Protective charter for broadcasters

Press, 9 May 1980, Page 11

Protective charter for broadcasters

'gF Broadcasting reporter

f A charter protecting thQ ' Broadcasting Corporation j from extensive legislative; ' change for five years is : among the main recom* ’ mendations of the Labour j Party caucus committee’s I first report on broad* | casting.

I The report, the first of ; several on broadcasting to ■ be issued by the com* i mittee in the next six i months, suggests such a ■ breathing space is needed to allow broadcasters to j work without fear of political retribution and with* » in a stable framework.The committee is scath- : ing about the condition of broadcasting since the National Government’s re* organisation of it. It concedes that changes were needed, but says these could and should have been made under the sys* ■' tern of “guided com* i-petition” recommended by •: the Adam report and in- ' stituted in 1975.

It says sweeping allegations of wastefulness were politically motivated, and attributes the same motivation to the Government’s refusal to allow an increase in the licence fee. It recommends that the Broadcasting Council be empowered to raise the fee to meet increased costs.

i Broadcasters _ should be 1 free from political control, i the report says, but still ■ accountable to the public ‘ and still in- touch with ' reality. It says the regional advisor, 7 committees, whose task is to comment on programmes and ‘‘make

sure the professionals don’t run away with themselves,” are far from fully effective. It recommends the setting up of a public advisory board that would hold hearings regularly throughout New Zealand and report annually to Parliament, The committee’s main recommendations are: — That the Broad* Casting Corporation be granted a charter that would guarantee its independence and integrity for five years, during which time it should be free from any major legislative change. Such a charter would need the bipartisan agreement of the other major parties to its institution, and Labour invites them to concur in jthis; — That a public advisory board be instituted, with a small full-time staff, which would hold hearings regularly throughout New Zealand, and report annually to parliament; and — That the Broad* casting Tribunal have its powers extended so that it can consider and when necessary grant increases in licence fees to meet increased costs, so that orderly development can proceed. On the first recommendation, the independence charter for five years, the report says that when the Government scrapped the separate boards of competing and independent television channels and of Radio New Zealand, and placed then under the control of a Minister, it returned to a monolithic and

monopolistic organisation open to political pressure. It says the result was low morale; an exodus of competent broadcasters; bland, trivial, and timid television programmes; and an atmosphere of uncertainty that restrained vigorous and innovative broadcasting.-

On the second recommendation, the roving advisory board, the committee cites the American film, “Network,” as an exaggerated illustration of the tendency of broadcasters to get out of touch. The regional advisory committees fall down in the task of keeping broadcasters in touch, the report says, because they are appointed by and report to the Boradcasting Corporation, and their conclusions were never publicly heard. On the third recommendation, raising the licence fee, the Labour panel says broadcasting cannot be independent if the Government requires it to extend television and radio coverage, yet denies it the chance to meet increased costs by raising the licence fee.The Government has allowed increases in the cost of other goods and services, but has refused the licence-fee increase, “in such a manner as to cast the gravest doubts on its motives,” the report says, “No development plan for broadcasting can possibly succeed if the funds it needs for its development can be chopped at the whim of a Prime Minister in a fit of vindictive pique.”