§ 1. Mr. William Hamiltonasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether, in view of the circumstances in which the contents of a letter from the hon. Member for Fife, West to Lord Hill, the Chairman of the British Broadcasting Corporation, were communicated to a national newspaper without the knowledge or consent of the hon. Member, he will dismiss Lord Hill.
§ Mr. HamiltonIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that a very serious principle is involved? When an hon. Member writes to a public corporation and the information is disclosed to a newspaper within 24 hours of his writing, without 378 the Member's knowledge or consent, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that that is to be deplored and that the matter should be further investigated with a view to disciplinary action being taken against the offender?
§ Mr. ChatawayI am told by the B.B.C. that it is investigating to try to discover how the information arrived at the newspaper. But certainly I do not consider it a matter which would justify the dismissal of the chairman of the corporation.
§ Sir R. CaryDoes not my right hon. Friend agree that, while there may be many reasons for dismissing Lord Hill, the request contained in this Question is not one of them?
§ Mr. ChatawayI agree with that last comment.
§ Mr. HamiltonIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
§ 6. Mr. Whiteheadasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether, in view of the provisions of the Licence and Agreement, his permission in writing was sought by the British Broadcasting Corporation before the transmission of announcements relating to the Time-Life part-work on the British Empire.
§ Mr. ChatawayNo, Sir. My permission was not sought.
§ Mr. WhiteheadDoes the Minister accept that in view of the B.B.C. advertising a commercial undertaking, upon which none of its staff had worked and for which it received 1 per cent. of the profits, in return for financial help in the sale and marketing of B.B.C. programmes, one of which incidentally bore the title of this part-work, there is a need to look again at the definition of sponsorship in Section 12 of the Licence and Agreement and particularly at what the phrase
money or any other valuable consideration" nowadays can mean?
§ Mr. ChatawayI am satisfied that the B.B.C. is right to say that it did not, in the words of Section 12, receive any money or valuable consideration in 379 respect of the sending of these announcements. I think that there is a feeling, on the part of a number of hon. Members, that there are aspects of the Time-Life arrangement about which the B.B.C. ought to think further.
§ Mr. Selwyn GummerWill my right hon. Friend look into one aspect which seems rather odd, namely, that the "British Empire" should have been arranged with an American publishing firm, the matter not having being discussed with a British publishing firm before the decision was made?
§ Mr. ChatawayThe situation undoubtedly is that the B.B.C. retains total editorial control over the programmes, though I am sure the corporation will take note of my hon. Friend's views.
§ 9. Mr. Madelasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications what discussions he has held with the British Broadcasting Corporation on the subject of advertising being used as a form of revenue for the corporation; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. ChatawayNone, Sir. Nor has the B.B.C. put this suggestion to me.
§ Mr. MadelAs the B.B.C.'s range of activities is so wide and as broadcasting costs continue to rise, would it not be better for the corporation to raise some revenue from advertising rather than make another request for an increase in the licence fee?
§ Mr. ChatawayThere is no question of a request for an increase in the licence fee at this time. The view that the corporation has always taken about advertising is that if it once allowed it into any of its programmes it would, in successive years, be forced to extend advertising throughout its service. On that basis, it has always resisted the idea of introducing advertising anywhere.
§ 22. Mr. Charles R. Morrisasked the Minister for Posts and Telecommunications when he expects to begin consultations about a successor to the present Chairman of the British Broadcasting Corporation.
§ Mr. ChatawayI have nothing to add to my reply on 9th February to my hon. 380 Friend the Member for Belfast, North (Mr. Stratton Mills).—[Vol. 830, c. 1319.]
§ Mr. MorrisWould the Minister indicate whom he will be consulting before the appointment is finalised? Also, would he bear in mind the independence, impartiality and, indeed, importance which reasonable people on all sides of the House attach to this appointment? What thought has the Minister given to taking the nation into his confidence and publishing a list of the aspirants for the post prior to the appointment being made?
§ Mr. ChatawayI am not sure that that is a very practical proposal, because I doubt whether a very satisfactory list of aspirants could be drawn up in public for such a post. We would do better to rely on more traditional means of filling the post.
§ Mr. Evelyn KingWould my right hon. Friend accept that, after giving reasonable freedom to producers, matters of programme content must rest securely in the hands of the new chairman and his colleagues and not in the hands of free communications groups within the B.B.C. or any other self-appointed doctrinaires? In this matter may we be sure that the chairman will have the fullest support of the Minister and Her Majesty's Government?
§ Mr. ChatawayAlthough the terms in which my hon. Friend described the situation might be regarded by some as slightly provocative, I think he has outlined the position absolutely correctly. Responsibility for programme content rests solely with the chairman and governors of the B.B.C.