THE LAST ITEM

Evening Star, Issue 22362, 11 June 1936, Page 9

THE LAST ITEM

SECOND READING DEBATE OPPOSITION PLEA FOR FREE SERVICE [Pje United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, June 10. Resuming the debate on the Broadcasting Bill, Mr Wright said newspaper reporters had always treated members > fairly, and often had knocked their speeches into shape. _ . Mr Forbes said it was significant - that there was no expression of opinion from members on the Government side • of the House. He said the taking over • of control of wireless was bound to s affect its progress, and' the change would not bring about any greater satisfaction than there had been in the past. Complete control was being given to the Government, and when it was learned how the Government intended to use it it gave cause for apprehension. It was a case of the new broom sweeping clean, and some useful furniture might be swept away in the pro- ■ cess. Regarding treatment by .newspapers, Mr Forbes said the Opposition s remarks were published in tabloid form, >. but everything the Prime Minister said was published in full. If the Prime Minister thought the Press was not giv- • ing him a fair run, what would he want from broadcasting? The past GoJ vernment had tried to establish a service that was free and unfettered, leaving the Minister power of veto, and it had worked well. He thought commercial advertising over _ the air was a retrograde step, and said that the power had been taken entirely as a weapon against the newspapers. He objected - to the State going into the market to ■ sell advertising, oyer the air, and said it was the opening up of a new avenue. It would mean additional cost to the people, as an advertiser would be forced to take advantage of wireless if a competitor did. Ho felt that the Labour Party, on getting into office, had low- • ered their standard, and the fact that they were going to have advertising ■ over the air was a great fall from the standard set by the Labour Party. Mr Schramm said Mr Forbes had said the Bill established a tyranny, and he asked the House to compare it with some of the measures passed by the previous Government. He instanced the threat of dismissal of Civil servants if they criticised the then Government. He' agreed that the Minister should have control, and the talk of political dominance was only a bogy. After all, all control, was political. The party in power appointed persons to the positions they occupied. He thought the establishment of C. stations and giving them the advertising was very necessary. He also agreed with subsidising i the B stations. UNCONSULTED LISTENERS. Mr Smith contended that political control could not possibly lead to fairness. He thought New Zealand should follow the British system, which' met with the approval of the people. The Government was changing the system without consulting the listeners, and many of the listeners who were opposed to the Government would be used to spread Government propaganda ; and the House was told that was fair and just. The Bill, which seemed a simple one, was setting up a dictatorship in the hands of the Government, and- he thought the Prime Minister would in time regret it. Broadcasting should be used in . the national interest, and as a national service, but in future it would be used to bolster up the Government. The Minister was just taking power to set up an advisory council. He might not set one up, but if he did establish a council the Minister need not - consult it. The Broadcasting Board had improved the position in New Zealand, and. had done extremely good work, yet it was to be abolished. He had always thought the B stations should be encouraged, and he congratulated the Minister oh the provision to help them. REPLY TO CRITICS. Mr Jones, in reply, said the opposition to the measure came under four heads; the abolition of the Broadcasting Board, the granting of subsidies to B SfrgflM, ihfi tm si license u tea, and

Broadcasting Bill Passes House Not a Single Amendment Strenuous Fight on Advertising Issue 'The plans for the prompt ending of the present sitting of Parliament went astray through th.e highly contentious nature of, the ; Broadcasting Bill, which the Government produced as its last item on the programme. Prior, to its appearance, the 1 knowledge that there was only one measure left gave the optimists full scope, with the result that it was generally believed that the session would be suspended on Wednesday, except for some formalities on the following day; but the second reading alone kept the Broadcasting Bill before the House -for-eight- hours, this stage being passed only after an all-day discussion.. Then the equally difficult committee stage jvas faced just before the dinner adjournment, and most of the trains and boats members would have liked to catch left Wellington while Clause I. was under discussion. The Government was sparing of the closure, this being used only once during the long evening. An amendment from Mr Coates, seeking to temper full Ministerial control by association with a broadcasting/sorporation of five, including three definite representatives of the listeners, was rejected by 43 to. ‘ 18, while a similar effort by Mr Poison on another clause met the same fate. Midnight was approaching when only four of the 20 clauses in the Bill had passed the committee, and the next y hour was occupied with the Opposition’s strenuous efforts to delete from the measure any authority to put advertising on the air. But the Government’s big majority operated faithfully, the Bill eventually emerging from committee without any amendment, even of the Minister’s authorship.

