asked the Postmaster-General what is the average time between the posting of a letter in the Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames and its delivery in Westminster; and how this figure compares with that in 1939.

Except on Saturdays, letters for Westminster posted in time for the first collection at Kingston-upon-Thames should be delivered on the same day. Later postings should connect with the first delivery on the next working day. In 1939 one could post about five hours later than now for delivery on the same day.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for those figures, may I ask him whether he can say on what size of statistical specimen they were based?

I am very sorry but I cannot give that information to the hon. Gentleman. I will obtain it and send it to him.

asked the Postmaster-General what is the cost so far of the advertising campaign, "Someone somewhere would like a letter from you."

The campaign ran from May, 1963, to February, 1965, at a total cost of about £467,000.

That is satisfactory because it is not a very high figure, but is the Postmaster-General aware that there is general public feeling that it is outrageous that the Post Office should recently have increased its charges by between 30 and 50 per cent. to the general public when they themselves are being called upon—as we heard yesterday, it may be enforced—to endure a prices and wages freeze? What has the Postmaster-General to say to justify this?

The supplementary question has nothing whatever to do with the Question. The campaign was started by the Conservative Government and ran for 18 months under them, and it has run for four months under the present Government.

Despite the increased costs, does the advertisement warn the public that they will be lucky if their letters are delivered first post next morning and that some of them may take two days?

More than 92 per cent. of the 35 million letters posted each day are delivered next morning.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware of dissatisfaction in the motor industry with the free advertisement given to the British Motor Corporation and Jaguar company by the issue of the postage stamp showing three Mini cars and an E-type Jaguar; and what steps he proposes to avoid unfair discrimination of this kind in future.

I am not aware of any general dissatisfaction with the design of this stamp, although I have received a number of representations from the agents of one particular manufacturer. It is difficult to avoid depicting products of a particular firm when illustrating such subjects as technology, but I will bear the hon. and learned Gentleman's views in mind in connection with future issues.

But surely the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that it is not a question of design that is at issue here but a question of the use of Her Majesty's postage to advertise certain products. On what basis were these cars chosen and why, at any rate in the case of the second car, was not a vehicle which had received the Queen's Award for Industry chosen instead? Surely the right hon. Gentleman appreciates that it is invidious to use the post for advertising in this way?

What we were trying to do was to advertise the excellence of British technology. Motor car manufacture and export performance is a very important element in that. The alternative would have been an identikit motor car and I do not think that anyone would have cared for that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman put the Severn Bridge on one of his stamps?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. There is a very good case for an issue on contemporary bridges—including not only the Severn but the Forth and the Tay and others. One of the things for which this generation will be remembered is the excellent bridges we are building.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will use the purchasing power of the General Post Office to promote more co-operation between the computer and telephone equipment industries.

I am reviewing the procurement policy of the Post Office and will certainly bear in mind my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Postmaster-General why the Post Office has ordered air compressors fitted with Japanese engines; and whether he will in future give preference to British equipment.

The purchase of these compressors followed competitive tendering by British firms all of which, of their accord, proposed to incorporate foreign engines. My right hon. Friend cannot reject all British equipment that includes foreign components.

Is this not rather a lame excuse? Would the hon. Gentleman look again at the procurement arrangements and ensure that British equipment and engines are used whenever possible rather than accept lamely the cheapest goods on the world market?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman is not aware that there is no embargo on buying foreign goods and that when foreign components are included in goods supplied by British firms we do not usually find out. But in this case, where the working of the compressor depends on the efficiency of the engine, we had to be told what engine the firm intended to use and the fact that the engine is foreign was thus incidentally disclosed.

asked the Postmaster-General what postal and parcel charges have been increased since 20th July, 1966.

asked the Postmaster-General why he raised the cost of letter cards to Cape Town from 6d. to 9d., an increase of 50 per cent., during the credit squeeze; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Postmaster-General why he has increased the price of air mail letters and parcels post in view of the price freeze.

The increased charges are listed in columns 659 to 666 of the OFFICIAL REPORT for 20th July. As announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on that day they are an integral part of the measures necessary to remedy the economic situation. I do not, therefore, propose to suspend them.

May I congratulate the Postmaster-General on one of the slowest deliveries since 20th July, particularly as the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs has stated that it is unpatriotic to put up prices? In addition, is it not despicable that closing time has been put forward to 5.30, so that prices have gone up and services have gone down? Is not this disrespect to the House, as the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries is looking into the whole business?

