Skip to main content

Clause 6—(Advisory Committees)

Volume 531: debated on Tuesday 27 July 1954

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 20, leave out "on any religious services or" and insert:

"as to the exercise of their functions in relation to any such items as are mentioned in paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of section three of this Act, and on any."

I beg to move. "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

This Amendment brings Clause 6 (2, a) into line with what we discussed in regard to Clause 3 (4, a) by widening the words from
"…on any religious services. …"
to the words which we have already discussed and on which we have had an interesting debate, namely, religious services or propaganda. Therefore, having discussed this point, I do not think that it is necessary to elaborate it further.

Question put, and agreed to.

Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 23, leave out "and."

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

I would suggest that it would be for the convenience of the House if we were able to discuss this and the related Amendment in page 11, line 31. The effect of this Amendment would be to prepare a code of standards—

Surely there will be no objection to omitting the word "and," because it is obvious that we will agree to the last committee.

Question put, and agreed to.

Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 29, after "contractors" to insert:

"with a view to the exclusion of misleading advertisements from such programmes, and otherwise."

Read a Second time.

I beg to move as an Amendment to the Lords Amendment, after "misleading," to insert "improper, or otherwise undesirable."

The Lords Amendment, which we propose to amend, relates to Clause 6, dealing with advisory committees. The Lords Amendment proposes to add words to subsection (2,b), so that it would then read:
" a committee representative of organisations … to give advice to the Authority and programme contractors with a view to the exclusion of misleading advertisements from such programmes, and otherwise as to the principles to be followed in connection with the advertisements included as aforesaid."
The Amendment that I have moved is to add words to the words which the Lords propose to add to subsection (2, b) and would have the effect of broadening the basis of consultation. It would go beyond
"the exclusion of misleading advertisements from such programmes "
and would include the consideration of "improper, or otherwise undesirable advertisements."

I bear in mind that in Clause 4 (5) it is
"the duty of the Authority to consult from time to time with the Postmaster-General as to the classes and descriptions of goods or services which must not be advertised and the methods of advertising which must not be employed and to carry out any directions which he may give them in those respects."
But that duty is laid upon the Authority
"Without prejudice to any of the duties incumbent on the Authority otherwise than under this subsection."
It rather looks, therefore, as if the Authority will consult the Postmaster-General from time to time and that he will tell the Authority what type of advertisement it is not to accept—or, to be more precise,
"the classes and descriptions of goods or services which must not be advertised."
He may also direct them on
"methods of advertising which must not be employed."
Subject to that, the Authority will have the benefit under Clause 6 of an advisory committee, which will be representative of organizations, authorities and persons concerned with standards of conduct in the advertising of goods and services. I presume that under subsection (2, b) of the Clause, that committee will give advice to the Authority from time to time on matters within its jurisdiction, subject to any directions given by the Postmaster-General under Clause 4.

In our view, it is not enough that the consultation should relate only to misleading advertisements. There are advertisements which, while not being misleading, may be regarded as improper or otherwise undesirable but yet may not come under any previous ban put upon them by the direction of the Postmaster-General.

There was very little said in another place upon this Lords Amendment when it was accepted on behalf of the Government. It was said, however, that it met with the approval of the Retail Standards Association, and I am sure that this alone would give it a considerable stamp of approval. However, there may be advertisements of goods and services which the Postmaster-General does not ban, and there may be methods which the Postmaster-General, by direction, has not prohibited, and yet there may be advertisements within the directions given which may be improper or otherwise undesirable.

9.15 p.m.

The hon. Gentleman is talking in a general way; would he give us an example?

Yes, for example, as far as I understand, the Postmaster-General will not prohibit advertisements of intoxicating liquors. I do not know. It is within his power to do so under Clause 4. However, he may decide not to do so —

Since no ban of that kind is given, and no direction is given to the Authority as to methods of advertising intoxicating liquor, it may be within the discretion of the Authority, in consultation with the Advisory Committee, as to whether that advertisement or any other proposed advertisement is misleading. Supposing an advertisement says, "A good booze-up will do you good." That may not be misleading. It may be a matter of opinion as to whether a good booze-up would do one good, but many people might say, "Hear, hear, to that. I have tried it and it worked." The Authority might consider that such an advertisement, whilst not misleading, was improper or otherwise undesirable.

Take another example. I do not know whether the Postmaster-General will ban advertisements from money lenders, but supposing he decides in general that money lenders are public benefactors, and that the facilities offered by them to members of the public should be brought to their attention. Now supposing a money lender says, "Wives, why be dependent on your husband for that new hat? Why not buy it the easy-pay way?" That may not be misleading, it may be an easy-pay way, but is it desirable? Is it improper or is it otherwise undesirable?

The Postmaster-General may not ban the football pool advertisements. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] I am responding to the invitation of the hon. Gentleman that I should give some examples.

Would my hon. Friend consider the question of the advertisement which is misleading to certain people? For instance, some weeks ago it was suggested that the use of a certain shampoo powder would make me resemble Miss Rita Hayworth. I have tried it and I have been told that there is no resemblance even to this day.

It is not for me to interpret the word "misleading." Whether that advertisement would be banned by the Authority on the ground of it being misleading, I do not know, but I should say that, having regard to the very unsatisfactory results in a particular case, the Authority might say that it was improper or otherwise undesirable. We want to broaden the basis on which the Authority may take the advice of the Advisory Committee on whether the advertisement should be put on television or not.

I have one final example, that of football pools. The Postmaster-General may not ban advertisements for football pools. It is possible that the football pool promoters may say, "Put your shirt on the four aways this week." That may not be misleading, it may not be improper, but it may be otherwise undesirable. It would not be in the public interest that too many shirts should be put on the four aways in any one week in the year. After all, there are other laws which have to be observed when it comes to putting our underwear on football pools.

There is a serious point here which we wish to submit to the House. By broadening the basis of consultation, and taking it beyond the word misleading we may include advertisements which, while not being condemned on the ground of being misleading, and not banned by the Postmaster-General, may nevertheless in principle be improper or otherwise undesirable.

I beg to second the Amendment to the Lords Amendment.

I wish to deal with the point of undesirability. The House will be aware of the work done by the Copy Committee of the Newspaper Proprietors' Association and the Newspaper Society in selecting the advertisements offered to newspapers, and I imagine that in this case a similar sort of organisation will have to be set up. That is not because the I.T.A. does not trust the advertisers, or because it shares the view that all advertisers are scoundrels. It is because it must be satisfied that the sort of advertisements it got were not designed solely for the purpose of swindling the victim. That will be one of the more easy things that such a body would have to do.

