Move To Defer TV Not Supported By Chambers

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28869, 14 April 1959, Page 8

Move To Defer TV Not Supported By Chambers

A move to obtain from the Associated Chambers of Commerce’s conference yesterday an expression that television should not be introduced into New Zealand until the financial position of the country warranted it, was unsuccessful.

A Dunedin remit had been rejected by the trade, industry and development group and as soon as it was mentioned again at the plenary session yesterday the conference went “into committee,’’ after which the subject was discussed “in open.”

The contention of the remit was simply that the benefits of television were not sufficiently apparent, said Mr J. K. Skinner, moving its adoption. In its present economic condition, New Zealand could not afford any such luxury. He felt that television would certainly come to the country.

The proposal in the remit was not to take away anything John ! Citizen already possessed or to I interfere with his way of life, he said. The Government had warned restraint and had issued licences for experimental and research purposes and not to whet the public appetite for television entertainment at this stage If some sections of the trade had jumped the barrier, they could not plead hardship There was everything to be said

for ordinary development but at this vital stage New Zealand could not afford to fritter away its overseas reserves to keep up with the Joneses. “Going Without’’ The people would have to go without something to buy TV, said Mr Skinner. Many industries were just getting on their feet and all the funds available for the radio industry would be spent in the first year of television on buying sets in the Auckland district alone. The benefits of waiting and watching television developments in other countries to see the programme best suited to this country were obvious, said Mr Skinner. Although the freedom of the individual was a dominant concept of associated chambers, it was subsidiary to the consideration of public interest. Television had to wait until New Zealand put its house in order. The country at this stage could not afford television, said Mr S. C. Scott (Dunedin), who seconded Mr Skinner’s motion. Canada had borrowed television from the United States and Denmark from Belgium. Another point was that colour television was “just around the corner.” Television could be a sop to the voters and Associated Chambers should give guidance in advocating that it should not be introduced till the country could afford it. The Government was being restrained in making television experiments, said Mr. H. W. Martin (Hutt Valley) and it was not necessary for the country to judge. The Best Judges Because of the extremely complex technical requirements of a television service, the best judges of whether the country could afford to establish it were those who knew all about it—the Government, said Mr C. R. Dahlberg (Masterton). Television could not be established in one year or two years. Because of the long-term policy, he could not see any merit in the remit. “The Mr Skinners of this world are not going to tell me what is good or bad for me,’’ said Mr H. L. Gibson (Dunedin). “I will find that out for myself.’’ “It is for John Citizen, through his elected representatives, to decide for himself, not for this conference.’’

That the question “be not now put’’ was moved by Mr J. F. Y Schischka (Auckland), seconded by Mr J. Roy Smith (Canterbury) and carried.