POSTAL DELIVERIES (MAGAZINE ADVERTISEMENT) (Hansard, 18 December 1964)

§ Mrs. Anne Kerr (Rochester and Chatham)
I appreciate this opportunity to address the House on a matter which is concerning many people throughout the country. It is the need to prevent the delivery of pornographic promotion material.
A constituent wrote to me recently enclosing certain material relating to a publication called "Penthouse" which, apparently, is about to be promoted throughout the country. He stated, in his letter: Its aim is corruption and making money in its worst form. It seems wholly improper that the Post Office should be used as a means of exploiting this traffic. Please take it up with the Minister. That is what I am attempting to do today and I hope that the Minister will be able to suggest some way by which this type of material can be prevented from going through the mails. The name of the magazine is "Penthouse." This has been publicised already, otherwise I would have omitted its name, as I would not wish to give it undue publicity.
I want to mention some of the headings from this disgusting leaflet. One is "Pornography for the Masses?"; "Bird-watching for Profit"—I stress these headings because I want the House to appreciate that this magazine in no sense aims to present a serious attempt to discuss sexual questions and difficulties. Another heading is The case FOR polygamy … Two heads may be better than one—especially if they're both … married to the same man. 823 'Sex in Suburbia'—They call it 'wife swapping', and it's becoming the hottest pastime in … suburbia. I feel very strongly that this House should be on record as opposing the dissemination of this type of vicious literature.
This promotional material goes on: … 'Penthouse' will encourage advertising of a personal nature, inter-readership with correspondents and all other devices which may tend to bring similar-thinking people into contact with each other … 'Penthouse' is more than just a magazine—it is a cause … I must say that that really shocked me, particularly when I noted the names of some of the eminent persons on the front page of the leaflet.
I was not merely shocked by that, but to me the ultimate disgusting aspect of the leaflet was that it linked the business of pornography with Christmas. It says on the front page of one of the leaflets: What can I give for Christmas? This question is asked by a young lady who is almost naked, and inside it goes on to say that that is the question asked by "our lovely pet" on the front page. It goes on 'Penthouse' is precisely right for all men—a continuous gift that will bring Christmas cheer throughout the year"— Christmas cheer throughout the year, indeed— And a beautiful 'Penthouse' Christmas card, handsomely engraved with your name and announcing that the recipient will receive a full 12-month subscription to Britain's most expensive and elegant magazine … will be sent free to anyone you select, anywhere in the world. All cards will be mailed"— And this is where I think my hon. Friend will be concerned— to arrive within a few days of Christmas. As I said earlier, I was particularly distressed to note some of the names on the front page of the leaflet. I hesitate to show the House this page, but No. 1 on the front page is the name of a man whom I greatly respect and with whom I have worked—Bertrand Russell. He has this morning asked me to mention his name in connection with this deplorable pornographic promotional material; and completely and utterly to dissociate him from it. He has had no connection whatever with these people who are putting out this muck, and he is devastated to find that his name appears on it. If I had had no other reason for raising this 824 matter today, that would have been enough for me.
Sex is a private and delicate matter and no good whatsoever can come from the distribution of this type of filthy pornography through our mails. I do not know how to approach its prevention, but I ask my hon. Friend to give some indication of what his Department can do in this direction. Very much of it, I fear, comes from the United States. A United States citizen is mentioned in this leaflet which I shall be glad to show to my hon. Friend after this debate. I ask, what are the Postmaster-General's powers in relation to stopping this perverted and blasphemous muck going through our post office, particularly at Christmas time?

§ The Assistant Postmaster-General (Mr. Joseph Slater)
I have listened very carefully to what my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Chatham (Mrs. Anne Kerr) has said and I can well understand her feelings in this matter. I assure her that I am just as anxious as she to see that the circulation of indecent and obscene material, whether by post or otherwise, is stamped out. Not only do I seek to express myself in this way, but also on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General along with all those engaged in the Post Office service who are most keen to safeguard the service from anything which would lower its standard of operation.
There is no doubt in my mind that the views which have been expressed by my hon. Friend on this issue are shared by many parents and particular organisations throughout the country. We have no evidence to suggest that the material which is in circulation at the moment is being sent to young children, but from the complaints we have had it seems that some of the advertisements, when they have come into certain offices, have been opened by young clerks engaged in those offices. My responsibility this afternoon is to reply on behalf of the Post Office and I first say in reply to my hon. Friend that it is an offence under the Post Office Act, 1953, to send through the post anything of an indecent or obscene character.
Naturally we should refuse to accept anything which was clearly indecent or 825 obscene which came to notice at the time of posting. We also confiscate at once anything of this kind which comes under notice in the post. It may be, for example, that such material comes to notice when we have to open a letter packet because it cannot be delivered as addressed. It may come to notice in the course of Customs examination or when it is poorly packed. If a packet which comes to notice in one of these ways is an isolated one, we generally deal with the matter ourselves and decide whether or not in addition to confiscating the packet we should be justified in taking proceedings against the people responsible for putting it in the post. Where there are a number of packets or the question could be of general concern, for example where there was apparently trading in pornography, we refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions and it is for him to decide on the action to be taken.
As I am sure my hon. Friend will realise there are instances in which we are not in the best position to judge whether the material found in the post is indecent or obscene within the legal meaning of those terms as used in the Post Office Act, even though we may be sure that the material would be offensive to many people in this country. In those instances we also consult the Director of Public Prosecutions and we are guided by his advice. I can assure my hon. Friend and hon. Members that the Post Office—

