§ 29. Mr. Murphyasked the Lord President of the Council if he will make a statement on the co-ordination of Government information.
§ The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Biffen)There is close co-ordination between the Prime Minister, myself and our ministerial colleagues on the presentation of Government policy.
§ Mr. MurphyDoes my right hon. Friend agree that a topic such as the need for multilateral nuclear disarmament requires such co-ordination? Is he prepared to state that the Government are planning a national advertising campaign to put across our realistic and forthright policy?
§ Mr. BiffenI agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of the subject, but I must make it clear that no final decision has been taken about whether to conduct a campaign of the kind reported in the press.
§ Mrs. Shirley WilliamsDoes the right hon. Gentleman recognise that, constitutionally, we have a Government of Britain and not of the Conservative party? Will he assure the House that there is no question of public funds being used for a propaganda campaign? Does he appreciate that there is no parallel whatever with the 1969 campaign, which was concerned with information and not propaganda?
§ Mr. BiffenI can only repeat that no final decision has yet been taken. Should there be such a campaign, 16 however, I am sure that it will take account of the campaign mounted in 1969 by the Labour Government, of which the right hon. Lady was a member, and will of course have regard to information.
§ Mr. Frank AllaunDoes the right hon. Gentleman agree that Government information and advertising should be confined to consensus matters such as new pensions arrangements? Should not the Conservative party itself pay for highly controversial propaganda of the kind involved in this instance? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is grossly improper and unfair to spend large sums of taxpayers' money to pay an American advertising firm to attack the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the Labour party and others?
§ Mr. BiffenI can only repeat that no decision has yet been taken about whether to conduct such a campaign, but I must point out that information campaigns were conducted by the Labour Government on counter-inflation in 1975–76, and on the United Kingdom's commitment to NATO in 1969. For many of us that covers the broad span of accepted politics, but I realise that for some it lies outside the area of consensus. That is why one can never have an information campaign covering every possible point of political opinion.
§ Mr. McCrindleWill my right hon. Friend confirm that when the Labour Government in 1969 sought to promote their defence policy by means of full-page advertisements in the national press, that was projected by some who served in that Government as co-ordination of Government policy? What has changed in the meantime to create the fuss that there has been in the past few days?
§ Mr. BiffenMy hon. Friend fairly points to broad comparisons between the situation in 1969 and what might be the consequences if a campaign of information on our defence policy were now to be conducted. But I must say to the House that, much as I am enjoying this, I am to some extent but the John the Baptist for what comes in defence questions tomorrow.
§ Mr. John SilkinIf I may question John the Baptist on this point, will he use his considerable weight as Lord President of the Council and as the co-ordinator of Government information to point out to his right hon. Friends that the difference between the present situation and 1969 is that the Opposition in this case are totally against the Government's nuclear policy?
§ Mr. BiffenWe all know what happened to John the Baptist. It is not for me to draw inferences or conclusions from the drift of the Labour party further and further into the neutralist non-nuclear camp.