I cannot agree that it is despicable that Post Office workers should have an extra half-hour of leisure a day. [HON. MEMBERS: "Not very bright at this time."] It may not be very bright, but Post Office workers are now getting an extra half-hour's leisure because post offices are closing at 5.30 instead of 6, which I think is quite reasonable. Increased charges were applied to only the parts of the Post Office which were not paying, and some charges were reduced on 20th July.

Will the Postmaster-General explain how the raising of postal charges, with all the consequent costs to industry, is regarded as a sound budgetary measure, but the raising of laundry charges, with less serious consequences, brings into action the full force of Part IV?

Because if the charges were not raised in this way, the taxpayer would have to pay the cost on his taxes, which is just the same.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that despite the increased charges a great deal of first-class mail is not delivered first post the next morning and that parcel deliveries are worse than ever?

I agree that parcel deliveries are not quite as good as letter deliveries, but 92 per cent. of letters are delivered first post the next morning.

asked the Postmaster-General why, after 15 years, he is now asking Messrs. Hooker of Brightlingsea to put fibreboard or wood containers round their cans, and so add to their costs of production.

Recent cases of damage to cans of die lubricant posted by Messrs. Hooker led us to recommend additional packing, both in the firm's interest and also to protect other parcels from soiling. Unless they either use this packing or satisfactorily modify the sealing of the cans we cannot agree to compensation in the event of damage.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this firm has not in any way altered its standards and believes that the trouble is the fault of the Post Office? Will he look into this again, because he is suggesting unnecessary costs of production for this firm which sends a lot of its cans for export?

That may be so with this firm, but we know from experience that the sealing of the special cap in the lid is inadequate. We have had these matters investigated, and when a can is travelling in a bag with other parcels, some of them weighing up to 22 pounds, this cap is liable to be sprung. I should like to invite the hon. Gentleman to go into one of our offices to see how these parcels are handled and what happens to bad packages which have to be handled by our people.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he has now resumed pay negotiations with organisations representing Post Office staff.

The detailed application of the Prices and Incomes Standstill to all outstanding reviews of Civil Service pay is currently being considered by the Government and until the general issues of principle have been resolved negotiations cannot usefully proceed beyond the establishment of relevant facts. When they can, we will get ahead as quickly as possible.

Is not the claim of the Post Office engineers in particular based on the report of the pay research unit issued as long ago as November, 1965? Was not salary revision long overdue before the pay freeze came into operation? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that these negotiations will proceed and that new scales will come into operation early next year?

I have recently discussed this matter with the Executive Committee of the Society of Post Office Engineers and agreed that we conduct negotiations on establishing the facts up to the point where cash is involved, and I have also given an assurance that once the Government have decided the criteria for the next move forward, we will then be prepared to start talking about the actual cash involved in the new award.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take up with the Treasury the matter of some of these telephone operators, because they feel that they have been badly treated and that an award was given some time ago which in fact is not now being paid?

That is a different question, but the hon. and learned Gentleman and the telephone workers may be assured that their point of view is put by me to the Treasury all the time.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps he is taking to restore confidence among business men in the provincial cities that their letters will be delivered in London the following day.

Nearly all letters—in fact, over 95 per cent.—for London posted in provincial cities by early evening are delivered the next weekday. There is very little complaint about the quality of this service.

Is the Postmaster-General aware that some provincial firms which have a large number of documents to send to London have had to resort to using their own couriers? Now that there is competition with public corporations in the sphere of television and airlines, would the right hon. Gentleman agree that the new Post Office Board should have similar competition in the future?

The number of complaints that we get is between three and four per million letters. If one takes the traffic between provincial towns and London, over 95 per cent. of it is delivered by the next morning's first post.

asked the Postmaster-General how many streets in Liverpool get their first post later now than they did in 1964.

About 1,200, but 2,500 streets get their first post earlier.

Is the Assistant Postmaster-General aware that some business men in Liverpool have had to change their hours of work because of postal delay? Is he further aware that I have in my hand four first-class mail letters, posted from different parts of the country to a comparatively small firm in Liverpool on Thursday, none of which arrived the following day? Can he take up with British Railways the question of the frequent late arrival of the London to Liverpool mail train?

