LABOUR ATTACK

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 55, Issue 295, 26 September 1935, Page 5

LABOUR ATTACK

THE BROADCASTING POLICY.

THE PRESS ALSO ASSAILED.

(Abridged from Press Association). WELLINGTON, September 25

In the House of Representatives this evening, Mr M. J. Savage (Leader of the Opposition), dealing with broadcasting, said the public had only themselves to blame for the position that had arisen. Broadcasting was slowly but surely being muzzled. He said that there should be absolute freedom of the air. He added that one heard often of the freedom of the Press, but he said he had not yet seen it very much. According to the newspapers, nothing the Opposition said had anything in it. The newspapers appeared to him to have special concern for vested interests. Public interest did not come into the picture. He had hoped that someone starting a newspaper woujldi giv|e the unvarnished truth, but he was gradually losing hope in that direction. No matter what newspaper one picked up the same side of the picture was presented, and he wondered what was going to happen to broadcasting. He was just a little afraid that what had happened to the newspapers would happen to broadens ino> if the House allowed it. He could see no logical reason for preventing anyone who had anything interesting to say from saying it, He knew that some members said the people did not want to hear speeches, but that was

not his opinion. “B Stations Crushed.” Mr Savage said that B stations were being crushed. They had helped to build up the service that had been built up and had helped to popularise broadcasting. The freedom of the Press did not exist. The Press expressed the views of those in control. It S av ? little publicity to the views of the Opposition, and he wanted to see some alternative means of publicity. If ever came into control he would see that that alternative was provided, and he would encourage the B stations and broadcasting. He admitted that there must be intelligent control, but ho did not think the means of publicity should be muzzled. Broadcasting other countries was being encouraged while in New Zealand itwas beir b starved out of existence. He asked the Postmaster-General if be had' anything Strand to help the B meet the illegitimate demands of those Government^ that* cmvtroversial matters shonld net be broadcast, but who was to judge what was controversial? Public qu were discussed in the the daily newspapers and ' y . “ H +W not be discussed over the air. not be forced! out of existence.

Plea for Change of Poltey. Mr W. A. Veitch (In<»., 'hr, mocri of the Dominion, but theie woio n»d many giving valuable service to Mv W E. Parry (Lab., AUCMan Central), supported Mr Savage charge against the press and publicity ,for the views of the Opposition. Mr F. Langstone (Lab., M aimarn ), sakl the press dominated the policy o the Government and the country and alleged that nothing could be bioaU cast until it had already appeared m the daily press. The press was stithng broadcasting in this country. He con tended that the press had a guaranteed price and received a bounty from the Government in the shape of telegraph concession rates. „„„ Mr Langstone said that as soon as the B Stations were allowed to broacicast all matter people would see where the power of the press really Press Denounced. Mr H. T. Armstrong (Lab., Christchurch East) said he did not think Mr Langstone had examined the position so far as the press of New Zealand was concerned. The yellow press of America “had nothing” on the New Zealand press. The newspapers did not dare to publish Labour s side of the case. The only people not allowed to broadcast were Labour Party candidates. He thought the people wanted to hear both sides. He contended that the concerts broadcast by the xA stations were not so attractive as they used to be because they did not make use of local talent but preferred to bring performers from Australia and other places. He alleged that appointments to the Broadcasting Board were political appointments, a knowledge of broadcasting not being necessary. New Zealand had been turned into laughing stock for the rest of the world. The Hon. Adam Hamilton said that Mr Savage’s criticism of broadcasting was quite unfair. He thought the Broadcasting Board was fairly representative of the community. It was not a political board. It Mr Veitch could suggest a scheme by which politics could be discussed over the air he might be helpful. Mr Hamilton said he had discussed with Mr Savage and others how they might discuss politics over the air during the forthcoming election, but it was not so easy as it looked. , /r _ vt * \ Mr W. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier): Was the Minister genuine in desiring to reach some arrangement? Mr Hamilton: “Quite genuine. He went on to say that the newspapers had to consider what was of interest to readers and the Broadcasting Board had to consider what was of interest to listeners. Mr Hamilton asked how many B stations Mr Savage ould license. Britain had only 12 stations, and he thought the British system was the admiration of the world. New Zealand had 29 stations; was it wise to expend money on building up that many stations? One of the evils that occurred in Australia was political candidates buying their way oh to the air.

That could not happen m Britain. Thev had to decide whether broadcasting was to be owned nationally or commercially. Most of the B stations originated commercially. The Government had to watch that the air did not become choked, and it was a question whether B stations should be allowed to grow and wield great power over the community as some American stations bad done. Regarding the B stations’ trouble over copyrights, that was a very difficult question, and it was very complicated.