HC Deb 20 March 1962 vol 656 cc193-4
23. Mr. Jeger

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware of the decline in standards in television programmes owing to the heavy reliance on old films; and whether he will take powers to control the content of television programmes.

Mr. Bevins

I am aware that more feature films than usual are being shown at present on I.T.A. programmes, but responsibility for programme content is a matter which successive Governments have felt it right to leave to the broadcasting authorities.

Mr. Jeger

While that may be all very well in normal times, does not the Postmaster-General realise that the advertisements are much more interesting than the old films? Will he take steps to prevent the advertisements being further interfered with in what are called natural breaks?

Mr. Bevins

I think that that is a view that many hon. Members on both sides of the House take.

Mr. Mason

If the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to take powers to control the content of programmes, does not he think that this is a matter which should be referred to the Television Advisory Committee?

Mr. Bevins

I am not sure which committee the hon. Gentleman has in mind.

Mr. Mason

The sub-committee which deals with advertisements.

Mr. Bevins

With respect to the hon. Gentleman, I do not think that any such committee exists.

24. Mr. Swingler

asked the Postmaster-General if he will give a direction to the Independent Television Authority, under Section 9 (2) of the Television Act, 1954, to refrain from broadcasting programmes which include contributions by prominent people on controversial topics, unless such people have given their specific consent to the actual broadcasting of their contribution.

Mr. Bevins

No, Sir.

Mr. Swingler

Has the Postmaster-General taken note of the protest of a number of distinguished people who were asked to contribute to the Associated Television's programme "The Four Freedoms" and found that subsequent to their contributions the script was altered to enable their contributions to be criticised by another person? Is not there a danger of abuse here? What safeguard has the individual who is making a contribution to a programme against an abuse to which he cannot reply being introduced?

Mr. Bevins

I have made inquiries about this case, and I am told that in line with the normal practice the revised script was sent to all those who had participated in the programme before the letter appeared in The Times, and their decision to withdraw from the programme was honoured by A.T.V. without question. In fact the letter to The Times was dated 15th February and appeared on the 16th, but the revised scripts had been sent to those concerned on 14th February.

Mr. Swingler

Is it clear that the consent of the contributor has to be obtained before his broadcast contribution can be used?

Mr. Bevins

Yes, certainly.