asked the Postmaster-General what improvements he is effecting to benefit both the staff and the general public in Acton Sub-district Post Office.

The counter was extended in 1960, but, unfortunately, we cannot improve things further in the present building. For some time we have been trying to obtain suitable accommodation elsewhere for a larger public office, and so to make room for improving the sorting office.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Would she not agree that the bustling, modern community that is Acton and the efficient and hardworking post office team we have there both merit something rather better than the converted poor law institution that the post office now occupies, and would she move with even more urgency to find a new, modern building which would not only be attractive to the public but provide cleaner, lighter, more healthy and convenient surroundings for the staff?

I appreciate how inefficient and unsatisfactory the present building is, and we are looking with great urgency at the possibility of remedying the situation as soon as possible.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will state the names of the distinguished British heroes and literati whose centenaries he proposes to celebrate by the issues of special postage stamps, and the principle he will apply to the selection of an appropriate design for each of them.

We have no such proposals in mind.

While acquitting the hon. Lady for that egregious Answer, does the Postmaster-General realise that in refusing to do what other nations who take a pride in their national achievements do he is guilty of a rather shameful inferiority complex with reference to Britain's achievements? Will he reconsider this matter in the light of Britain's great achievements and do as other nations do?

I am sure the hon. and learned Gentleman will appreciate that this great nation of ours has many proud achievements, and that one of our great difficulties is that we are so rich in achievements which we could commemorate on stamps that we have to be very careful to look critically at each issue of stamps in any one year. I recognise the hon. and learned Gentleman's concern in this matter. He has asked many Questions in this House and I have had to answer them. I remind him that I am a little in the position of the lady with

"Raving winds around her blowing… O'er the past too fondly wandering, On the hopeless future pondering."

asked the Postmaster-General what commemorative postage stamps he proposes to issue in 1962.

We have no proposals at present for the issue of any commemorative postage stamps in 1962.

Why is the hon. Lady working to rule in this matter? Does not she think that there would be a magnificent opportunity of recouping some of the losses which the Post Office has sustained in recent weeks, especially in Scotland, if she were bold and imaginative enough—and generous enough—to reconsider the ban on Robert Burns postage stamps in Scotland? This would add considerably to their value. Even if the Minister's likeness appeared on postage stamps on this occasion we would welcome it.

The House will appreciate that I gave a very full answer before, and I have no intention of going into this matter again.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that answer, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Postmaster-General what proportion of telegraph poles used by his Department are of home-grown timber; and what is the respective purchase price of home-grown and imported poles.

For many years the Post Office has purchased all the home-grown timber suitable for conversion to poles that has been offered at prices comparable with those paid for overseas poles. About 10 per cent. of our total needs in the years 1955–61 has been met in this way. All purchases are by competitive tender, and it would be contrary to established practice to disclose the actual prices.

Would not the hon. Lady agree that 10 per cent. is a very small proportion of the total in view of the large acreage of softwood timber at present ready for thinning? Will she consult the Forestry Commission and other timber merchants' associations to see whether the proportion can be increased, and also consider advertising the price at which the Post Office would buy home-grown poles?

Since before the war we have done everything possible to encourage producers of home-grown timber, and we have given them every assistance in this matter. We are determined to go forward with that, but I remind my hon. Friend that prices are put forward to competitive tender, and in that respect I believe that our people are getting possibly the best bargain and the best opportunities that they can have.

When the hon. Lady talks about comparable prices, can she say whether she is dealing with these poles bought as treated—I mean creosoted—for insertion in the ground, or untreated?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman an answer to that question off the cuff, but we have very generous conditions for producers of home-grown poles.

asked the Postmaster-General what meetings have taken place with representatives of the Post Office Engineering Union on his initiative in the last twelve months for discussion of the dispute which has led to working to rule.

asked the Postmaster-General what meetings have taken place with representatives of the Post Office Engineering Union on his initiative in the last twelve months for discussion of the dispute which has led to working to rule.

I have twice met the union executive at its request during the last year to discuss this dispute—in June and October, 1961. In addition, there have been several meetings between the union and my officials. We are always very ready to meet the union when it seems likely to serve a good purpose.

Does the Minister realise that in the Answer he has just read out he has evaded the key words of the Question, namely, "on his initiative"? He has explained to the House that the meetings that have been held have taken place on the initiative of the union and not himself. Is this not deplorable in view of the fact that he has had such a long time during which he could consider the differences existing between himself and the Post Office workers? Is not this another example of the complacency that has got him into all this trouble?

