HC Deb 05 April 1967 vol 744 cc317-25

6.45 p.m.

Mr. Paul Bryan (Howden)

I beg to move Amendment No. 5, in page 2, line 31, at the end to insert: and (e) to the United Kingdom'. This Amendment arises from the highly unsatisfactory answer given by the Postmaster-General during the debate on Clause 3 stand part in Committee. At that time, the hon. Member for Belfast, North (Mr. Stratton Mills) had pointed out that normally, under British law, a criminal offence could only take place in the United Kingdom, or a British ship abroad. This new offence under the Bill by which broadcasting not in Britain, or in a British ship and not even to Britain, could become a crime under our law is something entirely new.

Once we begin thinking about this the possibilities are absolutely endless. My hon. Friend asked the Postmaster-General in Committee about the example of Peter Scott having been on expedition to the North Pole, returning home and finding himself broadcasting to Canada on a Canadian ship. He asked whether he would be committing an offence, and the Postmaster-General said that he would be breaking British law. One discovers that a British man could be broadcasting in Peru or on a Peruvian ship to Peru, and be breaking the law in England, or on a Chinese ship to China, and still breaking the law in England. We ought to stop such a thing happening, but how does one do so?

On this very question, my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, Central (Mr. Ian Gilmour) asked the Postmaster-General if extradition arose. He later said that this would not be enforced. Having committed an offence all that one has to do is to go abroad for a couple of years. In other words, by banishing oneself, one can get away with the offence. We think that this is a lot of rubbish.

We ought to return to a realistic basis. The offence should be limited to a United Kingdom citizen broadcasting to Britain. The Postmaster-General said in Committee that this was absolutely impossible because pop or light music was universal and one would not be able to tell to whom it was directed. I cannot agree with that. If I heard a Beatles record coming over the radio, followed by a description of the blessings of Daz, explained in German, I would guess that this was aimed at the Germans and not directed at the United Kingdom. My local radio station is Radio 270, which is constantly advertising goods in kroner and pounds, and it does not take very long to guess at which nationality the programme is directed. Certainly, the implications in these examples are a lot clearer than many of the provisions and assumptions in the Bill, such as implying an advertisement, which is another of the crimes which comes under its umbrella.

Another reason for confining the offence to broadcasting to the United Kingdom is that throughout our discussions the Postmaster-General has too easily assumed, first, that any British seaman who joined a foreign ship would certainly know that it was a broadcasting ship, in whatever part of the world it happened to be. Secondly, he has assumed that after the Bill becomes an Act, a seaman in the most obscure part of the world will automatically know that it is against British law to broadcast from a foreign ship or to help such a broadcast to take place. A seaman is also expected to know exactly where a British subject stands if the law conflicts with the laws of the country in which he happens to be or the orders of the master of the ship.

The Postmaster-General must think about this again. The more one goes into individual cases, the more ludicrous it seems. If, for example, a British engineer joined an Indonesian ship in an Indonesian harbour, if it was one of those large vessels with a variety of masts, rigging, cranes, radio masts and the rest, he is not to know that broadcasting is its sole purpose, as, indeed, it might not be. If the offence is confined to broadcasting to Britain, or even to Europe, all these difficulties take on a much lesser degree.

We should bear in mind that the chance of seamen knowing about the law will remain remote. We here live abnormally close to these matters and we get so used to the Bill that to some of us it now does not seem particularly bizarre. To a seaman abroad, however, who listens all day to commercial radio, it is inconceivable that broadcasting a bit of pop music from a foreign ship is a crime.

We are ready to co-operate with the Postmaster-General to this degree. If he contends that limiting the offence to broadcasting to the United Kingdom is narrowing it too much, we will certainly consider confining it to broadcasting to countries which have signed the European Agreement. By bringing it far closer to one's own country, one has much more hope of making the situation realistic and just.

Mr. Charles Fletcher-Cooke (Darwen)

I come with a fresh approach to the Bill, having been in the Pacific during most of the time when it was passing through Committee. I therefore see clearly what effect it might have on that important ocean if we, on the opposite side of the globe, assume to ourselves the most extraordinary jurisdiction which any Act of this Parliament has ever assumed.

When I left these shores, the Bill started as a Measure to deal with the sound waves that proceeded, viciously and dangerously, over these islands. By easy stages it extended itself in people's minds to the waves that extended, equally dangerously and wrongly, over the Continent of Europe and its adjacent waters.

