§ 2.45 p.m.
§ Baroness HORNSBY-SMITHMy 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 what is the total Government expenditure on advertising for each of the last five years.
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)My Lords, total Government expenditure on advertising in the last five financial years was as follows: 1971/72, £10,093,200; 1972/73, £13,270,400; 1973/74, £17,042,300; 1974/75, £15,658,000; 1975/76, £17,528,900. These figures represent expenditure by the Central Office of Information, Department for National Savings, Civil Service Commission and the Scottish Office.
§ Baroness HORNSBY-SMITHMy Lords, would the noble Lord the Lord Privy Seal not consider that at the present time, when very strict financial stringency is necessary, a look should be taken at this rapidly escalating figure of Government advertising?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I would not say that the figure has escalated rapidly when one considers the timespan that I have read out. This year's figure compares reasonably with that of other years; but I agree that we should always watch this matter. On the other hand, information is important for the citizen.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, would the noble Lord take a look at the amount spent on notifying citizens of their right to claim social security and supplementary benefit? Would he consider the experiments made on combined assessment, where a person who claims one benefit is then asked to give enough information for an assessment to be made of his eligibility for a number of other benefits? This has resulted in an enormous increase in the take-up of benefits in the areas where it has been applied. It might considerably reduce the ineffective advertising undertaken by the Government over the years in informing citizens of their rights.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I will look at that point, but it is not easy. The question of social benefits is important, apart from the issue of the amount of money spent on advertising. But I will look at the matter carefully.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, would the noble Lord the Minister tell us whether the money spent on advertising by the nation is considerably less than that spent by the pools promoters?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I should like to have notice of that question. I do not know whether the noble Lord, Lord Paget of Northampton, fills in his "Little-wood's", but I will look at it.
§ Lord THOMASMy Lords, would the noble Lord not agree that the escalation in the cost of advertising is due to the increased cost of space, and not so much to an absolute increase in the advertising undertaken?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I accept that
§ Lord TAYLOR of MANSFIELDMy Lords, would the noble Lord the Lord Privy Seal say through which avenues this advertising is done?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, as I have said, the figures we have relate to the Central Office of Information, the Department for National Savings, the Civil Service Commission and the Scottish Office. Other Departments, particularly Defence, are involved very much in this matter, quite naturally, from the point of view of recruitment.
§ Lord CARRINGTONMy Lords, since the figures do not include advertising for nationalised industries, would the Government look at the amount of advertising done by the nationalised industries—advertising encouraging people to use more fuel, more electricity, more gas, and so on, when surely it must be contrary to the national interest that they should do so?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, has a real point here. I will look at it and convey it to some of my colleagues.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that under a Directive of the Common Market every contract above £400,000 put out in Britain must be advertised? Is there any national advertising to the Common Market included in this?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I cannot say, quite honestly, to be frank with your Lordships. But I will look into the matter.
§ Lord SEGALMy Lords, since most Governments are berated for their lack of communication. is not advertising a valuable outlet for putting right this rather sinful omission?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I agree that the money is well spent. It is carefully monitored. Several campaigns are conducted, as I mentioned earlier—for instance, recruitment for the Armed Services, road safety, crime prevention, explaining social legislation such as family income supplement and, indeed, also counter-inflation.
§ The Lord Bishop of NORWICHMy Lords, does not the noble Lord feel that there is a possible danger of overkill by over-advertising? Is the noble Lord 1128 aware that a Scottish ticket collector asked me to show my blue card when I wanted to buy a ticket the other day? It turned out that I am five years too young to show a blue card, which he knew all about. I could have got a cheap ticket if I had been 65, but I am 60. It seems to me there is a danger of overkill and over-advertising.
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I was not aware that one had to have a blue card. I have not reached that age yet—but you never know.
Lord HAWKEMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we view with some dismay the fact that a Cabinet Minister seemed unable, when reading the figures, to distinguish between thousands and millions?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I thought I admitted my mistake. My maths were always very good at school, I assure your Lordships, but I was up all night.
Lord GRAYMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether his specific reference to the Scottish Office was because it undertakes in Scotland advertising on behalf of the other agencies to which he referred, or is there some other reason?
§ Lord PEARTMy Lords, I will examine carefully what the noble Lord has said. There is no sinister motive in it.