No, Sir. There has been no complacency on my part. I frequently have informal meetings, at my request, with the leaders of the two main Post Office unions, and when the engineering union has asked to see me to discuss the dispute in which it is now involved I have at once readily agreed to see it.

In view of the statement which the right hon. Gentleman made in the debate last night, can he say when he next hopes to see the union on this matter?

The intervention that I made last night referred to the Union of Post Office Workers and not the union that is the subject of this Question.

asked the Postmaster-General at what date the Post Office Engineering Union submitted to the Post Office the pay claim which led to Civil Service Arbitration Award 408; at what date the union first indicated a desire to proceed to arbitration; at what date the Post Office accepted the principle of arbitration; at what date the terms of reference were formally signed; and at what date the Post Office first indicated to the union that the award of the Tribunal would not be implemented.

The claim was tabled on 8th November, 1960. The union formally expressed to me its wish to proceed to arbitration on 6th July, 1961, though I had suggested it to the union in May last year. The Post Office has at all times accepted the principle of arbitration. Terms of reference were signed on 21st July, 1961. On 11th August, 1961, I told the union that, if the Tribunal's award were to exceed the 5½ per cent. increase which I had already offered, but which had been refused, I should implement the 5½ per cent. as from 1st January, 1961, but that the excess would be withheld until some future date to be decided by the Government.

Does not the Postmaster-General recognise that the reply he has given clearly shows that the Post Office accepted the idea of arbitration and signed the terms of reference before the pay pause came into effect? Is this really the way to conduct negotiations? Is this in accordance with the traditional standards of honour between two negotiating bodies? Surely the Minister has done a great disservice to the Post Office Engineering Union by treating it in this way.

No, Sir. At his meeting with the National Staff Side on 10th August my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made it clear that in all proceedings before the Civil Service Arbitration Tribunal during the period of the pause, whether or not terms of reference had already been agreed, the operative date of any award would not be arbitral. To have implemented that award in full—and I should emphasise that the award was not made by the Tribunal until the middle of October—would clearly have been in conflict with Government policy.

Is the Minister aware that many of us are sorely distressed by the attitude he has taken up in this case? It is quite obvious that the terms of reference were agreed on 21st July, that everything was ready to go on with the case, and that it was not until 25th July that the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his declaration in this House. Surely there must be some honour left in the Post Office. It was honourable throughout the period when was connected with it. Are we becoming less honourable now than we used to be in the old days?

The position is that I made an initial offer to the union of 4½ per cent., which I later increased to an offer of 5½ per cent. Although that offer has been rejected by the union, I nevertheless feel that the Government ought to honour that 5½ per cent. award, as a pre-pause commitment. For the rest, any excess payment would clearly have been inconsistent with Government policy.

asked the Postmaster-General why the joint meeting of the Engineering Factories and Supplies Whitley Council fixed for 23rd January, 1962, did not take place; what subjects would have been discussed at this meeting; when the date of the meeting was fixed; and what date has now been fixed for the postponed meeting.

The meeting was postponed because of heavy pressure on the time of the Director General and senior Post Office officials who would have attended it. The agenda covers a wide range of matters, including many of the most important current developments affecting the Post Office engineering, factories and supplies fields. The date was fixed in October last, and the staff side have been informed that a new date will be suggested as soon as possible.

Is the Postmaster-General aware that this is what would have been one of the regular meetings of the Whitley Council; that it would have been attended not only by representatives of the union in dispute with him, but representatives of other groups not in dispute with him; that the Council would have discussed all kinds of matters besides the issue between him and the one union? Since he has ultimately to meet it to restore good conditions, would not it have been better to keep this going as a non-committal body where he could talk to men involved in the dispute and many who are not?

I appreciate what the hon. Gentleman has said. The pay claim of this union would not have been discussed at a meeting of this sort, where there would have been a discussion on a wide range of topics affecting the business of the Post Office and Post Office staffs. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the sole reason for the postponement was pressure of work on the Department and we shall get together as soon as we can.

Are we to assume that this meeting, which was fixed for this date, was postponed arbitrarily by the Post Office, without agreement with this union? If so, is not that cutting right across the tradition of the whole Whitley working, namely, that these things should be by agreement? Would not it be in the interests of the service as a whole that during a period of great anxiety and difference such as we are now going through, these meetings should be held regularly and that no cause for offence should be given?