In all the work done by these advertising censorships, one of the simplest tasks is to exclude the advertisement which is deliberately misleading and which is designed to part the sucker from his money. What is much more difficult, because advertising is a fairly skilful trade, is to protect the reader or, in this case the viewer, from what is unsatisfactory either because of reasons of bad taste, or because it is completely undesirable.

The medical committee, or the committee which is to deal with medical advertising, would be able to deal, for example, with the claim of a prominent make of laxatives who maintained that "One of these pills given to baby every night will cure baby's constipation." Of course, if a baby were given a pill every night, by the end of the year there would be no baby left. That is the sort of misleading advertisement with which the medical committee could deal. Indeed, I think that the patent medicine advertiser would have a rather rough ride, particularly from the B.M.A. representative.

But even more important is where the advertiser says that something is "good for you "—that a certain cigarette is good for a sore or tender throat. No one but the advertiser would believe that for a moment. Everyone who has ever smoked cigarettes when they had a sore throat knows quite well that almost all tobacco is irritating to the throat. Therefore such a claim is undesirable and is something which ought not to be permitted.

There will also be the rather more highfalutin' advertisement "You can write short stories and earn —£20 a week." This is a sort of trick advertisement, because everyone believes he can write short stories. Everyone believes that, if only editors were a little more lenient, he could be another O. Henry, and that there are vast sums to be made from writing short stories. Of course, short story writing is a very skilful trade in which few people succeed. But, if we do not control this sort of thing we shall have people who ought to be bus conductors wasting their money trying to be short story writers.

This has no high dramatic appeal, but it is nevertheless important. I suggest that, just as newspapers go out of their way to protect their readers from misleading advertisements of the sort designed to separate a man from his money, so we should take the responsibility of seeing to it that undesirable advertising—undesirable because it is offensive, such as advertisements asking, "Have you got bad breath?" or, "Are your bowels working?" should not appear on television. That is the sort of advertisement that we know is not attractive even when it meets the eye, much less when it meets both the eye and the ear. This is the sort of thing that is so undesirable that an Amendment to the Lords Amendment of the kind that, we propose, designed as it is to protect us from the offensive as well as the misleading, should be accepted by the Government.

I doubt whether an insertion of the kind proposed is really necessary, and I think that if hon. Members will consider the matter very carefully they will agree with me. My noble Friend accepted this Amendment in another place for the reason that the Merchandise Marks Act did not apply in general to advertising by television. As I think my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary informed the House before I came in, the Retail Trading Standards Association was disturbed about this and felt that it was desirable to take power in some way to exclude misleading advertisements from television programmes, although it had been our view that excluding misleading advertisements, in any case, would have been one of the principal objectives of the body which we are setting up to advise on standards of advertising.

I should have thought that that body, which consists of advertisers, advertising agents, and representatives of the Ministry of Health and of the British Medical Association, would certainly have prevented anything in the nature of improper advertising. If it did not do so, I should not have thought that it was doing its job. We are going a little far in suggesting that a committee of that standard would ever lend itself to allowing an advertisement which was in any way improper to be put on the air.

Will the Committee have power to vet all advertising before it appears?

Its job is to advise the Authority with regard to advertising, and I should have thought that if it was desirable to vet advertisements before they appeared the committee would certainly do so. The hon. Member is putting a very low estimate on the professional standards of advertising agents and also of the people who want to advertise.

We now come to the word "undesirable." What is undesirable? The manufacturer of one particular product would regard it as highly undesirable if his rival were to advertise the same product. I could imagine the partners of Watney's breweries taking a strong objection to any advertisement about Bass being good for one. I suggest that "undesirable" in this sense does not lend itself to exact definition.

Surely the words "otherwise undesirable" in this definition means what this expert committee thinks is undesirable, and surely that is exactly what the whole House wants. The House wants the expert committee to be able to say, "For reasons that we cannot define in detail, this advertisement is undesirable and therefore should not be allowed."

They have full power to advise the Authority on the type of advertisement, and if one is regarded by them as undesirable, they will certainly say so.

9.30 p.m.

Another reason for rejecting the Amendment is because of the power given in Clause 3 (1, b). This places upon the Authority a duty to see that nothing in a programme offends against good taste, decency and so on. Again, in Clause 4 (5) the Postmaster-General has the power to give directions to the Authority about forbidden advertising and advertising methods, and I would suggest that these safeguards are quite adequate for what we have in view. I cannot see that there can be any real danger about this.

Let us see what are the safeguards. First, there is the safeguard of the Postmaster-General's powers under Clause 4 (5). Second, there is the setting-up of the Advisory Committee which I have mentioned. Then, what I regard as perhaps one of the most important safeguards of all, which has not yet been mentioned in this discussion, there is the present high standard of the advertising profession, which has a code of its own which it has published. For finality, the Independent Television Authority can refuse to broadcast anything under Clause 3 (1). I think that these powers are extremely wide, and they cover any conceivable form of abuse. For that reason, I cannot accept the Amendment to the Lords Amendment.

Division No. 210.]


[9.34 p.m.

Acland, Sir RichardBrook, Dryden (Halifax)Dodds, N. N.
Adams, RichardBroughton, Dr. A. D. D.Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C.
Albu, A. H.Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Belper)Edwards, Rt. Hon. John (Brighouse)
Allen, Scholefield (Crewe)Brown, Thomas (Ince)Edwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly)
Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven)Burke, W. A.Edwards, W. J. (Stepney)
Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.Burton, Miss F. E.Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.)
Awbery, S. S.Callagnan, L. JEvans, Edward (Lowestoft)
Bacon, Miss AliceCarmichael, J.Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury)
Baird, J.Castle, Mrs. B. A.Fernyhough, E.
Balfour, A.Champion, A. J.Fienburgh, W.
Bartley, P.Chapman, W. DFinch, H. J.
Bellenger, Rt. Hon. F. JClunie, J.Fletcher, Eric (Islington, E.)
Benn, Hon. WedgwoodCorbet, Mrs. FredaFoot, M. M.
Benson, G.Cove, W. G.Forman, J. C
Beswick, F.Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton)
Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale)Crosland, C. A. R.Freeman, John (Watford)
Blackburn, F.Crossman, R. H. S.Freeman, Peter (Newport)
Blenkinsop, A.Cullen, Mrs. A.Gaitskell, Rt. Hon. H. T. N
Blyton, W. R.Darling, George (Hillsborough)Gibson, C. W.
Boardman, H.Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.)Glanville, James
Bottomley, Rt. Hon A. GDavies, Harold (Leek)Gooch, E. G.
Bowden, H. W.Davies, Stephen (Merthyr)Gordon Walker, Rt. Hon P. C
Bowles, F. Freitas, GeoffreyGreenwood, Anthony
Braddock, Mrs. ElizabethDeer, G.Grenlell, Rt. Hon. D. R
Brockway, A. F.Delargy, H. J.Grey, C. F.

