§ 52. Mr. Dempseyasked the Postmaster-General if, in view of the deteriorating moral standards of television pro- 422 grammes, he will introduce legislation to prohibit the use of obscene language in television programmes and to improve the moral standard of television broadcasting; and if he will make a statement.
§ 64. Mr. Spriggsasked the Postmaster-General if he will introduce legislation to give himself power to hold an inquiry into the British Broadcasting Corporation programmes which contain obscene language; and if he will make a statement.
§ The Postmaster-General (Mr. Anthony Wedgwood Benn)No, Sir. The broadcasting authorities are already under a duty imposed by Parliament to satisfy themselves that, so far as is possible, the programmes for which they are responsible should not offend against good taste or decency, or be offensive to public feeling.
§ Mr. DempseyIs my right hon. Friend aware that it leaves a very bad taste in the mouths of viewers when they listen to obscene language, hear sex relations being encouraged among teen-agers and see contraceptives being flaunted about on the television screen? Is it not time he dealt with these tightrope sexies who are undermining the moral fibre of this nation?
§ Mr. BennI understand the strong feelings expressed by my hon. Friend, which I know are shared by other people. I think that it is quite right to express them, and I take them to the B.B.C. and the I.T.A. when Members write to me about it. What I cannot accept, and this has been a view shared by other Postmasters-General, is that it is my job to censor the B.B.C., particularly as some of these problems arise in live broadcasts, and controlling a live audience is more difficult than when a programme is recorded.
§ Mr. SpriggsWill my right hon. Friend, when giving this matter further consideration, remember that magistrates' courts are convicting people for using the same type of obscene language?
§ Mr. BennNothing that I have said precludes prosecutions where they would be appropriate. I am simply saying that Parliament has placed a responsibility on the Governors of the B.B.C. and the I.T.A., and I do not feel that political censorship would be practicable.
§ Mr. MawbyIs the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that the B.B.C. is still carrying out the terms of the letter of the Chairman of the Board of Governors of June, 1964, in which they made clear the lines which they expected Parliament to take on these moral issues?
§ Mr. BennWith great respect, it is not my job to supervise the way in which the B.B.C. and the I.T.A. do their job. Parliament has placed this responsibility upon their shoulders, as the hon. Member knows better than most. Considering the very large number of hours when they broadcast in the week and the relatively small number of complaints, coupled with the fact that it is not possible to say anything without offending somebody, it is not the time when political censorship should be introduced.
§ Mr. BryanWould the Postmaster-General agree that the increasingly active interest taken by hon. Members and by various organisations outside the House in the level of good taste in broadcasting is entirely welcome? Secondly, would he agree that both the B.B.C. and the I.T.A. are showing great signs of consciousness of the importance of this subject? Possibly the most recent development was Mr. Newman's statement last week as head of B.B.C. drama.
§ Mr. BennI am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he has said. It is true that the B.B.C. and the I.T.A. are very well aware of public feeling on this matter. Both chairmen have assured me that HANSARD is studied by the governing bodies and, therefore, comments made in the House are subject to review by them. I accept absolutely that it is right for people who feel strongly about this to express their feelings, but I doubt whether I should give effect to those feelings by political censorship. That is the only point at which I dissent from the Question.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We must pass from Questions.