§ 32. Sir E. Erringtonasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will now take steps to amend the law relating to the sending of obscene literature through the post.
§ 48. Mr. van Straubenzeeasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now seek to amend the law relating to the sending of obscene literature through the post.
§ Mr. StonehouseNo, Sir. It is already an offence under Section 11 of the Post Office Act 1953 to send packets containing obscene material through the post.
§ Sir E. ErringtonIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that our constituents are being flooded with invitations to purchase pornographic literature? This morning I received a letter from a lady who said that her husband had had such a letter addressed to him, although he was dead. She had opened the letter with horror. In another case a letter was sent to a child below the age of 14. Cannot something be done about this?
§ Mr. StonehouseThe Question relates to powers. I am satisfied that the powers are sufficient. The Post Office is concerned that it should not attempt to censor mails, and it must deliver mails that are placed in its care.
§ Mr. van StraubenzeeIs not there a big difference between the censorship of mails, which is in nobody's mind, and the intrusion upon decent people's privacy in the form of the reception of quite unwanted material of this kind? Is not the real point that the actual material being sent is not of itself obscene but that it advertises something which, at least in the minds of many of us, is obscene?
§ Mr. StonehouseI appreciate that there is a distinction. All that I can say is that if any obscene material comes to the attention of the Post Office—for instance, as a result of a complaint by a recipient—the matter, if it is considered serious enough, is referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions for further investigations. I think that the powers are sufficient.
§ Mr. Arthur LewisWill my right hon. Friend please consult the Attorney-General in order to see whether something can be done jointly with the Law Offices of the Crown to tighten up the law so as to deal with this objectionable stuff, without in any way setting up a form of censorship? There is certainly a way of doing this. I am sure that the Attorney-General can tell my right hon. Friend ways of doing it.
§ Mr. StonehouseI am sure that my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General will take note of any suggestions that are made to him.
§ Mr. BryanThe Minister knows the sort of literature to which we are referring. Can he tell the House whether our impression that the volume of this literature is far greater than ever before is correct?
§ Mr. StonehouseI cannot say what the volume is, because that would assume that the Post Office keeps a check on the contents of these envelopes, but I can confirm that many complaints have been made to me.
§ Mr. SnowHow many cases has my right hon. Friend sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions for consideration? Is he aware that I have been informed officially that the D.P.P. depends on the climate of public opinion? How does the D.P.P. know what the climate of public opinion is?—or does he read too many of these "Smart Alick" articles in expensive Sunday newspapers?
§ Mr. StonehouseIf it is the case that the D.P.P. takes note of opinion generally, I am sure that he will take note of these exchanges. I cannot say exactly how many cases have been referred to the D.P.P. in the last year.