Commission limits Brierley holdings in N.Z. News

Press, 12 March 1985, Page 26

Commission limits Brierley holdings in N.Z. News

PA Wellington The Commerce Commission has refused Brierley Investments. Ltd. the right to increase its holdings in N.Z News. Ltd. beyond the already approved 40 per cent. The chairman of the Commission. Mr John Collinge. released the decision yesterday. He said the independence of the press was such a fundamental principle, being necessary to assure the free dissemination of information and views so essential to the democratic system, that it was important to ensure that no one

person or group had the potential for dominant influence over any one of the “big three” major newspaper groups. The "tig three" are Wilson and Horton. Ltd. Independent News. Ltd. and N.Z. News. Ltd. Each holds about 25 per cent of the total circulation of daily newspapers in New Zealand. The Commission said that if one company were able to hold all of the shares or a majority interest in any major ' newspaper group, then significant power would exist in the hands of that company. Where that company had

other interests, such as the wide commercial interests of Brierley Investments, then significant power would exist in the hands of that company. inns, a newspaper could, potentially, be inhibited from making comments adverse to the interests of its proprietor. Mr Collinge said the Commission emphasised that its decision was no reflection on the behaviour of BIL. The issue was that, if possible, there should be no potential for abuse of the power, either now or in the future.

The Commission noted that Brierley’s had undertaken to ensure editorial independence of N.Z. News, Ltd, and that it had no objection to its publishing matters contrary to its interests.

However, the Commission held that the principle of editorial independence was so important that it should stand on its own feet, and preferably not be dependent upon assurances and undertakings given to it

The Commission referred to a recommendation of the Broadcasting Tribunal in March last year where the Tribunal expressed concern that some safeguards were desirable against proprietorial influence on editorial content. The Commission also noted that the Minister of Broadcasting had, by direction under the Broadcasting Act, limited the shareholding which newspaper interests could hold in a company owning a television warrant to 30 per cent of

the capital of that company. The Commission further indicated that the Monopolies Commission in Britain had in a similar case, a bid by Lonrho to take over the “Observer." found that the transfer of shares to Lonrho might operate contrary to the public interest. The Monopolies Commission did allow that take-over, but only with the imposition of complicated and stringent conditions. including the appointment of some six independent directors having responsibility for matters of editorial independence. The Commerce also, as a guideline, indicated that in its opinion no one newspaper group should aspire. by merger or take-over, to more than’ one-third of the total national circulation of daily newspapers in New ZeaThe Commission noted that, since this matter was not necessary for its decision, such a guideline in relation to maximum circulation figures was tentative only, and subject to review and closer examination if the matter did arise in future. Overseas, similar guidelines bad been laid down by statute (for example, a limit of 15 per

cent of national circulation in France) and by recommendation (for example, a limit of 20 per cent in Canada). Mr Collinge said that the Commission did not consider these overseas criteria to be necessarily appropriate in New Zealand, ’particularly in view of the small domestic market Also, there was the fact that New Zealand newspapers were regional in nature, and there were as yet no national daily newspapers in this country. As lb the meaning of editorial independence, the Commission indicated that it considered that the guidelines laid down by the Royal Commission on the Press 'in Britain to be an appropriate starting point for any further consideration bv it’ in the future.

Mr Collinge said that submissions had been called from the public in relation to the issues raised in this case. Submissions had been received from Wilson and Horton. N.Z. News, Brierley Investments. the “Otago Daily Times,” and the Journalists' Union, which had been particularly helpful to it in arriving at its decision. These submissions were available to the public upon request