. Slater

A vice-chairman.

Mr. Bevins

—but I assure the hon. Gentleman that organised labour will be effectively represented on the Committee.

Sir R. Grimston

Is it not a fact that the Government have already got from the Television Advisory Committee all the technical information which will be available to this new Committee?

Mr. Bevins

The Government are in possession of some very valuable technical information from the Television Advisory Committee, but I would certainly not go so far as to say that all the information of that sort is at present available.

32. Mr. Biggs-Davison

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will amplify the terms of reference of the Committee of Inquiry into the future of sound and television broadcasting so as to include consideration of, and recommendations upon, the proportion of United States or semi-United States programmes shown and the cultural influence of these programmes, particularly on younger viewers.

Mr. Bevins

This is not necessary. The terms of reference are already comprehensive enough to allow for the considerations my hon. Friend has in mind.