§ 25. Mr. Straussasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what 1630 progress she has made in her discussions with the Arts Council on the withholding of subsidies from subsidised theatre organisations on the ground of the possible offensive nature of the plays they intend to produce; and if she will make a statement.
§ Mr. van StraubenzeeA statement published on 30th April has now been made by the Arts Council.
§ Mr. StraussDo I take it that the Minister accepts the Arts Council's admirable declaration which, in effect, says that it would not impose any censorship or control over the artistic theatrical bodies it subsidises?
§ Mr. van StraubenzeeThe Arts Council was never asked to act as censor. It is a very useful statement which says that it is necessary to recognise
that the welcome increase in the amount of subsidy, its deployment and distribution is very properly the subject of special and concentrated public scrutiny.It is a notable step forward that this has been so.
§ Mr. St. John-StevasIs not the only desirable form of censorship self-censorship? Have not the remarks of my noble Friend in the other place contributed notably to that end?
§ Mr. van StraubenzeeI believe that to be so.
§ Mr. FauldsCome, come. Does the Minister realise—
§ Mr. MartenHit her with your handbag.
§ Mr. FauldsI am not one of those who ever carry one. There can be no doubt about that.
§ Mr. SpeakerCome, come.
§ Mr. FauldsI will obey your admonition, Mr. Speaker. Does the hon. Gentleman realise that we are well aware that there have been pressures from the Paymaster-General on this issue? Will the hon. Gentleman now publicly share our delight that the Arts Council has resisted such improper pressures and has, in effect, told the Paymaster-General to take a running jump?
§ Mr. van StraubenzeeI do not think that a statement which includes the phrase
as subsidy increases it behoves the recipients of grants to justify that increase in terms of the general quality of the productionsis anything that can be described in those words. My view is that this is a very useful statement indeed.
§ Mr. Robert CookeWill my hon. friend make it clear to the House that our noble Friend in another place has never suggested that there should be any censorship of any kind? Will my hon. Friend make the speech of my noble Friend compulsory reading for certain hon. Members opposite?
§ Mr. van StraubenzeeThat is absolutely so. There has never been any suggestion that either my noble Friend or the Arts Council should be censors, but there has been a strong feeling—I think that this is a very successful outcome—that it is not proper for public money to be used without any kind of thought being given to the matter of productions which cause grave offence to a very wide number of people.
§ Mr. Hugh JenkinsDoes the hon. Gentleman agree that the statement issued by the Arts Council is a statement of its previous policy which it proposes to continue in future? As it is acceptable to his noble Friend, is this not a consummation about which everybody can be happy?
Mr. van StranbenzeeI understand the hon. Gentleman's embarrassment. After all, he said publicly in the House that he would advise his colleagues to enter into no statement of any kind. We will spare his blushes.