Orders of the Day — Broadcasting (Licence and Agreement)

Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 23 June 1952.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Walter Elliot Mr Walter Elliot , Glasgow Kelvingrove 12:00, 23 June 1952

It may be, but I have done a great deal more broadcasting than has the hon. Gentleman, and for many more years. I have a great deal more acquaintance than he has with practical broadcasting.

The general position of the Government is strengthened by the fact that in many cases the service given at present by the B.B.C. is not satisfactory. I was amazed to hear the general chorus of adulation which was going on all round the House about the wonderful system of broadcasting which we have. I was staggered to hear Member after Member say that everybody had the choice of at least three programmes and that many have the choice of seven.

Let me mention my own part of the country. For what are we paying licence fees? We cannot get television, of course; we cannot get the Third Programme; we cannot get the Scottish programme. We hear all this talk about whether we are to have Beethoven interrupted by advertisements for pills, but it is not a matter of us having Beethoven. We cannot even get the bagpipes.

We are told that we have the best system in the world. The system on the North-East coast is a disgrace. The system of broadcasting on either side of the Scottish Border is a disgrace. If it had been the subject of a little healthy competition that disgrace would have been removed long before now. The right hon. Member for Smethwick spoke at length about the report which had been made by Mr. Vincent Massey about broadcasting in Canada. Let him look at a report much nearer home—the report made by an ex-Governor-General of the B.B.C, Sir Frederick Ogilvie, in which he said that it would be a very good thing if there was competition; that it would be for the good of the B.B.C.

Hon. and right hon. Members opposite must not assume this high and mighty moral tone as if everybody opposed to them was a vulture—I think that was the cheerful phrase of the right hon. Gentleman.