We have taken note of the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. I have no doubt that we will be able to discuss this with British Railways. We are not responsible for British Railways; we are responsible for the postal service. I do not know if the hon. Gentleman was in the House on 2nd August, 1965, when my right hon. Friend the then Postmaster-General informed the House that the scheduled finishing time of the first delivery in Liverpool, as in other towns—not only in Liverpool—was being extended by 15 minutes, as part of the effort to reduce costs and improve labour utilisation.

Has not the Assistant Postmaster-General made a most extraordinary statement in saying that he feels no responsibility for the British Railways mail train? Is it not his business, however the letters are carried, whether by stagecoach, aeroplane or rail, to see that they get there on time?

We have the Royal Mail train but we are not responsible for running British Railways and the hon. Gentleman should realise that.

asked the Postmaster-General why he decided to appoint Mr. J. E. Wall of Electrical and Musical Industries as deputy-chairman of the Post Office Board at a salary of £12,500 per annum whereas the Postmaster-General as Chairman of the Board receives a salary of £8,500 per annum, which is £4,000 less; and whether he is satisfied that Mr. Wall's appointment will lead to better postal services.

Because £12,500 is paid to a number of heads of nationalised industries, whereas mine is a Ministerial salary. There is nothing new about this situation. The salary of the Director-General of the Post Office has exceeded that of the Postmaster-General since 1956, apart from a few months in 1965.

Does this appointment mean that the tightly-knit bureaucracy in the Post Office is at long last giving way to inspired leadership from private enterprise?

Mr. Wall has built up a reputation, both in the Civil Service and in industry, as an inspired and progressive leader. I am delighted to bring him into the Post Office. As I said when I made the initial announcement about the change of status, I hope that there will be a great deal of cross-fertilisation.

While in no way wishing to cast any reflection upon Mr. Wall in relation to this appointment, may I ask whether or not the Postmaster-General would agree that the time has now come to make appointments in the public sector of industry from the many able and willing people already working there? Would he not agree that he needs to make a career for the talent in the public service, and that this sort of appointment is most unfortunate?

I do not agree for one moment that this is a most unfortunate appointment; I cannot imagine a better one. Mr. Wall has unequalled experience, (a) of the Civil Service, (b) of the electronics industry and (c) of industry generally. He is tailor-made for this job.

Will the Postmaster-General accept that we acknowledge the complete integrity of Mr. Wall but, as a matter of principle, is it right that a Government Department should accept monetary favours from its suppliers? Will the Postmaster-General confirm that E.M.I. is paying Mr. Wall for services, not to E.M.I. but to the Post Office? Would it not be far fairer to Mr. Wall if his whole salary was shouldered by the Post Office, for which he will work, and not given in considerable part by E.M.I., which in its normal course of business must be seeking orders from his Department?

Mr. Wall is certainly having his salary made up by his firm. He is seconded for two years. If we want this kind of cross-fertilisation—if we want people to come from industry to service in the Civil Service or any corporation for a period—then we have to put up with this kind of thing, unless the community is prepared to pay the sort of salaries in the public service as are paid in industry.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is any contractual relationship, or supplying relationship, between E.M.I. and the Post Office?

Yes, there is. It is not a very big one but there is such a relationship. I am quite sure, and I give my word to the House, that E.M.I. will receive no advantage from this. The problem will be to ensure that E.M.I. does not suffer as a result.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps he proposes to allow reception of machine-franked mail after normal Post Office hours.

It is in the interests of both the Post Office and its customers that mail should be posted as early in the day as possible. However, where franking machine users need to hand in their mail after the counter is closed, head postmasters have been instructed to do their best to meet them. The actual arrangements will depend on local circumstances. If my hon. Friend has any particular case in mind and will let me have details, I shall be glad to look into it.

While I am delighted to hear that head postmasters have been given instructions to help where possible, may I ask whether my hon. Friend can say precisely what form this help takes? Will he give an assurance that he will look into the position at King's Lynn and make sure that all possible help is being given to firms there?

Apart from handing franked mail over the counter, customers can put it in special envelopes, and post them in specified boxes. The amount that can be posted in this way is limited. People are supposed to use this facility for urgent matter only, and for no more items than can be enclosed in one of the special envelopes.

Is the Assistant Postmaster-General aware that I have an example when early mail has failed to arrive the following day, whereas late mail has? Is not this almost African in its standard?

I do not dispute this but this sort of thing can happen. Like other hon. Gentlemen in this House, the hon. Gentleman is associated with certain business interests and just as I would say that in his field of operations he is not 100 per cent. perfect so we do not claim to be 100 per cent. perfect.

