WIRELESS CONTROL

Dominion, Volume 19, Issue 46, 18 November 1925, Page 10

WIRELESS CONTROL

A REPLY TO SIR JAMES PARR.

Sir,—There appeared in the Press throughout New Zealand on the 14th inst., a sweeping -denunciation bv the Postmaster-General, Sir James Parr, of my report to the listeners-in on the first meeting of the Broadcasting Advisory, Board, held recently in Auckland, in terms apparently'calculated to discredit my actions, if hot myself, in the eyes of the public in general and the listeners-in in particular. My report is described vaguely by the Minister as being “both gravely misleading and in some respects quite'inaccurate.” Although the meeting ,was held a mouth ago, I have not yet received, as the Minister promised ’me, a copy of the verbatim report of the proceedings taken—for what purpose Sir James would not state—by a departmental stenographer. If this copy should come to hand, it will show that my report is absolutely true to fact, and I challenge Sir James Parr to prove .t otherwise. It is significant that he does not define my alleged misleading and inaccurate statements. The Post-master-General is apparently highly sensitive to criticism, but if he will read mv report carefully he will discover that there is no attempt, as he suggests, to attack h’m personally, although reference is made to the unsatisfactory attitude towards broadcasting of the Government representatives on the board. Presumably, as a listeners’ representative, I am of no assistance to the Postmaster-General or to the Government because I am unwilling i

to ignore the instructions of those I represent, and to condone all actions of the departmental officials which are against the interests of the listener. Surely, it is Sir James Parr himself who had “departed from the canons of fair play” in suggesting to the public that I was a heckler at one of his elec- ( tion meetings because I asked, when questions were in order, two questions concerning information which the listener had a right to know before the meeting of-the board, in order that it might "be considered. Previous attempts to obtain’ the information required bv other «nethods had failed. As Sir James Parr was obviously embarrassed bv the questions he has misconstrued them into a political attack on himself and the Government.

Finally, Sir, I suggest it is rather remarkable that, although my report was published in the Auckland “Star” on October 24, while Sir James Parr was in Auckland, it is only now that he has taken such violent and unfair exception to it.—l am, etc., G. Mcß. SALT. University College, Auckland, November IG.