11
THE ATTACK made by the Conservatives' 1922 Committee on Granada Television, for what j5 alleged to be Left-wing bias in that compani9 programmes, stems from an unlovely combination of jealousy and a total misunderstanding of %hal 'fair' means as applied to a political television programme. Such an agitation would not norm' ally merit serious attention, but since Lord Hailsham, on behalf of the Conservative Part), i5 to make the protest official it is perhaps wain while examining the complaints. (Of course, charges of Left-wing bias have been bandied about for years; it is only the fact that the head of Granada TV, is well known as a suppoi of the Labour Party that has given the latest critic their zeal.) The programme that attracted most the Tory wrath was Under Fire, in which 1 SP people, often (but by no means always) Menthe of Parliament, are questioned on some topic o the day by a studio audience. It is objected' among other things, that the producers delihef' ately select obscure Tories who are then torn to pieces by the pro-Labour crowd in the audio cf. None of the Tories who have appeared has Oct made such a complaint, but to some extent weakness of those presenting the Government net case on television is inevitable; Ministers do normally appear except on special occasit 01, Which naturally reduces the Government's strength in this field. But I fear that the Conserva- tives must face more honestly the embarrassing fact that talent is spread thin on their back benches; and, still more embarrassing, it is largely (and predictably) confined to men who by their resolute independence of mind have made them- selves suspect in the party—men such as Sir Robert Boothby and, before his departure for Australia, Mr. Angus Maude. It is significant that ATV, when it was casting around for somebody to put the Tory view on its new programme, The People Ask Parliament, chose Lord Hinching- brooke, who does not even accept the Tory Whip. Nobody, as far as I know, has accused Mr. Val Parnell of being pro-Socialist.