Amendment can be that we are not a trade association. There is no other possible object in the exceedingly illogical speech which we have just heard. We put up one specific instance of the misleading advertisement, and everybody is agreed about it. If the hon. Gentleman's argument was right, there would be no reason to put it in, because it is already covered by what he calls the safeguards. We then said that, if he was going to put in one instance, he had better cover all the other instances, and put down the words "improper, or otherwise undesirable." If he refuses it upon the grounds that there is no reason for leaving out "misleading," there is no reason for not putting in the other words.

Does he consider that the gentlemen with the high standards of the advertising profession are not going to object in exactly the same way and to exactly the same extent? Is there a subtle difference between a lie and a bit of impropriety? What has the Merchandise Marks Act got to do with it? If we put in one instance, we must put in the others. It is part of the duty of the Authority generally to keep its programmes clean, and we have to guard against the dirty liar—both sides of him—whether he is dirty or a liar—and if the hon. Gentleman will not accept this Amendment, I can see no reason at all for his attitude.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Lords Amendment."

The House divided: Ayes, 245: Noes. 265.

Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A.Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)
Griffiths, William (Exchange)Mason, RoySimmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)
Hale, LeslieMayhew, C. P.Skeffington, A. M.
Hall, Rt. Hon. Glenvil (Colne Valley)Mellish, R. J.Slater, Mrs. H. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Hall, John T. (Gateshead, W.)Messer, Sir F.Slater, J. (Durham, Sedgefield)
Hamilton, W. W.Mikardo, IanSmith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)
Hannan, W.Mitchison, G. R.Smith, Norman (Nottingham, S.)
Hargreaves, A.Monslow, W.Snow, J. W.
Harrison, J. (Nottingham, E.)Moody, A. S.Sorensen, R. W.
Hastings, S.Morgan, Dr. H. B. W.Soskice, Rt. Hon Sir Frank
Hay man, F. H.Morley, R.Sparks, J. A.
Healey, Denis (Leeds, S.E.)Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)Steele, T.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Rowley Regis)Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Lewisham, S.)Stokes, Rt. Hon. R. R.
Herbisort, Miss M.Mort, D. L.Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)
Hewitson, Capt. M.Moyle, A.Stross, Dr. Barnett
Hobson, C. R.Mulley, F. W.Summerskill, Rt. Hon. E.
Holman, P.Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon. P. J.Swingler, S. T.
Holmes, HoraceOldfield, W. H.Sylvester, G. O.
Houghton, DouglasOliver, G. H.Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)
Hoy, J. H.Orbach, M.Taylor, John (West Lothian)
Hudson, James (Ealing, N.)Oswald, T.Thomas, George (Cardiff)
Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey)Padley, W. E.Thomas, Iorwerth (Rhondda, W.)
Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)Paget, R. T.Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin)
Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley)Thomson, George (Dundee, E.)
Hynd, H. (Accrington)Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury)Thornton, E.
Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe)Palmer, A. M. F.Timmons, J.
Irvine, A J. (Edge Hill)Pannell, CharlesTomney, F.
Irving, W. J. (Wood Green)Pargiter, G. A.Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn
Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.Parker, J.Usborne, H. C.
Jay, Rt. Hon. D. P. T.Parkin, B. T.Viant, S. P.
Jeger, George (Goole)Paton, J.Wallace, H. W
Jeger, Mrs. LenaPeart, T. F.Warbey, W. N
Jenkins, R. H. (Stechford)Plummer, Sir LeslieWatkins, T. E.
Johnson, James (Rugby)Porter, G.Weitzman, D.
Johnston, Douglas (Paisley)Price, J. T. (Westhoughton)Wells, Percy (Faversham)
Jones, David (Hartlepool)Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.)Wells, William (Walsall)
Jones, Frederick Elwyn (West Ham, S.)Proctor, W. T.West, D. G.
Jones, Jack (Rotherham)Pryde, D. J.White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)
Jones, T. W. (Merioneth)Pursey, Cmdr. H.Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.
Keenan, W.Rankin, JohnWigg, George
Kenyon, C.Reeves, J.Wilcock, Group Capt. C. A B
Key, Rt. Hon. C. WReid, Thomas (Swindon)Wilkins. W. A.
King, Dr. H. M.Reid, William (Camlachie)Willey, F. T.
Lawson, G. M.Rhodes, H.Williams, David (Neath)
Lee, Frederick (Newton)Richards, R.Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Abertillery)
Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock)Roberts, Albert (Normanton)Williams, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Don V'll'y)
Lever, Leslie (Ardwick)Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)Williams, W. R. (Droylsden)
Lindgren, G. S.Williams, W. T. (Hammersmith, S.)
Lipton, Lt.-Col. M.Robinson, Kenneth (S. Pancras, N.)Wilson, Rt, Hon. Harold (Huyton)
MacColl, J. E.Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)Winterbottom, Ian (Nottingham C.)
McGovern, J.Ross, WilliamWinterbottom, Richard (Brightside)
McKay, John (Wallsend)Royle, C.Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A
McLeavy, F.Shackleton, E. A. A.Wyatt, W. L.
MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling)Shawcross, Rt. Hon. Sir HartleyYates, V. F.
Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg)Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.Younger, Rt. Hon. K.
Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.)Short, E. W.
Mann, Mrs. JeanShurmer, P. L. E.


Manuel, A. C.Silverman, Julius (Erdington)Mr. Pearson and Mr. Arthur Allen.


Aitken, W. T.Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hon. J. A.Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C
Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.)Boyle, Sir EdwardCrosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E.
Alport, C. J. M.Braine, B. RCrouch, R. F.
Amery, Julian (Preston, N.)Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.)Crowder, Sir John (Finchley)
Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J.Braithwaite, Sir GurneyCrowder, Petre (Ruislip—Northwood)
Arbuthnot, JohnBromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. HDarling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.)
Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.)Brooke, Henry (Hampstead)Davidson, Viscountess
Astor, Hon. J. J.Browne, Jack (Govan)Deedes, W. F.
Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M.Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T.Dodds-Parker, A. D.
Baldwin, A. E.Bullard, D. G.Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. McA
Banks, Col. C.Bullus, Wing Commander E. EDonner, Sir P. W.
Barber, AnthonyButcher, Sir HerbertDoughty, C. J. A.
Barlow, Sir JohnCampbell, Sir DavidDouglas-Hamilton, Lord Malcolm
Baxter, Sir BeverleyCarr, RobertDrayson, G. B.
Beach, Maj. HicksCary, Sir RobertDrewe, Sir C.
Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.)Channon, H.Dugdale, Rt. Hon. Sir T. (Richmond)
Bell, Ronald (Bucks, S.)Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead)Duncan, Capt. J. A. L.
Bennett, F. M. (Reading, N.)Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.)Duthie, W. S.
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport)Cole, NormanEccles, Rt. Hon. Sir D. M
Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth)Colegate, W. A.Eden, Rt. Hon. A.
Birch, NigelConant, Maj. Sir RogerEden, J. B. (Bournemouth, West)
Bishop, F. P.Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. AlbertElliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.
Black, C. W.Cooper-Key, E. M.Erroll, F. J.
Bossom, Sir A. C.Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne)Fell, A.

