HC Deb 01 March 1960 vol 618 cc1024-7
40. Mr. Donnelly

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the practicability of televising the proceedings of Parliament.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)

The Government have given careful thought to various possible forms of televising the proceedings of Parliament.

The technical and financial objections to broadcasting them in full are decisive. I am advised that it would be feasible to prepare from films a short daily programme consisting of selected parts of our proceedings, but that the technical facilities required in the Chamber would, at best, cause some inconvenience to hon. Members and others present. The process of editing would, moreover, raise delicate problems.

As I have said in the House recently, the question of televising its proceedings is primarily one for the House itself. But from inquiries they have made the Government are satisfied that this proposal does not at present command the support necessary to justify so radical a departure from our traditions.

Mr. Donnelly

As the right hon. Gentleman has said that this is a matter for the House, would he consider publishing in the form of a White Paper the technical report he has received, so that the House can be fully acquainted with the factors which he has had to weigh?

The Prime Minister

No, Sir. I think it is clear that if we were to have a full, all-the-time service that would be very expensive in capital and in annual expenditure and would also create a lot of problems with regard to frequencies. I do not think it is necessary to publish a White Paper, as all this is generally known.

If we had something much smaller and less ambitious, there would necessarily be an intensification of the lighting, I am informed, and there would be a number of cameras in various parts of the Galleries, which would mean not more than an inconvenience. On the general question, I have thought that the Government ought not to propose a change in what is a society of which we are all members, unless it was fairly clear that it was the general wish that it should be done. The onus lies upon those who want the change. Therefore, in these circumstances, the Government do not intend to make any proposals.

Sir T. Moore

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the sense of relief which most of us feel at this announcement now that we know that our anxieties about this proposal have been definitely removed?

The Prime Minister

I think there may be a certain sense of relief both inside and outside the House.

Mr. Gaitskell

As the Prime Minister has said, this is essentially a matter for the House as a whole. I am not disposed to quarrel with the interim decision which the Government have made and I certainly would not look on this in any way as a party issue, but would the Prime Minister reconsider the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke (Mr. Donnelly)? I think it would be of interest to hon. Members if a fuller statement could be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT as to precisely what is involved in this and what the difficulties are, not so much of televising the whole proceedings—which most of us realised was really out of the question—but of the other proposal mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman.

The Prime Minister

I will consider circulating a more elaborate document, but this is fairly simple. If we want the whole thing, then that is out on capital and expenditure grounds, and I do not think that anyone really wants to make all the necessary changes in frequencies. If we want an hour at the end of each day, technically it can be done but with a certain degree of inconvenience—always a rather stronger light than now and a certain number of cameras present. The question is, do we want that done?

Hon. Members

No.

The Prime Minister

I do not think that the technical points are the only practical considerations, because they would be no more than rather inconvenient, and there would be rather stronger light. It remains a question of whether the House wants it, whether we should have half an hour taken out of the proceedings each day. On that, I feel that the House is not anxious to make this change at present.

Mr. Gaitskell

Judging by the noise, that is certainly the view of the majority of Members. Nevertheless, in the intrests of those who have not ruled out this possibility altogether, will the right hon. Gentleman do as I ask and circulate a fuller statement?

The Prime Minister

I will certainly consider it.