PARLIAMENT INDECENCY IN LITERATURE

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27733, 10 August 1955, Page 14

PARLIAMENT INDECENCY IN LITERATURE

CONTROL UNDER 1954 ACT

LIMITED RESORT TO PROSECUTIONS (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, August 9. The absence of a spectacular series of prosecutions had created some impression that the passing of last year’s Indecent Publications Amendment Act had achieved little or nothing, said the Secretary of Justice (Mr S. T. Barnett) in the annual report of the Justice Department, tabled today in the House of Representatives. That was far from true, said Mr Barnett. In the first place, the leading distributors had. of their own violation. declined to handle a number of periodicals and paper-back books which they thought might be open to objection. There had. moreover, been a very noticeable improvement in the standard of the contents of many periodicals still circulating. The beneficial effects of the New Zealand act had been reinforced by the passing of parallel legislation in Australian States, said Mr Barnett. In administering the act. the department at each step sought, and was freely given, the co-operation of the trade.

“The policy is that, as far as possible, the weapon of prosecution should be limited to use against that tiny minority which refuses to recognise its responsibility,” said Mr Barnett. The department, he said, was anxious to avoid the stigma of a criminal prosecution of booksellers and distributors who took a responsible view of their duties, because there might well be an honest difference of opinion as to whether a book was indecent or not.

Formerly, the legislation had been exclusively concerned with publications which were objectionable because of their treatment of sex. said Mr Barnett. Last year’s amendment had recognised that over-emphasis of violence, cruelty, and horror could have equally harmful effects on immature minds.

Negotiations were in train with distributors about some comics which the department considered might come under the present legislation, said Mr Barnett. “It may be, however, that it would be better to have special legislation, based on somewhat different principles, to deal with comics,” the report said.