Mr. Slater
As I was saying, I can assure the House that the Post Office is by no means inactive in combating the distribution of pornography through the post. For the information of the House, let me say that in each of the years 1962 and 1963 we dealt with some 800 cases of indecent and obscene material. In the first ten months of this year we have dealt with some 500 cases.
My hon. Friend referred to literature of an obscene character coming into this country from abroad. When indecent or obscene matter arrives in this 826 country in mails from overseas, as the great bulk of it does, we confiscate it and also seek the co-operation of overseas postal administrations in keeping such matter out of mails that they send to us. When the material originates in this country, we either deal with the case ourselves or we refer it to the Director of Public Prosecutions. So far this year we have referred about 70 cases to the D.P.P.
Having said this, I should be less than frank if I did not also say that it is quite impossible for the Post Office to guarantee that any matter which is indecent or obscene will not reach people through the post. I am sure that my hon. Friend knows that a great proportion of the mail we get is posted in plain sealed covers. She will realise that in such circumstances the person to whom a packet is addressed will be the first to know whether it contains indecent or obscene material. We do not have general powers to open sealed mail while it is in the post. I am sure that the House would not wish us in present circumstances to have such powers and, as it were, set ourselves up as censors. Anyone who receives indecent or obscene material in this way can certainly rely on the Post Office to co-operate in taking suitable action.
Some indecent and obscene material finds its way into the post in unsealed covers, but the great bulk of this unsealed mail, like other mail, contains nothing which is in any way objectionable. It is true that we examine a part of this mail to ensure that its contents are eligible for the cheaper unsealed post. Should we find anything in the course of this examination which we think may be indecent or obscene, or which is clearly so, we deal with it in the way I have already explained. We should certainly not be able, even if we wished, to examine this mail in such a way as to bring to light all the indecent or obscene material it might contain.
My hon. Friend referred to the pamphlet "Penthouse". Perhaps I may take this opportunity of saying a few words concerning our position in regard to this advertisement. The Post Office has had eight copies sent to it from Members of Parliament and 18 from outside. The Home Office informs me that it has had 50 sent to it from Members of Parliament and 15 from outside.
827 In accordance with the procedure which I have explained, we have sent copies of the advertisement to the Director of Public Prosecutions and I understand that these advertisements are now the subject of police inquiry. Until the outcome of those inquiries is known, it is not possible for me to say whether anything can be done about the transmission of the advertisements through the post. Recipients of the advertisements can easily make their views known, if they so desire, by writing to the senders of this type of literature which is now in circulation.
My hon. Friend might reasonably ask why, if an advertisement is clearly offensive to many people, its transmission through the post cannot be stopped on these grounds alone. It is certainly true that the transmission of grossly offensive words, drawings, and so on, through the post is a contravention of the Post Office Act, 1953, but that is only so if the words, etc., appear on the outside of the packet. Such copies of the advertisement for the "Penthouse" magazine are being sent through the post in plain covers.
My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary does, of course, keep under review the overall working of the Obscene Publications Acts to see that 828 they are broadly in line with current standards and opinions. It must, however, be said that he has no law-enforcement function and that he has no authority to give instructions to the prosecuting authorities. The enforcement of the Acts is the responsibility of the police, who collect the evidence which is necessary to institute proceedings and are guided as necessary by the Director of Public Prosecutions.
I hope, therefore, that I have succeeded in making clear to the House and to my hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Chatham, who, I know is greatly disturbed by the type of stuff that is now being circulated, the part played by the Post Office in dealing with the problem to which my hon. Friend has drawn attention.
I close on much the same lines as I opened by saying that we have no wish, in the Post Office, as a responsible authority, to see the mails used for the dissemination of indecent and obscene material and that we shall continue to do all we possibly can in the way I have described to ensure that the mails are not so used.