§ 15. Mr. Evelyn Kingasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now seek powers to ensure that, in the case of the broadcasting organisations, the adjectives "Independent" and "British" cease to be used.
§ Mr. ChatawayNo, Sir.
§ Mr. KingIs not the B.B.C. just as independent as I.T.V. and is not the I.T.A. just as British as the B.B.C.? Does not the difficulty stem from the fact that "British" seems to imply that the corporation is part of the Establishment, which it is not? Does not some criticism of the B.B.C. stem from the pretentiousness of this word, which seems to imply that it is more British than it is?
§ Mr. ChatawayI know that the B.B.C. protests that it is no less independent, and that independent television protests that it is no less British, and some of their critics protest that neither adjective is applicable to either organisation. But these are the names that have been given for the current Charter period and licence period to the two organisations. I should 1319 not be justified in attempting to change them.
§ Mr. William PriceIs it not clear that we are becoming a little too sensitive in the House—
§ Sir G. NabarroSpeak for yourself.
§ Mr. Leslie HuckfieldHark at who is talking.
§ Mr. Price—or, for that matter, in court? Is it not equally clear that any organisation, and particularly the B.B.C., which does its job correctly will attract its share of criticism? Will the Minister make it absolutely clear that he will have nothing to do with censorship from either side of the House?
§ Mr. ChatawayThe House knows that I have had nothing to do with censorship, but I believe that the broadcasting organisations ought to take very careful note of the criticism they receive and act on it.
§ Mr. Robert CookeMy right hon. Friend has referred to 1976. Would he not agree that the question of nomenclature could be looked at by any review body which may be set up meanwhile to look at the whole future of broadcasting?
§ Mr. ChatawayI think that that is correct.