§ 2.7 p.m.
§ LORD BIRDWOODMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the initiative for the B.B.C. Television programme from Moscow on May Day came from the Soviet Union or from this country; and also whether the arrangements included any reciprocal programme for the benefit of viewers in the Soviet Union.]
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, I would remind my noble friend, as I reminded my noble friend Lord Teviot, three months ago, that programme content is a matter for the B.B.C. The Corporation did, however, put out a Press statement on April 27 in regard to the agreement they had reached with U.S.S.R. officials to the effect that a live exchange programme would soon be transmitted from London to the Soviet Union. I understand that the initiative for the May Day broadcasts came wholly from the B.B.C.
§ LORD BIRDWOODMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply. Would he tell me what reciprocal arrangements have been made? I think that is a point in my Question. Further, is it true that a report that appeared in The Times alleging that a reciprocal arrangement had been made reads to the effect that Soviet reciprocity takes the form of their being in a position to choose the programmes which they will receive from the B.B.C.?
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, I cannot give my noble friend the details of the reciprocal programme, because that is, in fact, under discussion in Moscow during this week. I did not seethe reference in The Times from which he quotes and I certainly have no reason to think that reciprocity will be on the basis suggested. I will, of course, find out and let my noble friend know, but personally, I do not know the newspaper's source of information, and it certainly has not been offered to me. Therefore, I cannot tell him what truth, if any, there may be in it; but I should imagine that so far the basis of any reciprocity is still being discussed.
§ LORD BARNBYMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether any indication is given to the B.B.C. from outside, possibly from Government sources, as to the proportion of time in total broadcasts which is to be allotted to one country, for instance, Russia, as against others?
LORD ST. OSWALDNo, my Lords. I think that reasonably comes under the heading of "programme content" which is left entirely to the B.B.C.
§ LORD LAWSONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he will draw the attention of the B.B.C. television authorities to the Durham miners' demonstration, which Sir Stafford Cripps put on record as being a bigger and better demonstration than the Moscow one?
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, I am perfectly certain that the noble Lord's suggestion is a most valuable one, as are all his suggestions, and I will certainly see that it reaches the attention of my right honourable friend.
LORD REAMy Lords, would the noble Lord say whether the proposed reciprocal programme is one isolated instance, or is it the beginning of an interchange?
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, I am happy that the noble Lord asked me that question. In fact, it is hoped that it will become part of a regular interchange of programmes.
§ LORD BIRDWOODMy Lords, could the noble Lord perhaps further say that when a reciprocal programme is arranged it will be a programme chosen in this country and not in Moscow?
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, I think I said in my reply to my noble friend's first supplementary that I was not knowledgeable on exactly what the arrangement was, and I do not think it would be proper under the Charter for the Government to lay down anything of that nature to the B.B.C.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, would it not be natural that if you are proceeding to reciprocal arrangements there should be reciprocity as to which side chooses the particular programme?
LORD ST. OSWALDMy Lords, I am sure that if the noble Viscount the Leader of the Opposition regards it as such, then the B.B.C. is likely so to regard it as well.