§ 20. Mr. Mayhewasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what was the cost, in real terms, of the British Broadcasting Corporation's Overseas Services in 1945–46, 1950–51, and 1959–60.
§ The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Dr. Charles Hill)Figures are not available for 1945–46. Taking into account changes in the Consumer Price Index, the 1959–60 provision becomes £5.0 million, compared with £4.7 million in 1950–51. The actual 1959–60 provision was £6.7 million.
§ Mr. MayhewIs the Chancellor of the Duchy aware that, so far as effectiveness goes, these overseas broadcasts are widely regarded as the best in the world? Why, then, do the Government tamely stand by while other countries, including, for instance, China, overtake this country in the amount of broadcasting they do?
§ Dr. HillI think it a mistake to measure the efficacy of overseas broadcasting solely in terms of hours. The hon. Gentleman will realise, taking the 14 information effort as a whole, including overseas broadcasts, expenditure in the last three years has increased from £13 million to £17½ million.
§ 21. Mr. Mayhewasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what is the cost to public funds of the British Broadcasting Corporation's overseas sound transcription service and television transcription service, respectively.
§ Dr. Hill£251,000 for the B.B.C. sound transcription service. The export of television material is a commercial activity of the Corporation and makes no call on public funds.
§ Mr. MayhewWhy, when the Government have successfully and effectively subsidised sound transcription services, do they refuse to subsidise the even more important television services?
§ Dr. HillThat is not wholly true. It is true that the B.B.C. itself sells material overseas on a commercial basis, but, in so far as television film work is concerned, the Government purchase both from the B.B.C. and from the independent companies material which they use overseas. Indeed, there is £17,000 in the Estimates this year for that purpose.
§ Mr. MayhewIf I may say so, the reply of the right hon. Gentleman is greatly misleading, for the two things are exactly on all fours. The B.B.C. sells sound transcription; why should it not get the same subsidy for television as for sound?
§ Dr. HillThe B.B.C. can sell material to the C.O.I., which buys and distributes it overseas under the system I referred to just now. The system is that the C.O.I. purchases the material both from the B.B.C. and I.T.A. for use overseas. In that way the material is made available to those countries to which the B.B.C. cannot sell its material on a commercial basis.
§ Mr. John HallWould my right hon. Friend agree that it might be to the advantage of this country if Her Majesty's Government helped to subsidise some television stations for transmission overseas?