Does what the Assistant Postmaster-General has said apply to envelopes containing football pools?

asked the Postmaster-General why an order has recently been issued preventing the transfer of Post Office workers to other branches of the Civil Service when jobs are offered to them.

I know of no such order, but the Conservative Government decided that there should normally be no movement permitted between the Post Office grade of postal and telegraph officer and the general service grade of clerical officer, whether on transfer or by competition.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this order is apparently being implemented very strongly at the moment? Since he is very anxious to take every opportunity to bring private people into Post Office employment, does not he think that he should make the same opportunity available to people within the Post Office to go into private industry or another department within the Civil Service and to allow them to transfer their pension in the interests of the mobility of labour? At present they are not allowed to take their pension rights with them. This seems to be unfair.

I agree that the problem of the transferability of pension rights has to be faced in the very near future. Job transfer is permitted in other grades in the Post Office. Only in this grade is it not permitted. It is because there is a shortage here. When we train people for this grade, we feel that we should be able to retain them.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will give details of the improvements in postal services which have taken place during 1966.

The House will not wish me to itemise our constant efforts towards improvements; but our information based on continuous sampling processes using modern sampling techniques shows that some 92 per cent. of fully paid inland letters are now delivered by the next working day after posting, compared with 90 per cent. mentioned in our Report and Accounts for last year.

How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile his statement last Wednesday that there has been a slight improvement in postal services during 1966 with the increased public clamour to the contrary and the abundant evidence that postal services are worse than they have ever been since the introduction of the penny post in 1840?

The only increase in public clamour is from the Opposition. The number of complaints which we receive has dropped considerably. I repeat that there has been a 2 per cent. improvement in first post deliveries this year.

Would my right hon. Friend undertake to put in the Library a list of all the British firms which carry out 92 per cent. of their promised deliveries on time? Would he be good enough to take it from me that he would not need many sheets of paper for the purpose?

I do not know whether we can put it in the Library, but I can tell my hon. Friend that over 9,000 contracts in the Post Office are now behind delivery date.

Is the Postmaster-General aware that in his worthy efforts to defend his Department he is beginning to sound rather self-satisfied? Would he tell the House to what extent he has gone into the report of the Sun newspaper published on—[HON. MEMBERS: "That is the next Question."] No—in which it was reported that 200 million letters per annum are lost or delayed in post? May we have the results of his investigations into that report?

On a point of order.

I take it that the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that the hon. Member for Howden (Mr. Bryan) is anticipating Question No. 34. I understood from the hon. Member's remarks that he was referring to some other statement in the Sun newspaper.

May I complete the question?

Briefly, please.

Perhaps the Postmaster-General would also comment on the report that 4,750 letters each week are delayed on the way to Newmarket?

Both parts of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question are deductions drawn from completely inaccurate premises, and therefore they are inaccurate.

asked the Postmaster-General what was the outcome of the investigation initiated in his Department into the delay occasioned to eight letters posted by the San newspaper on 5th–6th October last.

My investigation, which has been carried out personally and with great care, has proved that the article in the Sun newspaper of 10th October was misleading and inaccurate. The inquiry by the Sun was conducted in an incompetent way. Half of the 600 test letters posted on the 4th October were incorrectly addressed—one-third of them omitted the most vital part of the address namely the post town. Nevertheless, the Post Office delivered a very large proportion of the items to time and the claim that eight are still missing is quite false. Though on 20th October the Sun was still stating that eight missing letters had not yet reached their destinations, on 13th October the writer of the article, who was invited to the Post Office, handed to the Post Office many of the 600 test letters, included in which were six of the alleged missing envelopes. From slips inside these items it appears that four of them certainly were delivered not later than 6th October and it is probable the other two were also delivered on that day.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps his Department is taking to assist people living in rural areas to make contact with their local social services.

I am introducing an experimental scheme on 7th November, in conjunction with the National Citizens' Advice Bureaux Council, under which people who want help from their local bureau will be able to make an initial approach by using reply-paid forms, obtainable on request from rural post offices and rural postmen. The experiment will be carried out in the rural areas around Bedford, Ulverston and The Wrekin.

In thanking my right hon. Friend for his reply and for that very welcome news, may I ask whether he has at the same time considered anything of a similar nature in the telephone service?

