HC Deb 14 May 1970 vol 801 cc1454-60
The Minister of Posts and Telecommunications (Mr. John Stonehouse)

With permission, I would like to make a statement.

As the House will recall, I said in the debate on 3rd December last year that I was considering an inquiry into the long-term future of broadcasting after 1976, when the present mandates of the B.B.C. and the I.T.A. expire.

There are important technical developments taking place in the field of broadcasting and of communications generally which may have fundamental implications for broadcasting in the later 1970s and it is necessary that these, as well as the existing broadcasting arrangements, should be examined before Parliament and the Government have to take decisions about the arrangements that should apply from 1976.

The Government have, therefore, decided to set up an independent committee of inquiry to carry out a wide-ranging review of the future of sound and television broadcasting. [Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. The Minister is making a statement. The House must listen to it.

Mr. Stonehouse

The terms of reference are: To consider the future, after 31st July, 1976, of the broadcasting services in the United Kingdom, of the dissemination by wire of broadcast and other programmes and of television for public showing; to consider the implications for present or any recommended additional services of new techniques, for example, for recording visual programmes for reproduction; and to propose what constitutional, organisational and financial arrangements and what conditions should apply to the conduct of all these services". I have invited the noble Lord, Lord Annan, to be Chairman of the Committee, and I am glad to inform the House that he has consented.

I shall announce the names of the other members of the Committee as soon as possible.

Mr. Bryan

While I accept that a number of technical developments are on the way, may I ask what knowledge the right hon. Gentleman expects to gain from an inquiry into the whole field of broadcasting which is not already available to the Government without an inquiry and all that that involves?

Second, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the low morale among the creative and executive staff in broadcasting is largely due to the fact that I.T.V. and the B.B.C., during recent years, have already been over-investigated, over-reorganised and over-restructured? Why is he hurrying to appoint a committee of inquiry before a General Election, when there are still six years before the B.B.C. and I.T.V. mandates run out?

Mr. Stonehouse

I do not think that we are yet fully aware of all the technical developments that may be generally accepted in a few years' time. The pace of change is considerable. I have had an advisory group of scientists and electronic engineers advising me on the subject for some months, and I am satisfied that the change in the technological environment for broadcasting may be so considerable that the whole function of the broadcasting institutions in Britain as we have known them may have to change. That is why a committee of inquiry which can take into account the wider social implication of these changes is essential.

I do not accept that there is low morale in the broadcasting institutions. The quality of our broadcasting is second to none in the world, and we want it to continue in that way.

The fact that there has been such a great deal of public controversy about the B.B.C.'s proposals in "Broadcasting in the Seventies" for sound broadcasting, when it was alleged that there was not sufficient time for consideration of its proposals, indicates that we must now give sufficient time for the inquiry to go ahead and for the public and Parliament to consider it after the report is made. As Lord Pilkington said, the last inquiry did not have sufficient time. We have decided that this inquiry should have sufficient time, and that is why the committee is being appointed now.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. We have a lot of businesss ahead. Questions and Answers should be brief.

Mr. Golding

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us are very grateful to him for instituting an inquiry into the technical aspects of broadcasting, an inquiry demanded by the T.U.C. and the Post Office Engineering Union? May we hope that consideration will be given to the possibility of handing over the technical aspects of broadcasting to the Post Office, where they truly belong?

Mr. Stonehouse

I am grateful for that expression of support. I know that the country generally will welcome the fact that the uncertainty about a committee of inquiry has now been dispelled. Of course, the committee will be able to consider any representations made to it.

Dr. Winstanley

I welcome the setting up of the committee of inquiry as a necessary step for the long-term future of broadcasting after July, 1976. But does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it cannot of itself do anything to remove the very deep anxieties both within and outside the B.B.C., nor will it do anything to remove the present state of financial dependence of the B.B.C. on the Government, which is a threat to the freedom of broadcasting?

Mr. Stonehouse

I do not accept that there is in the B.B.C. the degree of low morale which is being suggested. I think that the morale in the B.B.C. is very good. The controversy which surrounded "Broadcasting in the Seventies" has now largely subsided. It is now generally accepted that the B.B.C. is doing a first-rate job.

The committee of inquiry will not be concerned with short-term problems, but about the situation after 1976. All those who are concerned with broadcasting, including those in the B.B.C., will be anxious to make a contribution to that long-term consideration which is so fundamental.

Mr. Wyatt

Will the inquiry be able to consider the advisability of setting up a Broadcasting Council on the lines of the Press Council, to which the public can make complaints if they are not satisfied about the impartiality of B.B.C. or I.T.A. programmes?

Mr. Stonehouse

I know that my hon. Friend has put this idea forward on several occasions, and I am sure that, if he were to submit it to the committee of inquiry, it would consider it. I have put no reins on the committee's considerations, so this would certainly be one of the subjects which it could consider.