No cause for offence was given. Moreover, this was not a meeting between the Post Office and a particular trade union. It was a meeting between the Post Office and the Engineering Whitley Council. As soon as a little of the pressure is lifted from my Department we shall resume these meetings.

May I press the right hon. Gentleman to answer the first part of my supplementary question? Was it postponed by agreement and, if not, why not?

It was postponed for the reason which I have already given to the House on two occasions.

asked the Postmaster-General what was the total number of letters and parcels dealt with by the post office at Southampton during the Christmas period of 1961.

it is estimated that about 6·2 million letters, cards and letter packets were posted at Southampton during the period from 13th December, 1961, to 2nd January, 1962. No reliable estimate can be made of the items delivered, nor of the inland parcel traffic handled. Neither is it possible to give a precise figure for the substantial quantity of foreign mail which was dealt with at Southampton over Christmas.

Is the hon. Lady aware that this stupendous task, which is carried out every year, could never be achieved without the utter good will and co-operation of management and men in this great Department, a co-operation to which tribute is paid annually by the Mayor and by the two Members of Parliament who represent Southampton? Will the hon. Lady represent to her right hon. Friends that this good will is being torn down and jeopardised by the Postmaster-General at the present time and that the right hon. Gentleman should do everything to restore it?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that we do not underestimate the value of good will in the Post Office.

May I associate myself with the remarks of the hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Dr. King) regarding the good will, and may I ask my hon. Friend whether she can give us the figures for the amount of mail from the United States posted in Southampton for redistribution in Europe annually, or for the Christmas period?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman those figures without notice.

asked the Postmaster-General what interim pay reviews were made by agreement between the Post Office and the Union of Post Office Workers in 1957 in advance of pay research surveys.

One such review, covering overseas telegraph operators, telegraphists, telephonists and motor mail drivers was made in May, 1957.

Would not the Postmaster-General agree that there is no objection in principle to interim settlements? Does not he appreciate that in the present situation there may well be grounds for exploring the possibility of bringing the two sides together? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that much work and long negotiations follow the report of the pay research unit survey of which he is speaking? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has already had notice of the delay in relation to pay research units and, in the circumstances, cannot he visualise the possibility of an interim settlement?

I appreciate the point raised by the hon. Gentleman. I think he will agree that the 1957 case is entirely different from the present case. Here we have an instance where the grade affected by this dispute received a 4 per cent. increase in pay on 1st January, 1961. If it be the case that these grades have fallen behind in their pay, information to that effect will be indicated in the reports of the pay research unit which are about to be received by the union and by the Post Office. I have repeatedly said that once that information is available I shall be prepared to negotiate.

asked the Postmaster-General what are the national gross maximum weekly wage rates of cleaners, doorkeepers, liftmen and handymen at wireless stations under his control.

£8 16s. a week. The rates in outer and inner London are greater by 10s. and £1, respectively. This is the same as is paid to non-industrial male cleaners in the Civil Service generally.

Does not the hon. Lady think that those wages are ridiculously low? In view of the fact that the wage pause is preventing an immediate increase in the wages of these people, would she consider, with her right hon. Friend, contacting the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister by radio to make certain that the wages pause and the conditions attached to it are removed so that negotiations and wages can take place?

The hon. Gentleman probably knows that we await the Pay Research Unit surveys. In the last survey in 1957 we found that the cleaners were getting a higher rate than was general in the country. Since then there have been two increases, one in 1958 and one in January, 1961. We are anxious to make certain that they have the just treatment which we all want.

Is not this the core of the whole dispute which is taking place now? How can the hon. Lady and her right hon. Friend face the fact that there are men and women in the Post Office Service receiving amounts in wages which make it difficult for them to exist under present conditions? Is not it about time that something was done and the Postmaster-General accepted his responsibility towards people paid so little, especially having regard to the comparisons with similar grades in industry?

If that situation is such, it will be seen in the Pay Research Unit's reports, which are coming out very shortly.

asked the Postmaster-General, in determining that the increasingly higher rates of pay in manufacturing and other industries should not be a factor affecting the average wages of workers in his Department, what consideration he gave to the effect of this decision on the recruiting and retaining of staff.

The rates of pay outside the Post Office that I ought to take into account for the purpose of fair comparisons will soon become apparent as we have the Civil Service Pay Research Units surveys.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I do not have to confirm with him the dissatisfaction felt about recruitment? Has he seen the speech made by the Assistant Postmaster-General in Leicester last November in which the hon. Lady said that:

"Outside workers were receiving very high wages. The best "—

Order. Verbatim quotation is out of order in a question.

