HL Deb 07 July 1966 vol 275 cc1245-54

6.17 p.m.

LORD RUSSELL OF LIVERPOOL rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are aware of the policy of the Greater Britain Movement regarding "the large coloured and influential Jewish communities" which is set out in Section 3 of the Movement's Official Programme published by the Albion Press, price sixpence, and whether, having regard to the fact that the contents of the said section would appear to contravene Section 6(1)(a) of the Race Relations Act 1965, criminal proceedings could be brought under the said Act against the person or persons responsible for the publication and distribution of the said Official Programme, notwithstanding the fact that in order to obtain a copy an intending purchaser must first become a member of The Viking Book Club by signing an enrolment form and paying a fee of sixpence. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I promise not to detain your Lordships for more than a few moments, but I think it is important that I should let you have the reasons for putting down this Question. The Greater Britain Movement I think is best described as the Nazi Party of this country, and the passage I referred to in my Question is contained in theirOfficial Programme. I propose to read part of it out to you. It is under the heading "Nation and Race". I do not suppose that many of your Lordships ever read Adolf Hitler's Book Mein Kampf, but Chapter 11 of that book has exactly the same title, and there is a great similarity between that chapter and Section 3 of this Official Programme.

It starts off with the old nonsense about the Aryan race, saying that: Only those of British or kindred Aryan blood should be members of the nation. It then goes on to say: Citizenship of the State. and hence participation in the life of the nation, should be denied to all those of alien race, including the large coloured and influential Jewish communities, who should be eventually repatriated to their countries of origin or to other countries suitable for settlement by them. Further immigration of such people into Britain should be permanently banned. With respect to the Jews; our movement, before as well as after such time as it may represent the Government of Britain, will be dedicated to the most determined exposure and eradication of their power in our land. We hold it to be the Jewish influence, in politics and commerce, in morals and culture, that is perhaps more than any other single factor responsible for the organised filth and corruption that has infected the body of our society. The removal of the Jews from Britain must be a cardinal aim of the new order, and must be directed not to Palestine—which the Jews have plundered from its rightful Arab inhabitants—but to another of the world's open spaces where Jewish money and Jewish labour will support the building of an entirely new Jewish state. There is only one more paragraph I propose to read: For the protection of British blood, racial laws will be enacted forbidding marriage between Britons and non-Aryans. Medical measures will be taken to prevent procreation on the part of all those who have hereditary defects, either racial, mental, or physical. Section 6(1) of the Race Relations Act, 1965, to which I also refer in my Question, says this: A person shall be guilty of an offence under this section if, with intent to stir up hatred against any section of the public in Great Britain distinguished by colour, race, or ethnic or national origins— (a) he publishes or distributes written matter which is threatening, abusive or insulting". I should have thought your Lordships would agree that what I have just read out is certainly all three. There is another section, Section 6(2), which says this: 'publish' and 'distribute" mean publish or distribute to the public at large or to any section of the public not consisting exclusively of members of an association of which the person publishing or distributing is a member. The Greater Britain Movement did not miss that section. I propose to mention something about it.

There are a number of places where this charming little pamphlet can be obtained, but the chief one is the Viking Press, in Norwood High Street. Anyone can go there and get a copy, provided that he signs a form; and on the left hand side of the form appear these words: The Viking Book Club has been formed for the study of literature dealing with the Jewish question and other racial problems which it is not permissible to sell to the general public under the terms of the Race Relations Act 1965. Membership entitles one to obtain such Literature, and beyond the payment of an enrolment fee of 6d. carries with it no obligations whatsoever. One then signs a form, in accordance with the notice: Please complete the form below and sign it, and cut out and with your enrolment fee of 6d. give it to the Viking Book Club. A friend of mine got this copy by going to the Viking Press. He was served by no less a person than John Tyndall, whose name may be known to your Lordships. My friend signed the form, not in his own name, because Tyndall said "It doesn't matter what name you use"—and he did not even pay the 6d. That is why I out the Question down, and if, as I apprehend, there is a deficiency in this, Act, I hope that some steps will be taken to repair it.

6.23 p.m.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, I should like to express appreciation to the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liver- pool, for raising this matter this evening. The noble Lord is becoming almost a character in this House for raising matters of this kind. Recently we had the Swabey case; now he has raised this case, and I notice from the Order Paper that he proposes to raise a case in which there is apparently some doubt whether a sentence of death for murder was correct. He is almost becoming the Ombudsman of the House of Lords.

I rise to support what the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, has said, because I think Members of this House know that over a period of years I have been intensely concerned about this issue. I have introduced Bills in another place for a number of years which have dealt with the danger of the incitement of racial hatred. I recognise at once that there is a difficulty here, because most of us believe in liberty of speech, liberty of writing, and one has to balance the desirability of that liberty with speech or with writing which may bring grave social consequences.