Finlay, GraemeLloyd, Maj. Sir Guy (Renfrew, E.)Renton, D. L. M.
Fisher, NigelLloyd, Rt. Hon. Selwyn (Wirral)Ridsdale, J. E.
Fleetwood-Hesketh, R. F.Lookwood, Lt.-Col. J. C.Roberts, Peter (Heeley)
Fletcher-Cooke, C.Longden, GilbertRobinson, Sir Roland (Blackpool, S.)
Ford, Mrs. PatriciaLow, A. R. W.Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks)
Fort, R.Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)Roper, Sir Harold
Fraser, Hon. Hugh (Stone)Lucas, P. B. (Brentford)Ropner, Col. Sir Leonard
Fraser, Sir Ian (Moreoambe & Lonsdale)McAdden, S. J.Russell, R. S.
Fyfe, Rt. Hon. Sir David MaxwellMcCorquodale, Rt. Hon. M. SRyder, Capt. R. E. D.
Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead)Macdonald, Sir PeterSavory, Prof. Sir Douglas
Gammans, L. D.McKibbin A. J.Schofield, Lt.-Col. W.
Garner-Evans, E. H.Mackie, J. H. (Galloway)Scott, R. Donald
George, Rt. Hon. Maj. G. LloydMaclean, FitzroyScott-Miller, Cmdr. R.
Glover, D.Macleod, Rt. Hon. Iain (Enfield, W.)Shepherd, William
Godber, J. B.MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty)Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)
Gomme-Duncan, Col. A.Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley)Smithers, Peter (Winchester)
Gough, C. F. H.Macpherson, Niall (Dumfries)Smithers, Sir Waldron (Orpington)
Gower, H. R.Maitland, Patriok (Lanark)Smyth, Brig. J. G. (Norwood)
Graham, Sir FergusMannhigham-Buller, Rt. Hn. Sir ReginaldSnadden, W. McN.
Grimston, Hon. John (St. Albans)Markham, Major Sir FrankSoames, Capt. C
Grimston, Sir Robert (Westbury)Marlowe, A. A. H.Speir, R. M.
Hall, John (Wycombe)Marples, A. E.Spence, H. R. (Aberdeenshire, W.)
Hare, Hon. J. H.Marshall, Douglas (Bodmin)Spens, Rt. Hon. Sir P. (Kensington, S.)
Harris, Reader (Heston)Maude, AngusStanley, Capt. Hon. Richard
Harrison, Col. J. H. (Eye)Maydon, Lt.-Comdr, S. L. C.Stevens, Geoffrey
Harvey, Air Codre. A. V. (Macclesfield)Medlicott, Brig. F.Steward, W. A. (Woolwich, W.)
Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.)Mellor, Sir JohnStoddart-Scott, Col. M.
Harvie-Watt, Sir GeorgeMolson, A. H. E.Storey, S.
Hay, JohnMonckton, Rt. Hon. Sir WalterStrauss, Henry (Norwich, S.)
Heald, Rt. Hon. Sir LionelMorrison, John (Salisbury)Stuart, Rt. Hon. James (Moray)
Heath, EdwardNabarro, G. D. N.Summers, G. S.
Henderson, John (Cathcart)Neave, AireySutcliffe, Sir Harold
Higss, J. M. C.Nicholls, HarmarTaylor, William (Bradford, N.)
Hill, Dr. Charles (Luton)Nicholson, Godfrey (Farnham)Teeling, W.
Hinchingbrooke, ViscountNicolson, Nigel (Bournemouth, E.)Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. P. L. (Hereford)
Hirst, GeoffreyNield, Basil (Chester)Thomas, Leslie (Canterbury)
Holland-Martin, C. J.Noble, Comdr. A. H. P.Thompson, Lt.-Cdr. R. (Croydon, W.)
Hollis, M. C.Nugent, G. R. H.Thorneycroft, Rt. Hn. Peter (Monmouth)
Holt, A. F.Oakshott, H. D.Tilney, John
Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.Odey, G. W.Touche, Sir Gordon
Horobin, I. M.O'Neill, Hon. Phelim (Co. Antrim, N.)Turner, H. F. L.
Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. FlorenceOrmsby-Gore, Hon. W. D.Turton, R. H.
Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire)Orr, Capt. L. P. S.Vane, W. M. F.
Howard, Hon. Greville (St. Ives)Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)Vaughan-Morgan, J. K
Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.)Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian (Weston-super-Mare)Vosper, D. F.
Hurd, A. R.Osborne, C.Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
Hutchison, Sir Ian Clark (E'b'rgh, W.)Page, R. G.Wakefield, Sir Wavell (St. Marylebone)
Hutchison, James (Scotstoun)Peake, Rt. Hon. O.Walker-Smith, D. C.
Hylton-Foster, H. B. H.Perkins, Sir RobertWall, Major Patrick
Iremonger, T. L.Peto, Brig. C. H. M.Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich)Peyton, J. W. W.Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)
Jennings, Sir RolandPickthorn, K. W. M.Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon C
Johnson, Eric (Blackley)Pilkington, Capt. R. A.Watkinson, H. A.
Johnson, Howard (Kemptown)Pitman, I. J.Webbe, Sir H. (London & Westminster)
Jones, A. (Hall Green)Pitt, Miss E. M.Wellwood, W.
Kerby, Capt. H. B.Powell, J. EnochWilliams, Rt. Hon. Charles (Torquay)
Kerr, H. W.Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.)Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
Lambert, Hon. G.Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. L.Williams, Paul (Sunderland, S.)
Lambton, Viscount
Lancaster, Col. C. G.Profumo, J. D.Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)
Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H.Raikes, Sir VictorWills, G.
Legh, Hon. Peter (Petersfield)Ramsden, J. E..Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Lennox-Boyd, Rt. Hon. A. T.Rayner, Brig. RWood, Hon. R.
Lindsay, MartinRedmayne, M.
Linstead, Sir H. N.Rees-Davies, W. R.


