§ 20. Mr. Hugh Jenkinsasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what plans he now has for a fourth television channel.
§ Mr. ChatawayAs I told my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mr. McCrindle) on 23rd November, the possibility of a second service of independent television is not excluded, but I have no immediate plans for authorising it.—[Vol. 807, c. 3.]
§ Mr. JenkinsWould the right hon. Gentleman agree that if there were to be a fourth television channel it should not merely be additional but different? If the matter does come up for consideration, would he consider the possibility of a Pilkington solution from the point of view of revenue, so that the authority would be the recipient of the revenue and the channel would not be confined to the tastes of one particular programme contractor?
§ Mr. ChatawayThis is certainly one of the possibilities open, and I will certainly take note of the hon. Gentleman's suggestion.
§ Mr. GorstWill my right hon. Friend also bear in mind not only the desirability to avoid such a catastrophic situation as the "Yesterday's Men" programme, to which I think hon. Members on both sides took objection, but also the fact that there are additional resources becoming available as a result of policies which this Government have been pursuing with regard to the National Films Corporation which would mean considerable resources would be available for entertainment purposes and could easily 1437 provide a programme for a fourth channel, particularly if, unlike the suggestion of the hon. Member for Putney (Mr. Hugh Jenkins), it were run independently along the lines of the first commercial channel?
§ Mr. ChatawayI am not persuaded that it would necessarily be as simple as that to provide a fourth channel. As I have said, there must be doubts about the sufficiency of advertising revenue to finance it.