The hon. Lady referred to the good conditions and best possible wages which were a problem for the Post Office in getting recruitment.

I can only reply that during 1961 the number of full-time telephonists increased by over 5,000 and that of full-time postmen by over 3.000. That hardly indicates that the Post Office is being unfair to its staff.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have in my hand thirteen large cities and small towns in this country? [Laughter.] I apologise. I have statistics relating to thirteen large towns and cities where there are problems in regard to recruitment—Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, Leicester—all over the country.

That may well be true, but that is a problem not merely for the Post Office but for every industrial organisation throughout the country.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he intends to invite the Union of Post Office Workers to meet him at an early date in order to explore the possibilities of resolving the present dispute around the conference table.

I am ready to meet the union at any time, provided it is on a basis that offers some acceptable prospect of resolving the dispute, and that I am not expected to negotiate while the work-to-rule continues. Unfortunately, the response I have had from the union to my suggestions so far has not satisfied these conditions.

It seems rather strange that anyone should say in this House that there is anything wrong with working to rules which the Post Office itself has laid down. Apart altogether from that, is it not strange that the Postmaster-General does not take advantage of every opportunity that is presented to him to try to break this deadlock and impasse and try to get together round the table with him men and women who have shown the utmost good will for many years, of which he is fully cognisant? Is it not about time that he himself went some way to meet these people? Is it not the fact that the Union of Post Office Workers, in particular, has already informed the right hon. Gentleman that if he is prepared to have free negotiations and discussions with the union it can lift the working to rule, if that is desired, within 24 hours?

In reply to the first part of that question, I think the hon. Member ought to ask himself what the purpose of the work-to-rule campaign is. In regard to the second part of the question, I assure him and the whole House that I am constantly seeking means by which normal relations can be restored between the union and the Post Office, but so far I have not had a very helpful response from the union. I have not by any means abandoned hope, but what I cannot do is to negotiate while work to rule continues, or on the basis of conditions imposed upon me.

May I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, in the interests of a great service, that he should invite the executive council and officers of the union to meet him to see if they can find ways and means by which they can enter discussions? I have already told him my interpretation of what they have told him. Will he now try to take the initiative for the first time in this matter?

I have on several occasions taken the initiative, but frankly, I do not think that exchanges at Question Time—especially at this point in time—are helpful to the resolution of this dispute.

asked the Postmaster-General what is the average waiting time for a telephone in the Southend-an-Sea telephone area.

The composition of the waiting list of applications held up because of shortage of plant is not constant, and we are sorry, therefore, that a reliable average waiting time cannot be quoted. When plant and equipment are available, service is usually given in about four weeks.

Can my hon. Friend say how that compares with other areas of the country, and can she give any indication whether or not telephones promised a very long time ago are in fact to be delivered reasonably accurately as originally forecast?

The situation is that in the Southend area communications are going ahead very rapidly. Indeed, the business is extending more rapidly than in the rest of the country. We are doing our best to make accurate forecasts when we shall be able to provide services for everybody, and I can assure my hon. Friend that we are keeping this situation very closely under review.

Surely the hon. Lady is not trying to provide telephone services more quickly in Southend than in Croydon?

asked the Postmaster-General if he will give details of the special attention he is giving to those telephone areas in Great Britain and Northern Ireland with waiting lists of more than 2·5 per cent. of the total number of subscribers in the area; and how effective this has been in reducing waiting lists.

In drawing up the telephone development programme allowed by the resources available to us, the capital needs of these areas have been kept very much in mind. As a result, the number of telephone subscribers in these areas has been increased during the five years ended 31st December, 1961, by 23 per cent. in the lowest case to 41 per cent. in the highest, compared with 17 per cent. for the United Kingdom as a whole. In the same period the waiting list in these areas has dropped from 6·3 per cent. to 3·5 per cent., and 218,000 telephones have been provided. Future progress must depend upon demand and the resources available to us.

is the hon. Lady aware that I should like to study her figures closely before commenting on them? Can she tell me how many telephone areas there are in this category, and whether their number has been significantly reduced?

I should like further notice of that question. I am sure that when my hon. Friend has studied the figures he will realise that he is getting a very good share of the progress that we are making.

Can the hon. Lady inform the House to what extent they have succeeded in pressing down demand because of increased telephone tariffs?