Llewellyn, D. T.Remnant, Hon. P.Mr. Studholme and Mr. Kaberry.

Lords Amendment agreed to.

Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 31, after "included" insert:

"in such programmes, or in any publications issued"

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

This Amendment deals with the previous Amendment, which has been agreed to.

Question put, and agreed to.

Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 31, at end, insert:

"and to prepare and submit to the Authority a code of such standards of conduct as aforesaid: and
  • (c) a committee representative of organizations, authorities and persons having experience of and special interest in the welfare and education of children and young persons, to give advice to the Authority as to the principles to be followed in connection with the broadcasting in such programmes of matter intended for children or young persons."
  • Read a Second time.

    9.45 p.m.

    I beg to move, as an Amendment to the Lords Amendment, after "Authority," to insert:

    "and to the Postmaster-General (who shall lay a copy thereof before Parliament)."
    This is a very late opportunity for the Assistant Postmaster-General to redeem his personal honour with regard to certain undertakings given by him to Parliament. It concerns the code of advertising. In the course of our debates I think that the Assistant Postmaster-General, aided by certain hon. Gentlemen behind him, has learned what the advertisers' code is. I should like to draw his attention to three statements which he has made. First of all, in the debate on the White Paper he said:
    " … a code on advertisement is to be drawn up and, incidentally, it has to be agreed with the Postmaster-General."
    Later he said:
    "What I have said is that the code which the corporation will lay down has to be approved by the Postmaster-General, and in so far as it has to be, it is subject to Questions in the House."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th December, 1953; Vol. 522, c. 56.]
    Later, so that there is no possible doubt, he said in Committee:
    "I would remind hon. Members that the whole code of advertisement has not only to be agreed by the Authority but approved by the Postmaster-General."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 20th May, 1954; Vol. 527, c. 2334.]
    When we put this Amendment, and an Amendment which now appears as a Lords Amendment, on the Order Paper, the Government rejected them with their usual arguments "Trust the I.T.A. Trust the advertisers." I shall not repeat those arguments, which are all too painfully known to both sides of the House. When the Bill got to the Lords, however, it was decided to accept the code, with the result that we have an Amendment which goes some way towards meeting the wishes of the Opposition and the undertaking of the Assistant Postmaster-General.

    My hon. Friends and I would like to take it a little further so as at least to put the Assistant Postmaster-General right with the House. This is a great opportunity for him. It is an Amendment which he can accept without any difficulty at all. It imposes no other obligations on the Authority, the advertisers or anyone else than that they shall supply a copy of the code to the Postmaster-General, who will put it in the Library of the House of Commons. It ensures, in fact, that this undertaking that it will be submitted to him and that he can be questioned on it in the House is fulfilled.

    I hope that he will not be misled by the arguments used by the Government spokesman, I think the Paymaster-General, in the House of Lords in rejecting this part of the Amendment. There the noble Lord, the Earl of Selkirk, said:
    "What is the use of appointing an advisory committee if we do not trust it to do anything? First of all, it has to submit a code for the approval of the I.T.A.—and we are not to trust the I.T.A. Then, under the Amendment, the I.T.A. is to submit it to the Postmaster-General—and we do not trust the Postmaster-General. Then the code is to come to Parliament. That is really going too far."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, House of Lords, 13th July, 1954; Vol. 188, c. 980.]
    For the Paymaster-General to make a statement like that in the light of the undertaking of the Government is really going too far, especially when he made the totally incorrect statement that Parliament can, of course, annul it. Parliament could have done nothing of the kind either under the Amendment moved in the Lords or that which we are now putting before the House. I do urge the Home Secretary and the Assistant Postmaster-General to think that this only means that he has to publish the code in a form acceptable to the House—in other words, to put in the Library a copy of the code which it is already agreed shall be drawn up.

    I beg to second the Amendment to the Lords Amendment.

    My hon. Friend the Member for Preston, South (Mr. Shackleton) has pointed out the reasons why the Assistant Postmaster-General should at this late stage accept our Amendment, but even apart from the question of his honour and his opportunity of redeeming his pledges to this House, I submit that there is no reason whatever why he should not accept this Amendment which requires this code to be laid before the House, because it would only make this provision of the Bill consistent with various other parts of the Bill.

    Already a great number of safeguards which have been introduced as the Bill has proceeded through its various stages have to he presented to the Postmaster-General or agreed by him in consultation with the Authority, and in other cases laid before this House. The Postmaster-General, in consultation, can amend the Second Schedule. He can determine the classes of advertisements which can be banned from being put out by the I.T.A., and he can make certain rules regarding the classes of advertisements and the intervals during which they are shown.

    In those circumstances, he has accepted the necessity for a code being laid before this House and, as I say, it would only be consistent with the other provisions if he agreed that this code should be laid before us. We have sought all the way though to increase the responsibility of the Postmaster-General to Parliament so that he can be questioned and some measure of control can be kept over the E.T.A. This is simply another manner in which, in a small way, that control can be increased.

    I am very touched by the solicitude of the Opposition to protect my honour, but I hope that I shall succeed in convincing them that this is a matter in which my honour is not at stake. The hon. Gentleman is tending to mix up two quite distinct things. The first is that the Postmaster-General must agree on the classes of advertisements and the methods of advertising which may or may not be employed, and in that respect the Postmaster-General is subject to question in Parliament and is subject to close Parliamentary control.

    What we are talking about now is the advertising committee which is to be set up, consisting of representatives of various bodies, who are to advise the Authority. The question is whether that code need be placed before Parliament.

    Will the hon. Gentleman take it in two stages? The first point is the provision whereby it must be laid before the Postmaster-General for his approval. The second point is that it is to come before Parliament. There are two points involved.

    The Amendment as it now stands says that the Committee has

    "to prepare and submit to the Authority a code of such standards of conduct as aforesaid."
    The question is whether that is enough or whether it should go any further. I think it is unnecessary to go to the length of demanding that this code of standards should be submitted to the Postmaster-General and should be placed before both Houses of Parliament. After all, we are dealing here not only with a responsible committee—I hope it is—but a responsible Authority as well. I suggest that there is no need to bother Parliament with details of this sort. As to whether the Authority, having got a code, should publish it, that is for the Authority to decide. It might wish to do so, and it might not. The advertising associations of this country have a code of their own which, I believe, is published, and the Authority may take the same attitude with regard to this code. I suggest that this is a fiddling matter which we should not expect to have to debate in this way in the House of Commons.

    The Assistant Postmaster-General says that this is a fiddling matter, and yet he gave a specific undertaking, using the words "advertising code" and saying that this code would be published and that he could be questioned upon it.

