§ 1. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now set up a commission to inquire into the charter and finances of the British Broadcasting Corporation after 1976.
§ 2. Mr. Whiteheadasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will now announce his decision relating to the holding of an inquiry into broadcasting.
§ 15. Mr. Goldingasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications whether he will now establish a committee of inquiry into broadcasting.
§ 21. Mr. Moateasked the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications if he will now set up a commission to inquire into the method of financing the British Broadcasting Corporation.
§ The Minister of Posts and Telecommunications (Sir John Eden)The Government's reply to the report on the IBA from the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries is now available in the Vote Office. Its main conclusions are that there should be no general inquiry into broadcasting at the present time; that the Television and Sound Broadcasting Acts and the BBC Charter should be extended until 1981; and that an independent study of the coverage of the broadcasting services in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and rural England should be commissioned forthwith.
§ Sir G. NabarroWhile commending my right hon. Friend on his solicitude in providing me with a copy of the White Paper a few seconds before he replied, may I ask him two questions? First, has he omitted altogether any reference to a further delination and definition of the word "offensive" in the context of broadcasting generally and television in particular? Secondly, what provision does he propose to make for the mounting losses of the BBC, which I am told will amount to a sum of not less than £25 million by the year 1976?
§ Sir J. EdenOn the first point raised by my hon. Friend, he will be aware that the actual form of the programmes and their content is the direct responsibility of the respective chairmen and governing bodies of the two broadcasting authorities. The second point relates to a different question.
§ Mr. WhiteheadIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that his answer will be seen here today as a rebuff to the recommendations of the Select Committee of this House? Is he further aware that a statement of this magnitude should have been made as a statement to the House after Questions—with no disrespect to the important statements that are to be made at 3.30 p.m.?
Will the Minister tell us a little more about his reasons for rejecting not merely Recommendation No. 29 of the Select Committee but the recommendation of almost all other interested bodies in broadcasting that there should be an inquiry?
Will the right hon. Gentleman also say something about the reasons why he is so vague, in the document which we have just received, about the future of the fourth channel—the so-called ITV 2—and say whether the companies are to be allowed to go on with extended contracts under the Television Act, itself extended to 1981?
§ Sir J. EdenThe Television Advisory Committee recently reported, indicating that new technical developments were unlikely to have a major impact on the structure of broadcasting before the early part of 1980s. That is one reason why this decision to extend the franchise has been taken. Secondly, a new Chairman of the BBC has just been appointed. Thirdly, as the White Paper notes, the 863 question of the fourth channel is the subject of separate study, and conclusions will be brought before Parliament when that has been concluded.
§ Mr. MoateWill my right hon. Friend confirm that the effect of the White Paper is to say that no changes will be proposed in, or that there will be even a review of, the specific question of the financing of the BBC? Does he not agree that there is a case for a specific review of this subject, as the licensing system is discredited, very unpopular and expensive to administer?
§ Sir J. EdenThe licensing system is a separate matter. As I indicated in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro), there is a later Question on the Order Paper relating to this matter. However, I can say that the decision not to have a general inquiry does not prevent any other decisions on this or any related matter being taken before 1981. This matter does not rest upon the decision about a general inquiry.
§ Mr. GoldingIs the Minister aware that many defects in the present structure emerged during the debates on the Sound Broadcasting Bill, and that many defects in the structure of the IBA emerged during the hearings of the Select Committee? Is he also aware that undertakings were given to reconsider the defects in a committee of inquiry? Will he assure us that the public debate that the Select Committee deemed to be necessary will take place on the allocation of the fourth channel, and will he publish a Green Paper on the subject before the final decision is taken?
§ Sir. J. EdenThe exact form in which proposals will be presented to Parliament is something which I will decide upon nearer the time when I am ready to present them to Parliament. I have made it clear in the White Paper that the Government intend to put forward their proposals on all these outstanding matters before Parliament is invited to approve the extension to 1981.
§ Sir R. CaryOn the point about the BBC's finances, is the Minister aware that the television and radio licence fee is still among the cheapest in Europe and that I should hate to see the BBC driven into the position of borrowing money extensively at present interest rates?
§ Sir J. EdenI have no proposals before me from the BBC about its finances and, as I think is clear, I have certainly no proposition to put to the House to alter the present licence fee arrangements. But, as I said in answer to earlier questions, the method by which the BBC is financed need not wait upon any general review. It is something which could be dealt with separately.
§ Mr. John GrantIs the Minister aware that the White Paper is a tragedy of missed opportunity? It is deplorable in that it flouts quite clearly the central recommendation of an all-party Select Committee of this House, namely, that there should have been a far-ranging inquiry into the future of broadcasting, into access, structure and accountability, quite apart from the technical aspects. Although the Minister says that he is not yet allocating a fourth channel, it is clear from the White Paper that that channel will be allocated without the benefit of having had that inquiry, and that is crucial. Will he give us an assurance on that?
At a time when broadcasting and television are becoming of increasing social and political significance in this country the Minister appears to be excluding the opinions of the viewing public and interested parties generally. Is he aware that he and the Government are saying to them "Take it or leave it; we know what is best for you"? Will he tell us what Parliamentary opportunity there will be to debate this matter fully?
§ Sir J. EdenI am aware, of course, that hon. Members who put forward certain recommendations through the Report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries will be unhappy that all their decisions have not been accepted, and that this particularly important one has not been adopted by the Government. I understand that. It is not a case of flouting. The Government carefully considered all this—and it must be a matter on which the Government decide. It is a decision for Government, and not for the Select Committee. I can assure the hon. Member that no decision has been taken about the fourth channel—not even that it shall be allocated. So it is still wide open. It is one of the matters which, again, are reserved for Government decision.
865 Thirdly, the question of taking into account the views of individual members of the public or representative organisations gives me the opportunity to emphasise that there will be a chance for them to make their representations both to the independent study on all aspects of coverage and to me on matters relating to the fourth channel and about how viewers' opinions can best be represented.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. We must move on.
§ Mr. Russell KerrOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I know why the Chairman of the Select Committee was not called to ask a supplementary question on a matter of this importance.
§ Mr. SpeakerIt is a matter for my discretion. We have spent 10 minutes on this subject and there were four Questions put down by other hon. Members.
§ Mr. Russell KerrOutrageous.