Yes. We are, of course, at present carrying out an experiment in Manchester among a number of old people living alone. We are evaluating the results of this experiment, in which the instrument is plugged in to the electricity main. This is proving of great assistance to old people living alone and I hope that if it is successful, we may be able to use it in other areas.

asked the Postmaster-General what provision there is under the existing regulations for the payment of compensation to those whose telephone service is interrupted for any reason whatsoever; and what proposals he has for varying those regulations.

Under existing Regulations, which I do not propose to change, the Post Office is not liable for compensation in respect of interruption of telephone service.

Does not the Minister think that he might look at the problem again since the number of breakdowns and interruptions is increasing steadily, as is the number of shared lines? This is surely a reflection on the efficiency of the service as a whole, and if the right hon. Gentleman cannot provide the service, should he not think of compensating people who are affected by failure?

I do not accept that we do not provide a service. We provide a first-rate service. There is no evidence that the number of breakdowns is increasing. In certain circumstances we make ex gratia payments, and in certain circumstances we give a rebate of the rental, but to do it whenever there is a breakdown would be impossible because the charge is about Is. a day.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps he is taking to improve the telephone services to and from Fauldhouse, West Lothian.

I am sorry that service to and from Fauldhouse suffers from congestion. This will be relieved by a new cable which should be ready in a few weeks.

Why was not the cable completed sooner? Could not temporary relief have been given to the excellent staff at Bathgate? Are there any other matters in hand?

The cable was not completed sooner because it was delayed by road works. Temporary relief would have been difficult and costly. It was better to concentrate on getting the new permanent cable into service.

asked the Postmaster-General what is the percentage rate of failure of long-distance telephone calls via subscriber trunk dialling and through manual exchanges, respectively; and what was the rate of failure via manual exchanges before the introduction of subscriber trunk dialling.

A total of 65 per cent. of subscriber trunk dialled calls gets through first time. Of the remainder, 5 per cent. fail, owing to defective functioning of Post Office plant, and the balance of 30 per cent. fail because the caller makes dialling errors, receives engaged tone or gets no reply from the number he is calling.

The House will require far more information than the right hon. Gentleman has given. Will he please look at this matter most carefully because the general impression that the public have is that the service is pretty poor?

This is not the general impression. The service is first-rate. It is becoming fashionable to throw bricks at the Post Office. So long as I am Postmaster-General I will accept valid criticism, but this is not valid criticism.

Will the Postmaster-General tell us whether his figures tally with the figures of the Consumer Association Magazine "Which?" in which it says that one in ten of all calls is not successful?

I cannot recall the figures at the moment so I cannot discuss them with the hon. Gentleman, but the overall picture of the "Which?" investigation was quite favourable to the telephone service.

asked the Postmaster-General what evidence he has of inefficiency in the new telephone equipment now being installed throughout the country to provide easier dialling facilities.

I am not aware of any widespread inefficiency in new telephone equipment, and if the hon. Gentleman has any particular case of failure in mind I will gladly look into it.

In thanking the hon. Gentleman for his reply, may I say that there is certainly evidence in my part of the world, where on many exchanges it is necessary to dial a large number of letters or figures, that the telephone starts to give the engaged signal long before one completes the required code?

My information concerning the hon. Member's constituency is that we have not had any complaints regarding telephone facilities in operation. In view, however, of the hon. Member's supplementary question regarding his constituency, we will have another look at the matter.

asked the Postmaster-General when he expects to be able to make a statement on the Government's policy towards local sound broadcasting financed by advertising.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, as a corollary to his proposed action against the pirate radio stations, he will allocate medium wave channels for legitimate local broadcasting on a commercial basis.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will seek power to authorise commercial local sound broadcasting.

asked the Postmaster-General what plans he has to provide alternative broadcasting services, especially for fringe areas, now that he intends to restrict certain local broadcasting facilities.

asked the Postmaster-General what is the proposed date of publication of the White Paper on Broadcasting; and if he will make a statement.

I would ask the hon. Gentlemen to await the White Paper on Broadcasting, which will be issued very shortly.

Since the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor said on 3rd March that he expected to reveal the Government's intentions shortly after the General Election, does not the Postmaster-General think that it is now very overdue?

I agree that it is taking a very long time but, as I have said time and again, we in this country have been bequeathed a broadcasting system which is extremely difficult to work. Half of it is publicly owned and the other half privately owned. It is from this dichotomy, as I have said before, that nearly all our troubles come, but the White Paper will be issued very shortly.

Why is the right hon. Gentleman so leery or so scared to go for legitimate local broadcasting stations? The United States, Canada and Australia have these local stations, so why not here?