    The undertaking which I gave, if my memory serves me right, refers to the code to which the Postmaster-General himself has to agree, as to classes of advertisement and methods of advertising. As that has to be approved by the Postmaster-General it is subject to the scrutiny of this House and, if necessary, to question. But this other code will be prepared by the advertising committee, and I suggest that as it will be coming from a responsible body it is not necessary to provide that Parliament should deal with it in this way. For those reasons. I cannot accept the Amendment to the Lords Amendment.

    What is this other code to which the hon. Gentleman is referring? What I think he has in mind is Clause 4 (5), but that does not mention any code. It mentions that directions shall be given from time to time, but they do not constitute a code. They are directions, given in special cases. What does the hon. Gentleman mean?

    I was referring to the powers vested in the Postmaster-General. We might regard them as a sort of code, and they are subject to this House, because the Postmaster-General can be asked any question about it, and the subject of his prohibitions can be raised in debate in this House if necessary.

    That is really not the point. That has nothing to do with the code. That is some possible power of the Postmaster-General to require the Authority to consult him as to the classes of advertisements which may or may not be broadcast. It is a different proposition altogether.

    There are now three points involved; I thought at first that there were only two. The Assistant Postmaster-General has now said that there is no obligation upon the Authority or the committee to publish the code which they draw up. It may all he done in secret. There may be no publicity, and the public may not know what the code is. Whether the advertisers will know, I do not know, but I should have thought that they ought to know, so that they would know what they are doing.

    This is really a pantomime Government, and we have a really extraordinary Assistant Postmaster-General. This is not a fiddling matter; it is an important matter. This advertising code on commercial television is a matter of fundamental principle. It will regulate not only the classes of advertisements but the type of advertisements, the things which advertisers may do and the things they may not do, the timing and spacing of advertisements, and a whole lot of other things connected with the morals and public spirit of the advertisements to be permitted on television.

    This is a matter about which Parliament should know and have a power of veto. We have a Highway Code, under the Road Traffic Act, 1930. It is provided in that Act—which I had the honour of introducing—that the Highway Code not only has to be brought before Parliament but has to be approved by affirmative Resolution. I know that the Highway Code is a matter of very great importance, but so is this. It will be of very great importance to the class, character and standard of advertising on television. It is atrocious that the Assistant Postmaster - General should affirm, first, that there is no obligation upon the Authority or committee to publish the code; secondly, that the Postmaster-General should have no power over it; and third, that Parliament should have no rights in this respect.

    10.0 p.m.

    We say that Parliament ought to have rights in this respect. My hon. Friend the Member for Preston, South (Mr. Shackle-ton) is absolutely right, for the personal honour of the Assistant Postmaster-General is involved in this matter. It is no use his sitting there cynically smiling as though he did not know what honour meant. I hope he does. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] His honour is involved. I am assured by my right hon. Friends that the Home Secretary himself, who, perhaps, will not go in for cynical smiling —I should be sorry to see the representative of the Home Office do that in this connection—gave a similar assurance on Second Reading. I can make two quotations from the Assistant Postmaster-General that are quite specific so far as the powers of the Postmaster-General are concerned. In the debate on television development and Government policy on 14th December, 1953, he used these specific words:
    "What I have said is that the code which the corporation will lay down "—
    that name has been altered—
    " as to be approved by the PostmasterGeneral"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 14th December, 1953; Vol. 522, c. 56.]
    That is specific. Then, in Committee on the Bill, on 20th May of this year, he said:
    "I would remind hon. Members that the whose code of advertisement has not only to be agreed by the Authority but approved by the Postmaster-General."—[OFFICIAL REPORT. 20th May, 1954; Vol. 527, c. 2334.]
    The hon. Gentleman's honour is involved. If he wants to get out of it the only way to do so, though it is not a very meritorious way of getting out of it, is to apologise to the House; to explain that he said things he ought, not to have said, or that he said them believing they were capable of application but now he is convinced they are not; and he should humbly apologise to the House. Or, following the last Minister of Agriculture, he ought to make that his last speech in office, and he should resign forthwith—as Lord Woolton also ought to have resigned as the supervising Minister for food and agriculture. I forgot him the other day. However, I must not pursue that or I shall be out of order.

    Those are two specific promises made by the Assistant Postmaster-General. Surely we are not asking too much when we ask that, as he promised, this should be subject to the approval of the Postmaster-General and be embodied in a Statutory Instrument that can at least be challenged by Prayer on a negative basis in the House. Those are two specific, clear promises, and I ask the Government in these circumstances to accept the Amendment to the Lords Amendment. I ask the Home Secretary, who is a member

    Division No. 211.]


    [10.4 p.m.

