BROADCASTING (ADVERTISING CONTRACTS) (Hansard, 24 June 1964)

§ Mr. Jeremy Thorpe (Devon, North)

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to regulate the placing of advertising contracts with radio and television stations. The Bill which I seek leave to introduce is sponsored by hon. Members on both sides of the House. Its aim is to regulate the placing of advertising contracts with radio and television stations, which would be achieved by causing stations wishing to enter into such contracts to register with the Postmaster-General or any other body to which he would be prepared to accord recognition.

Perhaps I should at once declare two interests, although they are remote. First, I make part of my living by broadcasting, but the products are not such as ever to commend themselves for inclusion in the existing menu put out by the pirate radio ships. I am also a director of the south-west region of Rediffusion, although I understand that that body does not and would not derive any financial benefit or advantage from the operation of these stations.

Let me say of the pirate operators that one might admire their legal ingenuity, their capacity to make tax-free profits and, not least, their capacity to provide this sort of programme that appears to fill a need. In so far as this is shown by pirate radio operators, I would concede that they may well have indicated that this House and, to a lesser extent, the B.B.C. have lagged behind public opinion. But I suggest that there are four main objections to pirate radio stations.

The first is that 123 nations, of which we are one, have decided to share out radio frequencies on a rational basis rather than leave congested wavelengths to jamming and confusion. It is clear that the pirates care nothing for this. We have already received complaints of interference from neighbouring countries, and were there to be an increase in pirate transmissions it would follow that such interference would be aggravated and that, ultimately, there would be a very real chance that this would interfere with the safety frequencies used by ships and aircraft. We are surely all agreed that this is something we 404 could never tolerate in this country and I cannot see why we should have to wait until such a thing actually happens before taking effective action.

The second reason is that there is no legal recourse in connection with the contents of broadcasting by pirate radio transmitters. The content may be innocuous now, but it could just as easily be defamatory, seditious, obscene, or undesirable in some other way without any protection for the public or for this House.

The third objection is that, unlike the B.B.C. the I.T.V. Companies, Radio Luxembourg and Radio Manx, these stations are exploiting the products of recording companies without making any recompense. This is doubly unfortunate since these recording companies recognise the interests of the musical profession and the performers in making their livelihood in these ways. I do not believe that any ex gratia payments by these pirate radio stations are any substitute for payment as of right.

The fourth objection to these stations is that, by broadcasting outside the jurisdiction, they are not liable to tax on their profits and I believe that it is not unreasonable to expect that when money is made out of this country something should be paid back in return. If any proof is needed of the unsatisfactory state of existing legislation, I would point out that every person who listens to an unauthorised broadcast commits a criminal offence, for which he can be fined £10, and £50 for every subsequent offence. In fact the Postmaster-General has been condoning a series of criminal breaches of the law by not withdrawing the licences of the offenders.

I will not weary the House with the legal niceties involved. Suffice to say that the powers possessed by the Postmaster-General are far greater than he appears to understand. Radio Caroline has already had its registration withdrawn by Panama. It is not now registered in any country and is accorded no protection from visit or search by a warship of any country. It is, in certain circumstances, liable to seizure, and in certain other circumstances individuals broadcasting from it are personally liable to arrest under the Wireless Telegraphy Act.

405 Radio Atlanta is in a somewhat stronger position, because the Postmaster-General has not yet asked Panama to withdraw its recognition on the ground of the breach of the International Telecommunications Union which is being committed by that Panamanian registered ship. In fact, the only executive act so far adopted by the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues is to divert a helicopter on a training flight to collect a food-poisoned disc jockey who was suffering the ill effects of eating tinned salmon squatting on Crown property and broadcasting therefrom.

The right hon. Gentleman has said that nothing can be done until we receive the recommendations of the Council of Ministers. I make three comments about that. First, the Parliaments of Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland have effectively legislated already in regard to pirate radio stations and I refuse to believe that this House is less competent to act than the Scandinavian Parliaments.

Secondly, under the Representation of the People Act, 1949, we have already claimed extra-territorial powers to prevent political broadcasts, wherever they may emanate from, to this country so if a precedent is called for, there it is.

Thirdly, the proposed provisions of the European Convention are reasonably well known and none of them would conflict with the machinery which my Bill would set up. In any event, whether or not we accept the Convention an Act of Parliament will be necessary to give it force. The longer this problem is left, the harder it will be to tackle.

I ask leave to introduce the Bill without prejudice to the future of regional broadcasting, whether, indeed, there should be such broadcasting, and 406 whether it should be commercial or under the B.B.C. That is quite another problem and one for intelligent discussion. But, in my submission, the present situation in which pirate radio stations pay no tax, are under no obligation to pay copyright fees, and have no regard for internationally-agreed wavelengths, is something which cannot on any basis whatever be defended.

It will be interesting to see whether, if this Motion is opposed, the opposition comes from those hon. Members who sit for East Anglian seats, coincidentally on a marginal basis, who are prepared to condone these pirates rather than fight for a land-based and recognised legitimate alternative; whether it comes from the commercial radio lobby, who regard this as the thin end of the wedge, I believe wrongly, because if this pirate broadcasting is popular and made illegal the greater will be their case for a legalised substitute; or whether it will come from hon. Members who give unqualified support to the varying attitudes taken by the Postmaster-General and his colleague since this problem first arose. On these grounds, I beg to ask leave to introduce the Bill.