It amazes me, on coming back and reading the Bill, to find that it extends to the waves that are sent all round the globe and from any point on the sea. That is how I read it and I do not think that I am wrong. Indeed, the Postmaster-General conceded that in Committee because, although he kept saying, We cannot legislate for the whole world. … Obviously we cannot legislate in this Parliament for the whole globe", he added, But there is an international agreement on this subject—and not only the European Agreement. In other words, the right hon. Gentleman is legislating for extra-European waters. We must have some justification for this extraordinary extension of our jurisdiction.

I see on my left my learned colleague of the Scottish Bar, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Pent-lands (Mr. Wylie), supporting me in that. He will, I am sure, agree that except, perhaps, in the case of murder committed by British subjects abroad and one or two cases connected with the activity of persons on board British ships, which are for these purposes regarded as part of British territory, and, possibly, except for the activities—I am not even sure whether this applies—of persons who are false coiners or forgers in foreign countries it is doubtful whether any such jurisdiction has ever before been claimed by this Parliament.

Picture the situation. A British-protected person, who is certainly included by Clause 3, somewhere in the Pacific, in the waters where I have recently been, is quite legally, according to the laws of those parts, supplying a ship which is a broadcasting ship, which flies, perhaps, the flag of a foreign country in those parts and which broadcasts from the high seas in the Pacific, much to the comfort of those who listen to it and without any offence to any of the laws of the immediately surrounding countries.

Nevertheless, according to the wording of the Clause, such a British-protected person would be committing an offence against the law of England. As far as I can see, there is no provision in the Bill for giving him exemption. I may be wrong, but I cannot find it.

Is it not an extraordinary state of affairs that a British-protected person, engaged in broadcasting from the high seas, from the ship of a different flag from that of Britain, about which no complaint is made by the countries in the Pacific, where there is no objection to this sort of activity—because it is only the European Convention which has been materially discussed in these debates—if and when he returns to this country is liable to be prosecuted? When one considers the sort of British-protected persons who might be found in the area of the Pacific, and, indeed, all over the world, the doctrine that a man is presumed to know the law is being stretched far too far.

The Postmaster-General is taking, as those in Government service so often take, enormous powers, but he will reply that in such an instance as I have mentioned there would be no intention of using them. The worst sort of legislation is to take powers because one thinks that one may need to use them, although it is fairly certain that one will not need to do so.

Before powers of a penal character are taken, a need for their use in every particular must be made out. For such an instance as I have quoted, no argument has been given. Let the Postmaster-General have the courage of his convictions when he says We cannot legislate for the whole world … we cannot legislate in this Parliament for the whole globe."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee G, 9th March, 1967; c. 158–9.] In that case, let him limit the offensive broadcasts to broadcasts which go, if not only to the United Kingdom, at least only to Europe; otherwise, he is making an ass of himself and of this Parliament, because there is nothing more ridiculous than passing laws which cannot be enforced, and a law dealing with a British-protected person broadcasting in the Pacific is one which no court in this country could ever hope to enforce.

I cannot believe that the Attorney-General has considered this point. I cannot see him or any other Law Officer on the Front Bench opposite. If the point is applied to the usual principles of legislation relating to the jurisdiction of our courts over offences committed outside this country, I am sure that, when it is appreciated, the great width of this power will be rejected. If the Postmaster-General cannot give us what we are asking for today—and this Amendment may be slightly too limited—I hope that he will at least look at it again and see if in another place he could limit the extreme width of the jurisdiction which he is taking, because it is ridiculous, foolish and futile to have penal powers over people whom one cannot ever hope to touch.

Mr. Edward Short

The hon. And learned Member for Darwen (Mr. Fletcher Cooke) said that the only international agreement which has arisen in these debates is the European Agreement. However, that is not so. Almost every country in the world is under an obligation to end pirate broadcasting from the seas round its coasts. The International Radio Regulations which are annexed to the International Telecommunications Convention make that clear. Only today I had discussions with the Postmaster-General of New Zealand, who is at the moment drafting legislation based on our own to deal with a pirate radio ship based in that country. Almost every country has an obligation to put an end to this menace.

The only issue is whether or not we add the words "to the United Kingdom". I would point out to the hon. and learned Gentleman that Clause 3 deals solely with British subjects of one kind or another and subsection (3) specifies the various categories of British subjects. It only extends British jurisdiction to British subjects of one kind or another wherever they may be.

The effect of the Amendment is to make broadcasting on the high seas from structures on non-British registered ships and aircraft and any collaboration with such broadcasting mentioned in Clause 5 an offence only if the broadcasting is directed to the United Kingdom. If the Amendment were accepted, the Bill would not fulfil our obligations to legislate under the European Agreement. Article I of the agreement is directed against broadcasting.