    Aitken, W. T.Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. McAHurd, A. R.
    Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.)Donner, Sir P. W.Hutchison, Sir Ian Clark (E'b'rgh, w)
    Alport, C. J. M.Doughty, C. J. A.Hutchison, James (Scotstoun)
    Amery, Julian (Preston, N.)Douglas-Hamilton, Lord MalcolmHyde, Lt.-Col. H. M.
    Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J.Drayson, G. B.Hylton-Foster, H. B. H.
    Arbuthnot, JohnDrewe, Sir C.Iremonger, T. L.
    Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.)Dugdale, Rt. Hon. Sir T. (Richmond)Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich)
    Astor, Hon. J. J.Duncan, Capt. J. A. L.Jennings, Sir Roland
    Baldock, Lt.-C.mdr J. M.Duthie, W. S.Johnson, Eric (Blackley)
    Baldwin, A. E.Eccles, Rt. Hon. Sir D. MJohnson, Howard (Kemptown)
    Banks, Col. C.Eden, Rt. Hon. A.Jones, A. (Hall Green)
    Barber, AnthonyEden, J. B. (Bournemouth, West)Kaberry, D.
    Barlow, Sir JohnElliot, Rt. Hon. W. EKerby, Capt. H. B.
    Baxter, Sir BeverleyErroll, F. J.Kerr, H. W.
    Beach, Maj. HicksFell, A.Lambert, Hon. G.
    Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.)Finlay, GrarmeLambton, Viscount
    Bell, Ronald (Bucks, S.)Fisher, NigelLancaster, Col. C. G.
    Bennett, F. M. (Reading, N.)Fleetwood-Hesketh, R. FLegge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H.
    Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport)Ford, Mrs. PatriciaLegh, Hon. Peter (Peterstield)
    Bennett, William (Woodside)Fort, R.Lennox-Boyd, Rt. Hon. A.T
    Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth)Fraser, Hon. Hugh (Stone)Lindsay, Martin
    Birch, NigelFraser, Sir Ian (Moreoambe & Lonsdale)Linstead, Sir H. N.
    Bishop, F. P.Fyfe, Rt. Hon Sir David MaxwellLlewellyn, D. T.
    Black, C. W.Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead)Lloyd, Maj. Sir Guy (Renfrew, E.)
    Bossom, Sir A. C.Gammans, L. D.Lloyd, Rt. Hon. Selwyn (Wirral)
    Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hon. J. AGarner-Evans, E. H.Lockwood, Lt.-Col. J. C.
    Boyle, Sir EdwardGeorge, Rt. Hon. Maj G. LloydLongden, Gilbert
    Braine, B. R.Glover, D.Low, A. R. W.
    Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.)Godber, J. BLucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth S)
    Braithwaite, Sir GurneyGomme-Duncan, ColLucas, P. B. (Brentford)
    Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. H.Gough, C. F. H.McAdden, S. J.
    Brooke, Henry (Hampstead)Gower, H. R.McCorquodale, Rt. Hon. M. S
    Browne, Jack (Govan)Graham, Sir FergusMacdonald, Sir Peter
    Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G.TGrimston, Hon. John (St. Albans)McKibbin, A. J.
    Bullard, D. G.Grimston, Sir Robert (Westbury)Mackie, J. H. (Galloway)
    Bullus, Wing Commander E. E.Hall, John (Wycombe)Maclean, Fitzroy
    Butcher, Sir HerbertHare, Hon. J. H.Maclecd, Rt. Hon. Iain (Enfield, W.)
    Campbell, Sir DavidHarris, Reader (Heston)MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty)
    Carr, RobertHarrison, Col. J. H. (Eye)Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold(Bromley)
    Cary, Sir RobertHarvey, Air Cdre, A.V. (Macclesfield)Macpherson, Niall (Dumfries)
    Channon, H.Harvey, Ian (Harrow,.)Maitland, Patrick (Lanark)
    Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead)Harvie-Watt, Sir GeorgeManningham-Buller, Rt. Hn. Sir Reginald
    Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.)Hay, JohnMarkham, Major Sir Frank
    Clyde, Rt. Hon. J. L.Heald, Rt. Hon. Sir LionetMarlowe, A. A. H.
    Cole, NormanHeath, EdwardMarples, A. E.
    Colegate, W. A.Henderson, John (Cathcart)Marshall, Douglas (Bodmin)
    Conant, Maj. Sir RogerHiggs, J. M. CMaude, Angus
    Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. AlbertHill, Dr. Charles (Luton)Maydon, Lt.-Comdr. S. L. C
    Cooper-Key, E. M.Hinchingbrooke, ViscountMedlicott, Brig. F.
    Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne)Hirst, GeoffreyMellor, Sir John
    Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C.Holland-Martin, C. J.Molson, A. H. E.
    Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E.Hollis, M. C.Monckton, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter
    Crouch, R. F.Holt, A. F.Moore, Sir Thomas
    Crowder, Sir John (Finchlev)Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.Morrison, John (Salisbury)
    Crowder, Petre (Ruslip—Northwood)Horobin, I. M.Nabarro, G. D. N.
    Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.)Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. FlorenceNeave, Airey
    Davidson, ViscountessHoward, Gerald (Cambridgeshire)Nicholls, Harmar
    Deedes, W. F.Howard, Hon. Greville (St. Ives)Nicholson, Godfrey (Farnham)
    Dodds-Parker, A. DHudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.)Nicolson, Nigel (Bournemouth, E.)

    of the Cabinet and has higher authority than the Assistant Postmaster-General, to accept the Amendment to the Lords Amendment and so clear the Government of what otherwise will be a reflection upon them, in view of the very clear undertakings that were given.

    Question, "That those words be there inserted in the Lords Amendment," put, and negatived.

    Motion made, and Question put, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

    The House divided: Ayes, 270: Noes, 241.

    Nield, Basil (Chester)Roberts, Peter (Heeley)Taylor, William (Bradford, N.)
    Noble, Comdr. A. H. P.Robinson, Sir Roland (Blackpool, S.)Teeling, W.
    Nugent, G. R. H.Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks)Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. P. L. (Hereford)
    Oakshott, H. D.Roper, Sir HaroldThomas, Leslie (Canterbury)
    Odey, G. W.Ropner, Col. Sir LeonardThompson, Lt.-Cdr. R. (Croydon, W.)
    O'Neill, Hon. Phelim (Co. Antrim, N.)Russell, R. S.Thorneycroft, Rt. Hn. Peter (Monmouth)
    Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D.Ryder, Capt. R. E. D.Thornton-Kemsley, Col. C. N
    Orr, Capt. L. P. S.Savory, Prof. Sir DouglasTilney, John
    Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)Schofield, Lt.-Col. WTouche, Sir Gordon
    Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian (Weston-super-Mare)Scott, R. DonaldTurner, H. F. L.
    Osborne, C.Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.Turton, R. H.
    Page, R. G.Shepherd, WilliamVane, W. M. F.
    Peaks, Rt. Hon. O.Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)Vaughan-Morgan, J. K.
    Perkins, Sir RobertSmithers, Peter (Winchester)Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
    Peto, Brig. C. H. M.Smithers, Sir Waldron (Orpington)Wakefield, Sir Wavell (St. Marylebone)
    Peyton, J. W. W.Smyth, Brig. J. G. (Norwood)Walker-Smith, D. C.
    Pickthorn, K. W. M.Snadden, W. McN.Wall, Major Patrick
    Pilkington, Capt. R. A.Soames, Capt. C.Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
    Pitman, I. J.Speir, R. M.Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)
    Pitt, Miss E. M.Spence, H. R. (Aberdeenshire, W.)Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C
    Powell, J. EnochSpens, Rt. Hon. Sir P. (Kensington, S.)Watkinson, H. A.
    Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.)Stanley, Capt. Hon. RichardWebbe, Sir H. (London & Westminster)
    Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. L.Stevens, GeoffreyWellwood, W.
    Profumo, J. D.Steward, W. A. (Woolwich, W.)Williams, Rt. Hon. Charles (Torquay)
    Raikes, Sir VictorStewart, Henderson (Fife, E.)Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
    Ramsden, J. E.Stoddart-Scott, Col. M.Williams, Paul (Sunderland, S.)
    Rayner, Brig. R.Storey, S.Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)
    Redmayne, M.Strauss, Henry (Norwich, S.)Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
    Rees-Davies, W. R.Stuart, Rt. Hon James (Moray)Wood, Hon. R.
    Remnant, Hon. P.Studholme, H. G.
    Renton. D. L. M.Summers, G. S.