The conclusion to which I came, when I faced that problem, was that, just as an individual who libels or slanders another individual can be brought into court, so an individual who libels a whole race, the consequences of which may be much more serious in social events, should also be liable to prosecution. The phrase which remains in my mind from the passage which the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, has read is this: We hold it to be the Jewish influence, in politics and commerce, in morals and culture, that is perhaps more than any other single factor responsible for the organised filth and corruption that has infected the body of our society. I can imagine no phrase more likely to cause racial antagonism than that phrase. It certainly comes within the provision of the Race Relations Act.

The difficulty is that, superficially at least, one can obtain this pamphlet only by joining the club. I was interested to hear, as I listened to the speech from the Front Bench in the previous debate, how in war time if anyone tried by a "wangle" to escape regulations he was regarded as an enemy of our society. This is quite obviously a "wangle" to escape the effect of the provisions of the Race Relations Act. Indeed, it is acknowledged in the terms of membership of this Viking Book Club. They actually state that the purpose of the club is to publish material which would be illegal, under the Race Relations Act, if it were issued other than through the means of a club.

I think it very likely that the Government may say that they condemn this—indeed, I know they would say that they would condemn this as strongly as we do—but that under terms of the present Act it is not possible to proceed with a prosecution. If that is the case, if there is a gap in the Act, I would urge that it be filled as early as possible. On an earlier occasion I have asked whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce an amending Bill to the Race Relations Act. The necessity is recognised, but I gather that it is unlikely to be possible during the present Session. It is for this reason that I have given notice that on August 3 in this House I propose myself to introduce an amending Bill to the Race Relations Act, and I have made arrangements with friends in another place that the Bill shall be similarly introduced there. We shall certainly include in that Bill a clause which will fill this gap, so that these fictitious clubs, like the Viking Book Club, shall not have the opportunity to distribute this racial propaganda which may have such serious effects upon the whole community. If the answer of the Government is that this Act in its present form does not deal with this matter, my plea is that at least the Government will give facilities for the Bill which will seek to amend it to that purpose.

6.29 p.m.

THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUTHWARK

My Lords, there is little need for me to say that those of us who sit on this Bench, and I am sure all Churches, are concerned in this matter, and we are very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, for raising it and much hope that the Government will be able to take effective action. I am particularly concerned because the headquarters of the Viking Book Club is in my diocese, or at any rate on the borders of it, and therefore it is a cause of concern to me and to the Church in the Southwark diocese.

I do not want to overrate them. I think that the influence these people have is extremely small. They are known for the political perverts they are; and the sad sort of political slime for which they are responsible has little effect on people. Nevertheless, there are some who are affected and, even though it be perhaps only half-a-dozen, I am sure it is in the interest of all of us that their activities should be stopped. So, while I appreciate all the difficulties and do not want to exaggerate them in any way, I hope the Government will be able to take effective steps to stop this nuisance.

6.31 p.m.

THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH

My Lords, I think it is thirty years ago when I was in this House and a debate on foreign affairs was going forward that the first Marquess of Reading raised the question of the beginnings of Hitler's persecution of the Jews. I had the honour on that occasion to be the first Peer to express my respectful and sympathetic concurrence with what Lord Reading had to say. I am glad to recall that incident to-day. There are few things that I have done in my life which have given me greater satisfaction. In those days, Hitler's attack upon the Jews was of a comparatively mild nature, and a number of people, quite surprisingly, blamed me for what I had done and thought it was quite unnecessary to take serious notice of the quite mild anti-Semitism that was going forward at that time.

I do not see that there should be any great difficulty in bringing a prosecution against this alleged club. Your Lordships will remember that, quite recently, prosecutions were brought against a theatre club which was joined by an official under a false name. I think there was no objection to that prosecution, and I trust that the Attorney General will give this matter serious thought.

6.33 p.m.

THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE, HOME OFFICE (LORD STONHAM)

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, has performed a valuable public service in obtaining copies of the Programme of the Greater Britain Movement and bringing it to the notice of Her Majesty's Government and your Lordships' House. The right reverend Prelate, the Bishop of Southwark, quite rightly said that these mindless morons are an insignificant minority. But I was glad that the noble Earl, Lord Iddesleigh, referred 1:0 what be said on an occasion many years ago; they cannot be safely ignored because at the time of which the noble Earl was speaking many people said the same things about Hitler. I have read the whole of this Programme, and Hitler's words and programme are the Alpha and Omega of these Norwood Fascists. Their programme in fact is Mein Kampf unadulterated—it is all there, everything except the gas chambers and the Belsens; and to ignore such infamies would make nonsense, not only of the Race Relations Act but of our deep-seated beliefs in free and equal citizenship for all the inhabitants of these islands.

