A Spectator's Notebook
MY OPINION OF the Independent Television Authority, never very high, has fallen further since reading its recent notice to the press. It announces its 'dismay' over the Government's decision not to make available the £750,000 'provided in the Television Act for the support of balancing programmes.' This is simply untrue: the money was not voted for that purpose. The statutory duty of the ITA was to provide satisfactorily balanced programmes; then, if. the Treasury was satisfied, it could provide a subsidy out of the £750,000 reserve fund. But the ITA has failed in its statutory duty to keep the balance. This is not simply a personal opinion : the ITA admits in its press notice that its transmissions 'do not contain a sufficient number of programmes of information and discussion or of plays and performances of lasting value.' They argue that this unbalance 'was clearly foreseen during the debates on the Tele- vision Bill.' True: but it was foreseen only by opposition speakers. In its first leader on Monday The Times quoted ten extracts from Government spokesmen during the parliamen- tary debates on the Television Bill; and as soon as readers got over their astonishment at a Times first leader consisting entirely of comic extracts from a four-year-old Hansard, they must have been impressed by the Government's then deter- mination not to allow commercial television _to drift into the marsh where, by the ITA's own admission, it now flounders. The plain fact is that the ITA has fallen down on its job; and if the Treasury is being obstinate about that reserve fund, then the Treasury is only being sensible.
Previous page
