POLICY LEAKAGE

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 167, 11 April 1932, Page 8

POLICY LEAKAGE

Statement Misconstrued MR. FORBES’S CONCERN Securing of Information # Tbe premature publication in certain newspapers of important features of the Government’s economy legislation programme has caused the keenest interest, in political circles. The manner in which the breach of confidence occurred has still to be explained satisfactorily, but a statement attributed to the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, and published on Saturday evening, attempts to convey an impression con trary to anything that might be deduced from an interview with Mr. Forbes, published in the morning papers last Thursday. The statement published on Saturday was as follows: — “I am absolutely satisfied,” said Mr. Forbes, “that any confidences given the newspaper editors have- been scrupulously preserved, and it was never in my mind to suggest that the contrary was the case. A most unfortunate construction has been placed on the statements made by me to the morning newspaper representatives, making them appear otherwise than I intended. I wish to state definitely that I am convinced that thefleakage which resulted in the premature publication of the economy plans was from some other source.”

As the above statement appeared to reflect on the truthfulness of the position outlined in the papers of Thursday morning, representatives of the newspapers concerned called on Mr. Forbes at his private residence on Saturday evening with a request that he should remove any misapprehensions on the subject. Mr. Forbes, on perusing the article published on Thursday morning, at once admitted .that the statement conveyed no impression that the breach of confidence had occurred through the agency of any who had attended the editors’ conference with a section of the Ministry. Indeed, no reference was niadc to a conference of editors.

“The position is this,” said Mr. Forbes. “I was approacheel by a representative of the Auckland ‘Star,’ who said he had a communication from his editor, saying that the impression had been created in Auckland that the leakage had occurred as a result of the editors' conference. I simply said that, if that impression had been created, it was not the impression I wished to be caused. I have been in touch with those who attended- that conference, and I am assured that the leakage did not occur there. Naturally I accept those assurances.”

Questioned as to whether he believed the disclosure had been made by a member of the Coalition Party, following the explanation of the Government’s policy to the caucus, Mr. Forbes said he knew that leakages did occur out of caucus. As a matter of fact, he had been told that the information published had been secured from two Government members after the caucus, but ho had not been able to 'verify that, as no names had been mentioned.

While still ignorant of the source of the breach of confidence, Mr. Forbes reiterated his former assertion that the premature disclosure of the Government’s plans was “a pretty rotten thing.”