If the hon. Gentleman had listened to what I said last week he would have heard me say that I am much in favour of local broadcasting. I hope that he will await the White Paper.

Since we have a mixed economy, why cannot we have mixed broadcasting? There are several of these radio stations off my constituency and they provide excellent broadcasting. Can the right hon. Gentleman assure my constituents that they will be replaced by some good local radio stations?

We shall put something in their place.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the White Paper will be published before the Second Reading of the Bill dealing with pirate stations and that we shall have time to debate the White Paper before the Second Reading of the Bill?

I can give no such assurance. I have pointed out many times that there is no connection between the two. The pirate broadcasting stations are illegal, outside the law and must be closed down.

While we all appreciate the need to end this pirate broadcasting, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman to bear in mind the great popularity of these programmes and the great demand for them and do his best to ensure that the demand is met?

Yes, Sir. I do realise it and I understand that point of view. But the House should have no illusions. No legal radio station could do what the pirate stations are doing. The pirate stations ignore copyright laws and play records all day long. No local radio station under the law could do that.

Local broadcasting could serve a useful purpose, but will my right hon. Friend make clear that the Government have no intention of allowing private companies or individuals to run local sound broadcasting in this country?

I replied to my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Mr. O'Malley) on this in July. We will preserve the public service aspect of broadcasting in our proposals but I am afraid that he must await the White Paper for details.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman's reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Surbiton (Mr. Fisher) admit that there is a close bearing between the anti-pirate Bill and the White Paper? Is it not the case that we are waiting for the Second Reading because the right hon. Gentleman wishes to put before the public the alternatives he has in mind?

There is no connection whatever. I am aware of the ambivalence of the hon. Gentleman on the question of broadcasting. This illustrates the inherent lawlessness of the Conservative philosophy. The hon. Gentleman would not only throw overboard the rule of law in this case but every other rule of law as well if he could make a profit by doing so.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the British Broadcasting Corporation has now found a suitable site for a low-power relay station to improve the reception of B.B.C.1 in the Seaford, Newhaven, and Peacehaven areas; how long he estimates it will be before the site has been acquired; and when the station is likely to be operating.

I understand from the B.B.C. that a suitable site has been found and that negotiations for its acquisition are proceeding. The B.B.C. hopes to gain access to the site within six months and to complete the station in 1968.

While that is at least fairly good news, does not the hon. Gentleman agree that it amounts to a breach of contract to demand a fat licence fee in an area where the reception of B.B.C.2 is like looking at a Channel fog? Will the hon. Gentleman get the B.B.C. to provide a new relay station or waive the fee until that happens?

I thought that the hon. and gallant Gentleman would have been delighted with my reply. Such conditions, I remind him, do not merely operate in his constituency or even in his particular area.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will license young amateurs for sound broadcasting and allocate wavelengths and limited time through registered non-profit-making clubs for this activity.

No, Sir. In this country, broadcasting has always been entrusted to public corporations, and not to private individuals. Of course, qualified radio amateurs may be licensed to transmit on special wavelengths for the sole purpose of communicating with one another and not to broadcast generally.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there have been prosecutions of young people in Birmingham and other places recently? In these days of delinquency and crime, would he not try to encourage this sort of activity?

I have a great deal of sympathy with the feeling behind the hon. Gentleman's question. Some schoolboys in his constituency were, rightly, prosecuted and fined for doing this while rich Americans get away with it and make great profits out of it. I remind him that the Conservative Party Conference this year voted to allow them to continue to do so.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps he will take to improve the reception and stop the interference of British Broadcasting Corporation programmes in the Crediton, Newton St. Cyres area of Devon.

The B.B.C. tells me that, in these areas, its services are not particularly liable to interference and that reception of them should be generally satisfactory. If, however, the hon. Gentleman would let me have details of the interference to which he refers, I will gladly have it investigated.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that in 1966 it is about time that every area was able to receive adequate coverage of B.B.C. programmes? Will he bear in mind that many viewers, particularly in bad areas, would rather be able to see B.B.C. programmes than, say, a programme via Early Bird from Australia?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman's sentiments, but I am given to understand that the B.B.C. is doing everything it possibly can in this regard.

asked the Postmaster-General what representations he has had from Radio Scotland; and if he will make a statement.

