Programmes monopoly threatened

Press, 20 November 1981, Page 2

Programmes monopoly threatened

The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) has threatened to take ‘ the television ; programme monopoly from the “Listener.”. ’ i Addressing ’ a lunchtime meeting of journalists at the Christchurch'Media Club yesterday, Mr Muldoon, referred to the “Listener” as “that rather Left-of-centre journal?' . ■. “I certainly intend to put it to my caucus colleagues after the election that we take from them this' programme monopoly which gives it the big circulation which enables it to promulgate this trendy-Left material,”; he said. Answering a question by the “Listener” columnist, Tom Scott. Mr Muldoon said that he thought the “Listener” was a good paper. However, he did not like its editorial line or its “so-called humorist.” Its editorial line did not matter, provided it was prepared to sell on its merits. Of' the news ’ media, Mr Muldoon said that' Parliamentary press gallery journalists had fallen prey “to the most pernicious disease of journalism” — writing to a scenario. The scenario this year was that although National had been ahead in the polls in the last election, Labour would make up ground during the campaign. The result would be either close or a Labour victory. The scenario did not fit the facts, said Mr Muldoon, and accordingly “the facts have not been emphasised.” Growth strategy was the central issue of the 1981 election campaign. Journalists and the opposition parties had criticised the strategy. Mr Muldoon said he was happy to answer them. However, political journalists had failed to nail Labour on the issue of its ability to carry out its election promises. The question that remained unanswered, and largely unasked, was how Labour would produce the overseas funds to back its job-creation programme and where it would find the revenue for tax reductions and other election promises. Mr Muldoon criticised the leader of the Labour Party (Mr Rowling), saying that he retained his position as leader only because Labour had no-one better to put in his place. Some writers were “trying to sell the story” that Mr Rowling had changed from being an ineffective leader to being strong and dynamic. “The people of New Zealand have more common sense than to believe that,” he said. The Social Credit leader (Mr Beetham), on the other hand, was an individual of “considerable talent” who got into the Social Credit movement “by accident” and had led it since because he was so different from most of its members. But he realised he could never sell the true, basic Douglas theory to New Zealand and his main policy was “a plague o' both your houses.” Mr Muldoon denied that Mr Beetham had read the Treasury reports on the “think big” projects. The reports did not contain “any-

thing like" what Mr Beetham had asserted, said Mr Muldoon. Both leaders of the Opposition parties were “coming out with stuff that was sheer fabrication." The Aramoana smelter would not lose overseas funds, said Mr Muldoon. Fletcher-Challenge would not go into a project that would cost it more than it got back. Asked whether Treasury reports would be made public, Mr Muldoon said.that about 3000 Treasury reports were produced every year. Everything that involved the spending of Government money involved a Treasury report. They had been kept secret “since" the beginning of time” and there was no reason to change that. < Asked why he had chosen to make public reports on Socialist Unity Party activity in trade unions and “subversive” involvement in the anti-tour movement, Mr Muldoon said they were reports on fact, not opinion. The Press Association reported from Wellington last evening that Mr Muldoon had mistaken the critical function of the news media for opposition to the Government, according to the “Listener” editor, Mr Peter Stewart. Mr Stewart said, “The interests of the public are best served by the present situation." The “Listener” had a substantial readership for its general news apart from its television and radio guide.