… intended for reception or capable of being received, wholly or in part within the territory of any Contracting Party."— that is, any of the 12 countries.

Mr. Fletcher-Cooke

That is an important limitation. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman where in the Bill that limitation is reflected, because it is clearly a limitation to Europe?

Mr. Short

Radio waves do not stop at the frontiers, but go on over other people's territory as well.

Article 1 goes on: … or which causes harmful interference to any radio service operating under the authority of a Contracting Party.

If we are to ratify that agreement, we cannot limit the Bill in the way proposed by the Amendment. The agreement recognises that contracting parties may wish to exceed the minimum obligations, but there will be no excuse for falling short of those obligations to our partners in Europe. In any case, if the Bill is seen as part of a common legislative effort by European countries to end pirate broadcasting, it must not be limited to broadcasting directed to the United Kingdom, even if that were possible; otherwise we would be unable to help a foreign country such as Ireland if a ship manned by British nationals or financed by British advertising was broadcasting to it. That country would, like any other country similarly placed, naturally be unwilling to apply its own legislation in the converse situation.

I cannot accept the Amendment.

Question put, That those words be there inserted in the Bill:—

The House divided: Ayes 120, Noes 191.

Division No. 301.] AYES [7.7 p.m.
Atkins, Humphrey (M't'n & M'd'n) Glover, Sir Douglas Mott-Radclyffe, Sir Charles
Baker, W. H. K. Gower, Raymond Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh
Batsford, Brian Grant, Anthony Nabarro, Sir Gerald
Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds) Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gos. & Fhm) Grimond, Rt. Hn. J. Osborn, John (Hallam)
Berry, Hn. Anthony Gurden, Harold Page, Graham (Crosby)
Bessell, Peter Hamilton, Marquess of (Fermanagh) Pearson, Sir Frank (Clitheroe)
Biffen, John Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Peel, John
Birch, Rt. Hn. Nigel Harrison, Brian (Maldon) Percival, Ian
Boyle, Rt. Hn. Sir Edward Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye) Peyton, John
Braine, Bernard Heald, Rt. Hn. Sir Lionel Pink, R. Bonner
Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) Higgins, Terence L. Pounder, Rafton
Bruce-Gardyne, J. Hill, J. E. B. Pym, Francis
Bryan, Paul Howell, David (Guildford) Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James
Bullus, Sir Eric Hunt, John Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter
Burden, F. A. Iremonger, T. L. Ridsdale, Julian
Carlisle, Mark Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye) Rodgers, Sir John (Sevenoaks)
Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) Russell, Sir Ronald
Channon, H. P. G. Jopling, Michael Sharples, Richard
Chichester-Clark, R. Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith Sinclair, Sir George
Clegg, Walter Kaberry, Sir Donald Smith, John
Costain, A. P. Kimball, Marcus Steel, David (Roxburgh)
Crouch, David Lambton, Viscount Summers, Sir Spencer
Crowder, F. P. Langford-Holt, Sir John Taylor, Edward M. (G'gow, Cathcart)
Dalkeith, Earl of Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry Temple, John M.
Dance, James Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) Thatcher, Mrs. Margaret
Davidson, James (Aberdeenshire, W.) Longden, Gilbert Thorpe, Rt. Hn. Jeremy
d'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry Loveys, W. H. Tilney, John
Dean, Paul (Somerset, N.) Lubbock, Eric van Straubenzee, W. R.
Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F. (Ashford) McAdden, Sir Stephen Wainwright, Richard (Colne Valley)
Digby, Simon Wingfield MacArthur, Ian Ward, Dame Irene
Dodds-Parker, Douglas McMaster, Stanley Weatherill, Bernard
Doughty, Charles Maddan, Martin Webster, David
Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton) Maginnis, John E. Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William
Elliott, R. W. (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, N.) Maude, Angus Winstanley, Dr. M. P.
Emery, Peter Mawby, Ray Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick
Errington, Sir Eric Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. Worsley, Marcus
Fletcher-Cooke, Charles Maydon, Lt.-Cmdr. S. L. C. Wylie, N. R.
Gibson-Watt, David Monro, Hector
Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.) More, Jasper TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) Morrison, Charles (Devizes) Mr. Eyre and Mr. Kitso
NOES
