Censorship rejected

Press, 22 September 1984, Page 3

Censorship rejected

A debate on the eviles of censorship deeply divided delegates to the New Zealand Party conference. They were united in their abhorrence of censorship and equally united in their abhorrence of pornography, but divided on how to rationalise these two matters of principle. In the end, they adopted a remit by a majority of about two to one, “That all forms of censorship be abolished in respect of private conduct. This refers to the freedom of adult individuals to read whatever literature, view or listen to whatever visual or audio material, in the privacy of their

homes.” The remit outraged most of the women delegates to the conference. Some were very angry that the men put their personal freedom ahead of the safety of women and children.

The anger was led by Ms Josephine Grierson (Pakuranga) who said that the New Zeland Party was against “victimless crimes” being criminal offences but delegates should not think pornography was a “victimless crime.”

"Children are exploited and damaged, and people are sometimes killed on pornographic films,” Ms Grierson said. “Not all

forms of censorship are bad.”

Ms Grierson later cut the ground from under opponents of the remit by seconding a one-word amendment to it — inserting the word “adult” The conference was told that pornographic videos were already being made in New Zealand, and would go on being made, because there was good money in them and people wanted to see them. The conference decided that adults had a right to the freedom from censorship that was a higher freedom than the freedom from legal pornography.