Demand is still very good.

In connection with the areas mentioned, can the hon. Lady say how much delay is occurring because of the lack of provision of main cables in reception areas with the result that telephones cannot be linked up because of lack of power?

It is difficult to give a precise answer to that question because, as the hon. Gentleman knows, where development is going forward quickly there is a shortage of main cables, and this holds up the situation considerably.

asked the Postmaster-General how many customers requesting telephones are unable to get installation because of shortage of telephone instruments.

Very few, as telephone instruments are generally in good supply. If my hon. Friend has a particular case in mind and will let us have details, my right hon. Friend will be happy to make inquiry.

Can my hon. Friend say whether the same consideration applies to all types of telephone instrument, including automatic exchanges?

Automatic exchange equipment comes into a different category, and some of it is in short supply. But we are urgently looking into all these matters.

asked the Postmaster-General what measures he proposes to take to correct the defects in telephonic communication reported to his Department by the firm of J. Ambler & Co. of Peterlee, Co. Durham.

Officials have been in touch with the firm in recent weeks, and my right hon. Friend had hoped that the provision of more trunk circuits in November and December would have improved the position. We are very sorry, however, that the firm is still having trouble. My right hon. Friend has arranged for this to be investigated further, and the telephone manager personally is to be visiting the firm this week. My right hon. Friend will write to the right hon. Gentleman as soon as these further inquiries are completed.

Is the hon. Lady aware that I am grateful both to her and to her right hon. Friend for what they have done in this connection? I have been compelled to put this Question on the Order Paper because the firm concerned has informed me that it is still having trouble, which is causing a hold-up in its trade. It is an important firm, and it is very desirable that there should be no impediment to the transactions which it undertakes.

We will stop at nothing to put this situation right. The work which was done yesterday should have considerably eased this firm's position.

asked the Postmaster-General what arrangements can be made to enable a subscriber on an automatic exchange, which depends on a manual exchange for non-local calls, to make an emergency call.

Subscribers on many of these exchanges can dial 999. But there are other exchanges where it is not possible to give this service, and subscribers have to dial O to get an operator who then gives priority to emergency calls. The number of such cases is steadily decreasing as manual exchanges become automatic.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in my constituency there are a number of exchanges which depend on the manual exchange at High Wycombe and that it is by no means a rare experience to have to wait between 10 and 20 minutes for an answer from the operator? In the case of emergency calls this is far too long. Can something be done to help?

We recognise that the service at High Wycombe is not all that we would wish. We are making plans to provide more positions so that the calls may be dealt with more quickly. High Wycombe will become automatic early in 1966 and until then we shall do everything we can.

Did I hear my hon. Friend aright? Did I hear her say that the High Wycombe exchange would become automatic in 1966. Is not this deplorable? Cannot she hasten it?

The hon. Gentleman knows that there are many manual exchanges in the High Wycombe area. It will become fully automatic by 1966. If we can do better, we certainly will do.

Would my hon. Friend bear in mind that this problem is not confined to High Wycombe but exists all over the country, and that at a time when there is a power cut, or something exceptional, ordinary subscribers cannot get through to the exchanges at all because they are blocked with emergency calls? Is she aware that that presents a very real problem?

I am sure my hon. Friend will appreciate that the capital investment in telephones is higher than ever before. We are at present pressing on with plans for a fully automatic telephone system in this country.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that the amount of time given to advertisements between 7.30 p.m. and 10.25 p.m. on Sunday, 12th November, 1961, in the Independent Television Authority programme devoted to the Royal Variety Show was so great as to detract from the value of the programme; and, in view of this, if he will consult the Independent Television Authority under Section 4 of the Television Act, 1954, with a view to making amendments to Schedule 2 of the Act, limiting the amount of advertisements that is permissible on Sunday evenings.

Under the Television Act it is the duty of the I.T.A. to see that the amount of time given to advertising is not such as to detract from the value of the programmes as a medium of entertainment, instruction and information. The Authority tells me that the amount of time given to advertising during the television programme in question did not exceed the maximum allowed by them. The answer to the second part of the Question is, "No, Sir".