As my noble friend Lord Brockway has pointed out, the Race Relations Act was designed to deal with minority groups preaching racial intolerance and with anti-Semitic and anti-colour propaganda. The then existing law was admittedly inadequate, and in the new Act we made it an offence to incite to hatred on grounds of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins. The problem, which was a difficult one, was to frame a provision which penalised racial scurrility, inflammatory speeches and publications, without curtailing legitimate comment or controversy. We were determined that legitimate public debate should not be inhibited, and the offence under the new Act was closely defined to ensure that it should bite only on the race-mongers. It was also designed to act carefully and selectively against the leaders and organisers, and that it should not be capable of being used against the ordinary man in the street engaged in ordinary conversation or discussion of the issues and events of the day.

The noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, has referred to two parts of Section 6 of the Race Relations Act, and I would point out that they have three arms. First, the matter or words complained of must be threatening, abusive or insulting; second, the matter must be likely to stir up hatred against a section of the pubic on grounds of colour, race or ethnic or national origins; third, there must he not only a likelihood, but also the intention, of stirring up hatred against a section of the public. Only a court can decide these matters; but it appears to me, as the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, said, that this Programme issued by the Greater Britain Movement offends violently against all three provisions, and it is obviously intended to do so.

Under the Act it is an offence to publish or distribute such written matter by any method. This is not confined to something done in a public place; it covers also the letterbox campaign. As Lord Russell of Liverpool pointed out, however, there is in Section 6(2), a definition of "publish" and of "distribute" which expressly excludes the publication or distribution of written matter amongst members of an association of which the person publishing or distributing is a member. It is this exclusion which the Viking Book Club have sought to use, in the belief that they can thereby conduct their filthy and dangerous trade with impunity.

As my noble friend Lord Brockway said, this intention is clear because the order form expressly states: The Club has been formed for the study of literature dealing with the Jewish question and other racial problems which it is not permissible to sell to the general public under the terms of the Race Relations Act 1965. Many people would regard this as a full acknowledgement of a deliberate flouting of the spirit of the 1965 Act. I want to point out that this does not mean that the Act is ineffective. There is, indeed, clear evidence that it has had considerable effect, that the amount of offensive literature has been drastically reduced and that the Fascist leaders are doing all they can to avoid distribution to the general public.

I think that the noble Lord by his account has made this clear. But I say now that it certainly would not be safe for the leaders of the Greater Britain Movement to assume that, even if the distribution of pernicious publications is confined to members of the Viking Book Club, this necessarily means that there is not an infringement of the Act.

The particular section of the publication to which the noble Lord has drawn attention epitomises the racial intolerance associated with the Greater Britain Movement. Lord Russell of Liverpool did not read it all. There are such choice phrases as these which he did not read out: Urban slums made yet uglier by the arrival of imported sub-humanity bringing disease and filth, rape and drug traffic. There are many more such phrases in this so-called Programme. But however detestable or pernicious these views may be, there is no evidence that they have been disseminated to members of the public at large. This is the important point as the Act now stands.

This publication, I am informed, is not displayed in the window of the Viking Bookshop and the police have no grounds for believing that it is available to persons who are not members of the movement or of the Viking Book Club. I have, however, taken careful note of what Lord Russell of Liverpool said of the manner in which his copy was obtained and what was said to his friend when it was obtained. I will see that those points are considered in the proper quarter. But copies are not posted to or pushed through the letter-boxes of unwilling recipients, or handed to people in the street. They are available only to those who want to read this sort of stuff, and are willing to take the trouble to go or send to the Viking Bookshop and become a member of the Club.

I am informed that active membership of the movement (the Programme clearly defines members and supporters) does not exceed thirty members who pay the required subscription and undertake active work—thirty intellectual illiterates with an inferiority complex so deep that, in order to be able to live with themselves, they have to assume a superiority based on the colour of their skins and an accident of birth. There are also passive supporters, who pay less and make no undertaking, but counting these together with the members of the Viking Book Club, the total number of participants does not exceed some three hundred in all.

As I have said, the publication of written matter strictly among members of an association is not an offence under the Act. This provision was thought to be necessary if the affairs of clubs, businesses and even political Parties were not to be liable to unjustifiable interference. But if this provision leads to blatant evasion we shall have to look at it again, although I am bound to add that a satisfactory Amendment will be difficult to frame. My noble friend Lord Brockway mentioned that he hopes to bring in a Bill, and he told me that he would include a clause or clauses which would close this gap. I shall be very pleased to read those clauses when he has drafted them. Meanwhile, as I have indicated, the Act has been effective in confining literature of this sort to clubs such as the Viking Book Club, and checking its distribution to unwilling recipients.

The Government are aware of the policy of the Greater Britain Movement and of the Viking Book Club, and its literature is being closely examined. I can assure your Lordships also that the police are well aware of the club's activities, and if the club takes any action which might he a breach of the law the case will be referred to my right honourable friend the Attorney General with a view to seeking his consent to the institution of proceedings. The Act has been in operation for only a few months, but if experience clearly indicates that its provisions do not suffice to deal effectively with the mischief at which it was aimed, I can assure your Lordships that Her Majesty's Government will be ready to consider the introduction of amending legislation. In the meantime, we must and will work the present Act to its full extent.