HL Deb 28 January 1970 vol 307 cc379-81

2.45 p.m.

LORD BETHELL

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to provide the B.B.C. with sufficient finance to enable increases to be made in B.B.C. broadcasts to foreign countries.]

THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (LORD CHALFONT)

My Lords, the Government, and the B.B.C., are agreed that the most urgent task should be to improve the audibility of the existing broadcasts. Finance has therefore been provided for the installation of more powerful transmitters at home and overseas.

LORD BETHELL

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord for that reply. May I ask him whether he recalls the comments made by the noble Lord the Leader of the House when I raised this matter in the debate on broadcasting on May 21 last year? Does he recall his noble friend saying on that occasion that my remarks, and my request for a greater number of broadcasts, would not pass unnoticed, and that certain increases might be expected? Will my remarks pass unnoticed?

LORD CHALFONT

No, my Lords; of course they will not. I recall what my noble friend the Leader of the House said—I think it was in November—when he was talking in the more immediate context of the Duncan Committee's Report on foreign representation generally. But, of course, the noble Lord's remarks will not pass unnoticed. It is simply that we believe that audibility of existing broadcasts is more important at the moment than simply increasing the number of hours of broadcasting or the number of languages in which we broadcast. The Government and the B.B.C. are at one on this, and that is our attitude to the problem.

LORD WAKEFIELD OF KENDAL

My Lords, can the Minister say what steps are being taken in the countries for which the transmissions are intended, and what facilities there are for improving the receiving sets of the people there? Although the power of the transmissions may be increased, does not the Minister agree that what is important is that the people should be able to receive what is transmitted?

LORD CHALFONT

My Lords, I think it would be difficult in some cases for us to interfere in the quality of the local receiving sets. These are, in most cases, sovereign countries, and we have no control over the type of receiving sets they have. All we have done—I think it is all we can do—is to increase the power of the transmitters. We have put up new relay stations—for example, on Ascension Island and on Masirah; and of the 41 short-wave transmitters in use by the B.B.C. we have improved the power of 26. This means that the signal is more powerful, and so any given receiving set will get a louder noise at the other end.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, can the noble Lord say—I shall understand if he wants notice of the point about potential—what is our principal transmitting station for broadcasts to the Middle East, or relays of broadcasts to the Middle East, and could he say what is its potential?

LORD CHALFONT

My Lords, the principal relay station for Middle East broadcasts is the new one on Masirah. I am not quite sure what the noble Earl has in mind when he refers to "potential".

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, I meant kilowattage.

LORD CHALFONT

I should require notice of that question, which is a rather technical one. But I will find out and let the noble Earl know.

LORD BLYTON

My Lords, does my noble friend consider that increases in broadcasts by the B.B.C. are justified in the light of the biased reports they made of the Nigerian issue?

LORD CHALFONT

My Lords, that is another question. I should not like to comment on a matter of bias, in this case or in any other. As I said, it is important that we should broadcast overseas, and broadcast in foreign languages, and it is important that those broadcasts should be heard.

THE EARL OF JELLICOE

My Lords, could the noble Lord confirm that the gist of his reply means that the Government have accepted, broadly speaking, the main tenor of the Duncan Committee's recommendations so far as external broadcasting is concerned?

LORD CHALFONT

No, my Lords. I think the noble Earl would be wrong in assuming that. As my noble friend the Leader of the House indicated in the House in November, we do not fully agree with all that the Duncan Committee had to say about external broadcasting We have put in hand a review of all B.B.C. foreign language broadcasts, as the Duncan Committee proposed, and I think it would be unwise to anticipate the findings of that review.

LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICK

My Lords, could the noble Lord tell the House the cost of setting up the radio station which beamed propaganda to Rhodesia and which I now understand been dismantled?

LORD CHALFONT

My Lords, that is another question. If the noble Lord would give me notice of it, I could give him the answer.