Mr. Ian Gilmour

If this inquiry was to be set up, would it not have been far more sensible to set it up before the damage was done to the B.B.C.? Would the right hon. Gentleman make it clear whether the chairman will be Lord Arran or Lord Annan? If the latter, will he undertake to see, so that some impartiality is preserved, that Dr. Leavis is also a member?

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member should not refer discourteously to a Member of another place.

Mr. Stonehouse

I do not accept that there is now undue controversy in the B.B.C., and I do not believe that an earlier announcement of the establishment of this committee of inquiry would in itself have changed the controversy which has raged for the last year about sound broadcasting in the B.B.C.

I made clear in my statement that it is Lord Annan who is being appointed. I cannot yet announce the other members of the committee.

Mr. Fred Evans

Although I generally welcome my right hon. Friend's statement, may I ask to what extent the particular interests of Wales will be covered by the inquiry?

Mr. Stonehouse

I am very anxious, as I am sure the chairman of the committee will be, that it shall take into account not only the interests of Wales, but those of Northern Ireland and Scotland as well. I will ensure that a member is appointed from Wales to help to represent the concerns of the Welsh.

Mr. Mawby

If the main function of this committee, as I understand it to be. is to look into the technological future, why not have a technologist as chairman? If, on the other hand, it is to look into the whole question of the social impact upon society of broadcasting as a whole, would the right hon. Gentleman take very close account of the point made by his hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Mr. Wyatt)?

Could the committee be called upon to consider the very vexed question whether there should be a council on on the same basis as the Press Council, even if only as a long-stop, to protect society from this method of communication?

Mr. Stonehouse

As I said, the committee will be able to consider any of these points which are put to it. But I am concerned that the full technological changes, which will certainly be vital in the next few years, should be considered by the committee. I also have leading technologists advising me on this very aspect and I will ensure that this advice is made available to the committee. It would have been wrong if it concentrated purely on the changes in technology. What we have to ensure is that the full social and political impact of these changes is considered by a wide-ranging and widely-drawn committee.

Dr. Miller

Would my right hon. Friend accept that this inquiry is welcome? But will he confirm that, in addition to looking into technological aspects, the committee will also consider the policy of broadcasting, both in sound and in television? Would he confirm that there will be a Scottish representative on the committee? I am sure that he must recognise that national interests could be looked after if broadcasts came from Scotland as well as from any other part of the country?

Mr. Stonehouse

I am glad to confirm that all the policy issues will be considered by the committee if it wishes to do so. I am also pleased to confirm that I will be making an appointment from Scotland, so the special concerns of that part of the United Kingdom can be kept in mind.

Mr. Ian Lloyd

Since the period within which the committee will be examining the impact of technology on television and sound broadcasting is probably the next decade, and since, within that decade, the virtually complete monopoly which national States have exercised over broadcasting to their nationals is likely to disappear as a result of direct satellite television broadcasting, would the Minister specifically include this subject in the terms of reference of the committee?

Mr. Stonehouse

The committee, and indeed Ministers, can be concerned only about activities which lie within their jurisdiction. I am very glad to take up this point, because it is an extremely valuable one, which we have very much in mind. This is one of the new technological developments which will certainly undermine, in time, the quasi-monopoly in broadcasting in Britain at this time.

Mr. Faulds

Would my right hon. Friend accept—I should like to put it to him with the greatest possible courtesy and warmth—that he is wrong when he says that the internal concern in the B.B.C. has died down? If he believes this, would he ask for a report of last Sunday's meeting of the 76 Group with some of the leading B.B.C. figures?

Mr. Stonehouse

Generally speaking, the correspondence which the B.B.C. and 1 have been receiving in recent weeks confirms that there is now very little outside concern about the impact of the B.B.C. programme changes. Indeed, there has been wide acceptance that these were a change for the good. We should not become embroiled in this, in considering the wide-ranging future of broadcasting from 1976 onwards. We should not be concerned about temporary disputes which may exist within one of the institutions to which we are referring.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. I must protect the business of the House.

Mr. Ian Gilmour

On a point of order. I did not hear it absolutely clearly, Mr. Speaker, but I understood you to allege that I had been discourteous to either one of two members of another place whom I mentioned. With the greatest possible respect, nothing that I said relating to either of those peers could possibly be construed, if you heard me aright, as discourteous. I should be grateful if you would clarify your Ruling.

Mr. Speaker

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that matter. I saw the distress he showed when I made my Ruling. If I misheard him, I at once apologise to him.

Mr. Hugh Jenkins

On a point of order. As you know, Mr. Speaker, so far as anyone in the House is representative of those who work in television broadcasting, it is myself—

Mr. Faulds

Hey, hey, hey!

Mr. Jenkins

—it is myself—would you be so good as to tell me, either publicly or privately, why I am so consistently unsuccessful in catching your eye?

Mr. Speaker

I have never noticed that the hon. Gentleman is singularly unsuccessful in catching Mr. Speaker's eye, but he cannot catch it every time.