    Ridsdale, J. E.Sutcliffe, Sir HaroldMr. Vosper and Mr Wills


    Acland, Sir RichardEdwards, Rt. Hon. John (Brighouse)Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill)
    Adams, RichardEdwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly)Irving, W. J. (Wood Green)
    Albu, A. H.Edwards, W. J. (Stepney)Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.
    Allen, Scholefield (Crewe)Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.)Jay, Rt. Hon. D. P. T
    Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven)Evans, Edward (Lowestoft)Jeger, George (Goole)
    Attlee, Rt Hon. C. R.Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury)Jeger, Mrs. Lena
    Awbery, S. S.Fernyhough, E.Jenkins R. H. (Stechford)
    Bacon, Miss AliceFienburgh, W.Johnson, James (Rugby)
    Balfour, A.Finch, H. JJohnston, Douglas (Paisley)
    Bartley, P.Fletcher, Eric (Islington, E.)Jones, David (Hartlepool)
    Bellenger, Rt. Hon. F. J.Foot, M. M.Jones, Frederick Elwyn (West Ham, S.)
    Benn, Hon WedgwoodForman, J. CJones, Jack (Rotherham)
    Benson, G.Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton)Jones T. W. (Merioneth)
    Beswick, F.Freeman, John (Watford)Keenan, W.
    Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale)Freeman, peter (Newport)Kenyon, C.
    Blackburn, F.Gaitskell. Rt. Hon H. T. N.Key, Rt. Hon. C. W
    Blenkinsop, A.Gibson, C. WKing, Dr. H. M.
    Blyton, W. R.Glanville, JamesLawson, G. M.
    Boardman, HGooch, E. GLee Frederick (Newton)
    Bottomley, Rt. Hon. A. GGordon Walker, Rt. Hon. P. C.Lee Miss Jennie (Cannock)
    Bowden, H. W.Greenwood, AnthonyLever, Lele (Ardwick)
    Bowles, F. G.Grenfell, Rt. Hon. D. RLewis, Arthur
    Braddock, Mrs. ElizabethGrey, C. F.Lindgren, G. S.
    Brockway, A. F.Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)Linton Lt. Col. M
    Brook, Dryden (Halifax)Griffiths, William (Exchange)MacColl, J. E.
    Brown, Thomas (Ince)Hale, LeslieMcGhee, H. G.
    Burke, W. A.Hall, Rt. Hon. Glenvil (Colne Vallay)McGoern J
    Burton, Miss F. E.Hall, John T. (Gateshead, W,)McLeavy, F.
    Callaghan, L. J.Hamilton, W. WMacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling)
    Carmichael, J.Hannan, WMallalieu, E. L. (Brigg)
    Castle, Mrs. B. AHargreaves, AMallalieu J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.)
    Champion, A. JHarrison, J. (Nottingham, E.)Mann. Mrs. Jean
    Chapman, W. DHastings, S.Manuel, A. C
    Clunie, J.Hayman. F. H.Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A
    Corbet, Mrs. FredaHealey, Denis (Leeds, S. E.)Mason, Roy
    Cove, W. GHenderson, Rt. Hon A. (Rowley Regis)Mayhew, C. P
    Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)Herbison, Miss M.Mellish, R. J
    Crosland, C. A. R.Hewitson, Capt MMesser, Sir F
    Crossman, R. H. SHobson, C. RMikardo, Ian
    Cullen, Mrs. AHolman, P.MitchiSon, G. R
    Darling, George (Hillsborough)Holmes HoraceMonslow, W
    Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.)Houghton DouglasMoody, A. S
    Davies, Harold (Leek)Hoy, J. H.Morgan, Dr. H. B. W
    Davies, Stephen (Merthyr)Hd on, James (Eling. N.)Morley, R.
    de Freitas, GeoffreyHughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey)Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)
    Deer, G.Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Lewisham, S)
    Delargy, H. J.Hughes Hector (Aberdeen, N.)Mort, D. L.
    Dodds, N. NHynd, H. (Accrington)Moyle, A.
    Ede, Rt. Hon. J. CHynd, J. B. (Attereliffe)Mulley, F. W

    Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon. P. JRoss, WilliamTomney, F.
    Oldfield, W. HRoyle, C.Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn
    Oliver, G. H.Shackleton, E. A. A.Usborne, H. C.
    Orbach, M.Shawcross, Rt. Hon. Sir HartleyViant, S. P.
    Oswald, T.Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.Wallace, H. W.
    Padley, W. E.Short, E. W.Warbey, W. N.
    Paget, R. T.Shurmer, P. L. E.Watkins, T. E.
    Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley)Silverman, Julius (Erdington)Weitzman, D.
    Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury)Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)Wells, Percy (Faversham)
    Palmer, A. M. F.Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)Wells, William (Walsall)
    Pannell, CharlesSkeffington, A. M.West, D. G.
    Pargiter, G. A.Slater, Mrs. H. (Stoke-on-Trent)White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)
    Parker, J.Slater, J. (Durham, Sedgefield)Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.
    Parkin, B. T.Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)Wigg, George
    Paton, J.Smith, Norman (Nottingham, S.)Wilkins, W. A.
    Peart, T. F.Snow, J, W.Willey, F. T.
    Plummer, Sir LeslieSorensen, R. W.Williams, David (Neath)
    Porter, G.Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir FrankWilliams, Rev. Llywelyn (Abertillery)
    Price, J. T. (Westhoughton)Sparks, J. A.Williams, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Don V'll'y)
    Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.)Steele, T.Williams, W. R. (Droylsden)
    Proctor, W. T.Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)Williams, W. T. (Hammersmith, S.)
    Pryde, D. J.Stross, Dr. BarnettWilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton)
    Pursey, Cmdr. H.Summerskill, Rt. Hon. EWinterbottom, Ian (Nottingham, C.)
    Rankin, JohnSwingler, S. T.Winterbottom, Richard (Brightside)
    Reeves, J.Sylvester, G. O.Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.
    Reid, Thomas (Swindon)Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)Wyatt, W. L.
    Reid, William (Camlachie)Taylor, John (West Lothian)Yates, V. F.
    Rhodes, H.Thomas, George (Cardiff)Younger, Rt. Hon. K,
    Richards, R.Thomas, Iorwerth (Rhondda, W.)
    Roberts, Albert (Normanton)Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin)


    Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)Thomson, George (Dundee, E)Mr. Pearson and Mr. Arthur Allen.
    Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.)Thornton, E.Mr. Arthur Allen.
    Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)Timmons, J.

    Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 36, leave out "them" and insert "the Authority."

    10.15 p.m.

    I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

    This is purely a drafting Amendment. The word "them" was ambiguous and might have referred either to the advisory committees or to the Authority. It is now quite clear that it is the Authority that is referred to.

    Question put, and agreed to.