Is the Postmaster-General aware that there were twenty-one minutes advertising in this programme, which must have brought in about £150,000, and that although the artistes gave their services free for this so-called charity show only about £20,000 was handed over? Does not he think it wrong in principle for vast profits to be made by private interests out of charities of this kind?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman is quite accurate. My information is that there were eighteen minutes of advertising during the course of this programme, and that in all respects the advertising was within the Authority's rules. For example, there were six minutes of advertising in the two hours 8 o'clock to 9 o'clock and 9 o'clock to 10 o'clock. This is a minute less than the maximum allowed of seven minutes per hour. In regard to the second part of the question, my information is that in addition to the heavy production costs which were incurred in putting on this show, the programme company gave £12,000 to the Variety Artistes' Benevolent Fund, and that all in all this was less profitable as a Sunday evening show than is normally the case.

While the sponsoring company, A.T.V., may not have made anything out of it, is he aware that the other network companies must have made at least £60,000 to £70,000? Should not this excessive profit also be handed over to the charity?

I do not think that that question arises out of the Question on the Order Paper.

Would not it be in the interests of programme companies to try to improve their image a little by being less mercenary?

That may be true, and it may well be that Sir Harry Pilkington's Committee will have something to say about that.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will have consultations with the Independent Television Authority with a view to making regulations amending Schedule 2 of the Television Act, 1954, imposing restrictions on the advertising of tobacco and cigarettes.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will consult the Independent Television Authority with a view to amending the rules as to advertisements in order to restrict tobacco advertising in commercial television programmes.

The answer is, "No", Sir.

But since a connection between cigarettes and lung cancer has now been proved, would not the Minister consider two alternatives, either extending the present ban on such advertisements during children's hours, until 9 o'clock, even though children may still be watching, or, preferably, banning these advertisements altogether on television, particularly since they are deliberately being aimed at young people, with all kinds of romantic associations?

I well understand the point of the hon. Gentleman's question, but I think it is fair to say that most people in this country are well aware of the risks involved in heavy smoking. The decision whether to smoke is really a matter of personal choice. Perhaps I might add that the I.T.A. bans the advertising of cigarettes and tobacco during children's programmes, but I think that it would be a rather extraordinary step to go further and ban such advertising during normal peak hours. If one were to do that on television, why not through other media of advertising?

Is the Postmaster-General aware that the distillers, by praiseworthy arrangement, do not advertise their wares on commercial television, and that that is done without any apparent detriment to their prosperity? Why cannot the Postmaster-General seek to bring about a similar arrangement on the part of cigarette manufacturers? Surely if the Ministry of Health is trying to encourage local authorities to advertise the dangers of excessive cigarette smoking, we ought to co-operate with it to that extent?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is "Yes". As regards the second, I do not think that at any time my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health has represented that this sort of advertising should be banned on television.

Is the Minister aware that he has left us in some confusion following the remarks in the House of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, who on a number of occasions has said that he is looking into the possibility of banning tobacco advertising on television? Will the Postmaster-General consult his hon. Friend and came to a more satisfactory conclusion?

I have read in full what my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade said. He did not commit me or the Government to imposing a ban of this kind.

Will the right hon. Gentleman try to come half-way to meet us? I think the House will agree that it is the responsibility of the Government and others to see what they can do to minimise the effect of smoking on young people. Cannot he do something between the hours of five and seven o'clock when it is not unreasonable for some of these young people to be watching television? Will he consider that aspect of it?

I would be willing to look at this aspect of it. I realise that strong views are held on this subject, but at the moment I am not convinced that the case for complete prohibition has been made out.

asked the Postmaster-General what consultations he has had with the Independent Television Authority under Section 4 (4) of the Television Act, 1954, with a view to reducing the maximum amount of advertising permitted in any hour from seven minutes to six or less.

None, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that a recent opinion survey has confirmed—if confirmation was necessary—that the great majority of viewers are sick to death of these incessant commercials? Is he aware that for several years the Government and the Authority imposed no maximum at all on the programme companies at peak hours? The present maximum of seven minutes is far too much. Will the Minister now cease sheltering behind the Pilkington Committee and assert himself on behalf of the viewers and the intentions of the Act and not on behalf of the commercial interests involved?

I am not sheltering behind the Pilkington Committee. Indeed, I hope shortly to march forward with it. Under an I.T.A. rule there is a limit of six minutes spot advertising, averaged over the day, and the maximum amount in any hour has been progressively brought down from eight minutes in 1959 to seven and a half minutes in September, 1960, and seven minutes in December, 1960. That is reasonable, although there must clearly be some flexibility according to the nature and type of programme.

Is the Minister in favour of all this rubbish which is advertised on television programmes? Surely, as a civilised person, he can answer "Yes" or "No".

That is not a matter for me.