A company describing themselves as the selling agents for Radio Scotland have recently written to me seeking authority for Radio Scotland to establish a commercial sound broadcasting station, or a chain of stations, on land. The company have been advised to await a statement of Government policy on sound broadcasting.

As this station, which has a very wide listening public in Scotland, has shown its preparedness to co-operate in any scheme of Government licensing and any payment of fees, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that stations like Radio Scotland are prepared to operate legally if given a chance?

I imagine, as Sir A. P. Herbert pointed out in The Times yesterday, that every burglar, too, would like legalising.

Am I correct in assuming that Radio Scotland is operating within territorial waters? If that is the case and it is infringing the law, why has no prosecution taken place?

This is rather a difficult one.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman catch it?

It is a hulk. There are no engines in it, but I understand that it is towed about from one place to another, sometimes in territorial waters and sometimes not. Whether there should be a prosecution is a matter not for me, but for the Procurator-Fiscal.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind when dealing with this obviously difficult problem that, quite apart from whether Radio Scotland has a higher quality of music than the B.B.C., there are many people in my constituency and, I am sure, in many others whose only listening is to Radio Scotland or Radio Caroline, because B.B.C. programmes are not audible in their areas? This is an important consideration and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will keep it in mind.

I think that a lot of people listen to this station—taking its own figure, about one-third of the population—but the rest of us are about two-thirds.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps his is taking to enable people in the Chagford area of Devon to receive independent television programmes.

The extension of the coverage attained by its services is primarily the responsibility of the Independent Television Authority. It has told me that in deciding on any further extension, it will take into account the claims of Chagford along with those of other localities.

Can the Postmaster-General tell me what would be the cost of a small relay or booster station in this area, which would overcome the problem? Will he also bear in mind that there are still too many pockets in the South-West where I.T.A. programmes cannot be received?

I could not say what the cost would be, but I have discussed this matter with Lord Hill and the Authority has promised to look into it.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will state the number of occasions reported to him on which broadcasting from pirate radio stations has interfered with radio communications between ships at sea.

If I am correct in assuming that my hon. Friend refers to communications between ships at sea and the shore, 49; the most recent being a letter which I have received today from the Chief Inspector of Lifeboats reporting interference to the Scarborough lifeboat on 2nd October. I have it here.

Does not the Postmaster-General agree that those 49 instances are instances of absolutely the utmost of public irresponsibility, and does he not also agree that they should be brought to the attention of the London offices of the pirate radio stations in order that the public at large may know what their attitude is, if they have one, to this question?

I agree with my hon. Friend. Of course, it is true that the stations, as I have said before, operate outside the law. The figure is 49, but they have long since stopped reporting individual cases, so that the actual instances are much more than that.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say in what period those 49 instances occurred?

Pirate radio ships started up with Radio Caroline in March, 1964, when the Conservative Government were in office, and that was when action should have been taken, of course.

Bearing in mind the way in which Australia has dealt with her first pirate radio station, will my right hon. Friend consult with his hon. Friend the Minister of Defence for the Royal Navy with a view to some combined operation?

We have considered many things, of course, but our aim has been to avoid violence and to do this in accordance with the Council of Europe convention.

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Would it not be to the convenience of the House if we were to discuss with new Clause 1 the Schedule which appears on page 3189 of the Notice Paper, as the Clause intends to introduce that Schedule?

That makes sense to me if the House agrees.

With respect, Mr. Speaker, I do not think that that would meet with the convenience of the House. These new Clauses are merely paving the way for new Schedules which are replacing old Schedules. I am certain that it would meet the convenience of the House better if we kept to our regular procedure and discussed the Schedules when we came to them. I think that it is far better to discuss first of all the provisions of the Bill and then come to the Schedules.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think that the Leader of the House let the cat out of the bag a few days ago when he said that we usually take a certain time discussing the early pages of the Notice Paper and then romp through the latter pages. I am anxious that these Schedules should not be dealt with in the early hours of Friday morning. They are something of a new Bill. This Bill went into Committee as one Bill. It has come out as two Bills.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I desire to support my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby (Mr. Graham Page). I think that the right hon. Gentleman is making the confusion with which we are becoming all too accustomed. He is identifying his own convenience with that of the House, and I do not think that the two are identifiable at all. I feel very much the same as my hon. Friend. If we are deprived now of an opportunity of discussing this new Schedule so lately introduced to us, we shall be nullifying the purposes of debate. I cannot help feeling that the right hon. Gentleman will not add to his reputation, because he will be deceiving the House of Commons.