TELEVISION AND RADIO BROADCASTING (Hansard, 19 January 1972)

§ LORD DENHAM
My Lords. I think it will be convenient also that I should repeat now the Statement which has been made by my right honourable friend the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications in another place. My right honourable friend said:
"With permission, I should like to make a Statement about allocation of frequency channels for a fourth television network and about control of the number of hours of television and radio broadcasting.
"For many years to come, frequency channels will be available only for four 94 television networks of near-national coverage. Channels for three of those networks are already being deployed and therefore only one network remains to be allocated. The Independent Television Authority recently put to me a submission, 'I.T.V. 2', published on December 8, advocating that this network should now be allocated to a second service to be provided by I.T.V. The I.T.A.'s proposals have prompted the expression of a number of different views in Parliament and elsewhere concerning, for example, the possibility of reserving the fourth network for a specialised service or of organising a fourth general service on some different basis. I am not persuaded that the time has yet come to allocate the fourth network.
"The Authority have also asked for an end to the restrictions at present imposed on the number of hours of television broadcasting. This would allow the fuller use of I.T.V.'s programme-making capacity. It would enable the Authority to meet more adequately the needs of certain minorities, such as shift workers, and to provide greater opportunities for experimental programmes. The Authority have made it clear that they would not allow any fall in the amount of time given to educational, Welsh-language and other programmes exempt from the present limits. I have therefore decided to end the restrictions on hours of television broadcasting. Similarly, I have decided to lift the present limits on the number of hours of radio broadcasting."
My Lords, that is the end of my right honourable friend's Statement.

§ LORD SHACKLETON
My Lords, the noble Lord opened his remarks by suggesting that it might be convenient to take this Statement now. It is not his fault, but it is rather a switch from the tragic to the almost irrelevant. However, I do not blame him and I shall be very brief, because Rhodesia is very much in our minds.
As an old opponent of commercial television, along with the noble and learned Lord who sits on the Woolsack—and I do not seek to involve him now in what I am saying—I can only say that I am glad that the Government did not take 95 this decision a good many years ago when they introduced commercial television. None the less we have it now. There are a number of reasons for an extra channel, but our difficulty is that we do not know why the Government have come to this decision. I can think of many reasons, but all we are told is that the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications, in a characteristically authoritarian way—characteristic of this Government—says: I am not persuaded that the time has yet come … We should like to know why this is and what are his reasons for thinking so. Many people thought that he was going to agree to another channel, and there was a very interesting report from the Independent Television Authority which, if agreement was given for another channel, had some worthwhile ideas to put forward. My first question then, is: why is the Minister not persuaded? I imagine that he has actually thought about it before coming to a view and we should like to know his reasons.
Secondly, I would ask the noble Lord (he may not be able to answer and if not I would ask him to make representations) this question. We are told that the Authority has made it clear with the extra hours of broadcasting—I will not go into this, because there are controversial angles here—that they would not allow any fall in the amount of time given to educational, Welsh-language and other programmes exempt from the present limits. I take it that by 'amount of time "they really mean percentage of time, because presumably there will now be more of this specialised broadcasting. Perhaps the noble Lord the Minister can work that one out while the noble Lord from the Liberal Benches speaks. Thirdly, I would ask whether the noble Lord and the House now realise what a mistake it was to abolish the Annan Committee—because the only way in which we can get the facts and the arguments, and debate properly these very important decisions, is to follow the traditions of the past, which previous Conservative Governments initiated, and have a proper inquiry. Will the noble Lord again consider whether we ought not to do this, instead of patching around with local commercial radio, and so on?

§ LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY
My Lords, it is a pleasant change to be able wholeheartedly to welcome a Statement made by the Minister of Posts and Telecommunications. We think it is right that the fourth network should not be allocated, and the removal of the restriction of hours of both radio and television broadcasting is something that we have long advocated. I was interested in a question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, to which I hope we shall get an answer. The question was whether the amount of time or the proportion of time will be affected. I am prepared to back fairly heavily that what the I.T.A. are saying is that they will not allow the amount of time to be reduced. May I express a pious hope en passant (though this not a matter for the Government) that this will not mean that good minority programmes are pushed to more and more impossible hours of the day and night.
May I now turn to what I think the Government should answer. To reinforce what the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, said, I should like to ask the Government what their intentions are with regard to preparing for the eventual decision which will have to be made about the fourth channel and what machinery they intend to set up so that this question can be decided properly at the right time. Can we have an assurance that the possibility of a whole channel being devoted to education will be given the most thorough and sympathetic consideration?

§ LORD DENHAM
My Lords, I am most grateful for, if not the support of the two noble Lords opposite, the fact that they have not attacked this Statement. The noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, wanted to know why we have come to this decision, although he supports it. I think he should probably he thankful for small mercies. My right honourable friend has considered the representations that have been made to me. He has considered all the factors that he thinks are relevant and has come to the conclusion that it is not yet right to make a decision on this point.

§ LORD SHACKLETON
Tell us.

§ LORD DENHAM
My Lords, if the noble Lord wants that, I think it would 97 be more the subject for a debate—perhaps an Unstarred Question—on what prompted my right honourable friend to come to that decision. But as the noble Lord opposite believes the decision to be the right one, I cannot see the point of that at the moment. I assure your Lordships that my right honourable friend has given this matter the greatest and most careful consideration. The noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, also asked—and the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, even produced a wager on the subject—whether it was the amount of time or the percentage of time that would be reduced. The undertaking was that the amount of time would not be reduced. Whether advantage will be taken of enough extra television time to make much difference between the amount of time and the percentage of time I do not know. Perhaps if there were a great deal of extra television time used, this question would be more relevant then.
The third question which the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, asked was regarding the Annan Committee and whether my right honourable friend will establish some form of inquiry to decide on the future of television. I can only repeat what my right honourable friend said in another place on December 15 last: I accept that, nearer to 1976, it will be right to look in a comprehensive way at the options which are open. But I do not think it can be sensible for broadcastine to be in a state of more or less permanent inquiry."—[OFFICIAL REPORT. Commons, col. 572.] That is my right honourable friend's view at the present time. The noble Lord, Lord Beaumont of Whitley, asked what were the intentions of Her Majesty's Government in inquiring into the future use of the fourth channel. This is up to my right honourable friend; he will be answerable to Parliament, and I think that it is right that he should decide this matter, taking all the advice that he thinks fit.

THE DUKE OF ATHOLL
My Lords, before money is spent on the fourth channel, and before it is allocated, would my noble friend make sure that all parts of the country are able to receive the three channels which are now in existence?

§ LORD DENHAM
My Lords, my noble friend realises the difficulties of 98 getting the channels, and even some radio programmes, to certain remote parts of the country. I am sure that he would not wish for no further progress to be made without getting the remotest areas of the country covered. But, as I said, there is no decision as to when the fourth channel will be reconsidered.

§ LORD SHACKLETON
My Lords, if the noble Lord really believes that his right honourable friend is answerable to Parliament, perhaps, as his representative here, he will answer the question that I asked, instead of just telling us to be content with the position. I am very prejudiced on this subject of commercial television, but I hope the noble Lord will not allow my prejudices to prevent him from giving answers which other noble Lords may wish to have. If the noble Lord cannot give us the information today—and I accept that we may have to wait—may I ask him whether he has any idea why his right honourable friend took this decision? If he says "Yes", will he give us one reason?

§ LORD DENHAM
My Lords, short of the reasons that I have already given—which, I must say, satisfy me—I have no further idea. I will repeat what possibly the noble Lord, the Leader of the Opposition, did not hear: The I.T.A.'s proposals have prompted a number of objections in Parliament and elsewhere, for example, … the possibility of reserving the fourth network for a specialised service … or of organising a fourth general service on some different basis. I am not persuaded that the time has yet come to allocate the fourth network". My Lords, I do not think one could he clearer than that.