Abse, Leo Garrett, W. E. Ogden, Eric
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.) Gourlay, Harry O'Malley, Brian
Allen, Scholefield Gregory, Arnold Oram, Albert E,
Archer, Peter Grey, Charles (Durham) Orme, Stanley
Armstrong, Ernest Griffiths, David (Rother Valley) Oswald, Thomas
Ashley, Jack Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.) Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, S'tn)
Atkins, Ronald (Preston, N.) Hamilton, James (Bothwell) Owen, Will (Morpeth)
Atkinson, Norman (Tottenham) Hamilton, William (Fife, W.) Padley, Walter
Bagier, Gordon A. T. Hamling, William Page, Derek (King's Lynn)
Barnett, Joel Hannan, William Paget, R. T.
Baxter, William Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles
Beaney, Alan Haseldine, Norman Park, Trevor
Bence, Cyril Heffer, Eric S. Parkyn, Brian (Bedford)
Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood Henig, Stanley Pavitt, Laurence
Blackburn, F. Hobden, Dennis (Brighton, K'town) Pearson, Arthur (Pontypridd)
Boardman, H. Hooley, Frank Peart, Rt. Hn. Fred
Booth, Albert Horner, John Pentland, Norman
Braddock, Mrs. E. M. Howarth, Robert (Bolton, E.) Perry, George H. (Nottingham, S.)
Bradley, Tom Hoy, James Prentice, Rt. Hn. R. E.
Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan) Huckfield, L. Price, Christopher (Perry Barr)
Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn) Hughes, Emrys (Ayrshire, S.) Price, Thomas (Westhoughton)
Butler, Herbert (Hackney, C.) Hunter, Adam Price, William (Rugby)
Cant, R. B. Hynd, John Pursey, Cmdr. Harry
Carmichael, Neil Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill) Rees, Merlyn
Carter-Jones, Lewis Jackson, Colin (B'h'se & Spenb'gh) Rhodes, Geoffrey
Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara Jackson, Peter M. (High Peak) Richard, Ivor
Coe, Denis Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) Roberts, Gwilym (Bedfordshire, S.)
Coleman, Donald Jones, Dan (Burnley) Robertson, John (Paisley)
Concannon, J. D. Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham) Robinson, W. O. J. (Walth'stow, E.)
Jones, T. A. (Rhondda West) Rose, Paul
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) Kelley, Richard Ross, Rt. Hn. William
Crawshaw, Richard Kenyon, Clifford Rowland, Christopher (Meriden)
Crossman, Rt. Hn, Richard Kerr, Dr. David (W'worth, Central) Shaw, Arnold (Ilford, S.)
Cullen, Mrs. Alice Kerr, Russell (Feltham) Sheldon, Robert
Dalyell, Tam Lawson, George Shore, Peter (Stepney)
Davidson, Arthur (Accrington) Leadbitter, Ted Short,Rt. Hn. Edward(N c'tle-u-Tyne)
Davies, G. Elfed (Rhondda, E.) Lestor, Miss Joan Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford)
Davies, Robert (Cambridge) Lever, Harold (Cheetham) Silverman, Julius (Aston)
Davies, S. O. (Merthyr) Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) Slater, Joseph
Delargy, Hugh Lomas, Kenneth Small, William
Dell, Edmund Loughlin, Charles Snow, Julian
Dempsey, James Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.) Spriggs, Leslie
Dewar, Donald McBride, Neil Steele, Thomas (Dunbartonshire, W.)
Dickens, James Mackie, John Stewart, Rt. Hn. Michael
Dobson, Ray Mackintosh, John P. Thornton, Ernest
Doig, Peter Maclennan, Robert Tomney, Frank
Dunn, James A. McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.) Urwin, T. W.
Dunnett, Jack McNamara, J. Kevin Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne Valley)
Dunwoody, Dr. John (F'th & C'b'e) Macpherson, Malcolm Walker, Harold (Doncaster)
Eadie, Alex Mahon, Peter (Preston, S.) Wallace, George
Edwards, Robert (Bilston) Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg) Watkins, David (Consett)
Edwards, William (Merioneth) Manuel, Archie Whitaker, Ben
Ensor, David Mapp, Charles Whitlock, William
Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) Marquand, David wilkins, W. A.
Evans, Ioan L. (Birm'h'm, Yardley) Marsh, Rt. Hn. Richard Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)
Faulds, Andrew Mellish, Robert Williams, Alan Lee (Hornchurch)
Fernyhough, E. Mendelson, J. J. Williams, Clifford (Abertillery)
Fitch, Alan (Wigan) Mikardo, Ian Willis, George (Edinburgh, E.)
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) Millan, Bruce Woodburn, Rt. Hn. A.
Foley, Maurice Mitchell, R. c. (S'th'pton, Test) Woof, Robert
Ford, Ben Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire) Yates, Victor
Forrester, John Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe) Zilliacus, K.
Fowler, Gerry Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)
Fraser, John (Norwood) Morris, John (Aberavon) TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Galpern, Sir Myer Newens, Stan Mr. Howie and Mr. Harper.