Protests

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31769, 28 August 1968, Page 16

Protests

Sir, —“The Press” appears to be exhibiting a touch of neurotic hysteria in “thrusting its opinions” on protest marches “down the throats” of the public. We do not in New Zealand have a specific right either to protest or, fortunately, to be protected from protests. And who among the public (apart, presumably, from the editorial staff of “The Press”) needed to be protected from such an impressive and orderly protest as the recent Omega march? The public may have been “going about their lawful occasions” on that day, but so were the protesters. In order to avert the fearful risk of persons being exposed to opinions with which they might have no sympathy, I suggest that in the event of any future march, the council should allow it to take place but prohibit banners, placards, and the expression of any opinion by any marcher on any subject.— Yours, etc., A. K. GRANT. August 27, 1968. Sir, —Two points Which “The Press” does not mention in its editorial this mornine are that the City Council wishes to have the right to approve the wording of placards and to control the numbers taking part in a demonstration. In other words, it wants the right to control what the public say and how many shall-say it. I watched the last demonstration which ended in Victoria Square, and as the demonstrators used the pedestrian crossings with the lights I fail to see how any reasonable person could say they interfered with traffic. 1 question the logic of your last sentence. Permission to hold a demonstration is sought from the City Council and reported in our papers, so if the public wish to avoid a demonstration it is easy to do so. With Czechoslovakia in mind I am all for protecting freedom of speech in New Zealand. 1 am sure it 'is something most of us still value.— Yours, etc., DILYS BEARDSLEY. August 27, 1968.