commercial stations. The board had refused to' allow controversial subjects to be discussed over the air, despite the past Minister’s permission. He claimed that Ministerial control was a step forward, and said Ministerial control had existed finder the last Government. Regarding Mr Coates’s statement that the Government had an agreement with the B stations, Mr Jones said all the time he was in the House the question of support for B stations was_ repeatedly raised. He mentioned stations that had been bought by the past Government, and the other B station proprietors were concerned lest they would be forced off the air. At the present time the license fees were being Vised’ to stations. The Government spent more than £20,000 on advertising. Why should some of that not be used in advertising over the air? It seemed that the only fear of members was that advertising would be lost to the newspapers. Mr Coates’s statement that the newspapers the Government was laughable, and if_ the day came when the newspapers did oome over to the Government’s side, the Government would have to look at itself to see what was wrong. The Government did not believe in dictatorships, nor did it agree with what was taking place in Germany, but references had been made to what was being done in that country regarding the manufacture of cheap sets. The parliamentary broadcasts had assisted to popularise broadcasting, and he predicted that the number of licenses would show an increase during the present year. The second reading was challenged, but was passed at 4.20 p.m. by 49 to 19, DIVISION LIST. The division list was as follows: —For the Bill, 49. Anderton - Lyon Atm ore M'Dougall Barclay M’Millan Barnes Mason Barrell Meachen C. H. Burnett Moncur Campbell Munro . Carr Nash Chapman Neilson Christie Nordmeyer Coleman O’Brien Cotterill Parry Cullen Petrie Denham Katana Fraser Richards Herring Roberts Hodgens Robertson Howard Savage Hunter Schramm Jones Semple Jordan .Sexton Langston© Sullivan Lee Thorn Lowry Webb Wilson ■ —Against the Bill, 19. Bodkin Holland Broadfoot Holyoake T. D. Burnett Kyle Coates Poison Cobbe Ransom Dickie Roy Endean Smith Forbes Wilkinson Hamilton Wright Hargest —Pairs.— , For the Bill; Coulter, M'Combs. Against the Bill: Ngata, Henare. THE COMMITTEE STAGE The House went into committee to consider the Bill. Speaking on tho Short Title, Mr Hamilton said most of the B stations bought out by the last Government were poor insignificant stations, except two. Mr Broadfoot asked what stations were to be subsidised. There were 21 of them, and the House was entitled to that information. What kind of information was to be permitted, and what were the rates to be ? Mr Wright sought information as to what was to be broadcast in the way of political matter. The Prime Minister had said Government speakers would say something that would help the country along. What did he mean by that? Mr Savage: I can tell you in a minute. Nothing is reported from this side of the House, because we want legislation to go through, but it is reasonable to think that something is being done to support our iegisla-1

tion; but that seldom appears in the newspapers. . Mr Endean said no one would say a board would not produce a better programme than a Minister and advisory council. Tho principle covering the judiciary was that it should be free from political control, and the same principle should apply to broadcasting. The Rev. Clyde Carr asked if some arrangement were not entered into between the newspapers and the broadcasting authorities that the newspapers would not use news picked by short wave from Continental and American stations if tho broadcasting authorities did not advertise? He realised that thero was nothing on the Department’s files regarding tho arrangements. ON BUSINESS LINES. Mr Jones said there would he a Department of Broadcasting under the control of a Minister, who could delegate some of his powers to a DirectorGeneral, who would see that tho Government’s policy was carried out. He assured the House that nothing would be put over the air from tho Government commercial station that was not docent. The station would be run on business' lines. No advertising rates had yet been determined, and these would not be fixed till the station was established. Mr Kyle said tho Broadcasting Board was being wiped out, but an Advisory Council would be established in its place. What was the difference? Mr Holyoake asked on what basis the B stations to be subsidised would be subsidised? Mr Jones said a survey would be made. Mr Savage moved the closure at 8.10, sTnd this was carried after a division by 43-15. Tho short title was then passed by 43-16. NO LISTENERS’ REPRESENTATIVE. Replying to further questions, Mr Jones said it was not intended .by the Government to appoint a direct listeners’ representative on the Advisory Council. The Government contended that the members of Parliament would be able to represent the listeners very well. The Minister might suggest to the council that it should go into the question of or into new buildings, but in the mam its work would be to deal with the programmes. MINISTER’S DUTIES. Dealing with the duties of the Minister, Mr Jones said he visualised the time when the Postmaster-General would still carry on the work of supervising the technical side of broadcasting, and the new Minister of Broadcasting would look after the cultural side. If at any time the Government was of opinion that a senior Minister or a Minister better qualified should fill the important position of broadcasting, it would be easy to make the appointment. All that had been done was to provide for the position. Mr Wright said he was sure there would be a great deal of dissatisfaction among listeners when they learned that a listeners’ representative was not to be appointed to represent them. Tho Prime Minister said it was not a question of appointing a hoard. It was appointing people to advise the Minister. The members of the council would be appointed because of what they kView of broadcasting, not because they happened to be listeners, nor because they happened to be organisers of tho Reform Party, or of the Labour Party, or of any other party. The Government’s job would bo to get hold of those men or women and appoint them as advisers to tho Minister, or his subordinates. He had told people all over the country that as long as there was a board the listeners were entitled to be represented on it, but when this Bill was passed tho board would be past, and an advisory council would be substituted. This council would bo composed of persons to advise, not because they were listeners, but because of their knowledge, and the Government’s job would be to get people with that knowledge. Mr Broadfoot said the people who paid the price were entitled to construct the tune at which they were to he taxed. FARMERS’ VIEW, Mr Poison said the farmers had certain views on the question of broadcasting, and they were of opinion that some representative of their interests should be on the advisory council. _ The Minister had said that one Minister would look after the cultural side. Voice: The agricultural side! Mr Poison: “No, the Minister does not know anything about agriculture.” Ho went on to say that the side the Minister would.look after would bo that of “ kultur.” Mr Nash said there was a tendency to make Parliament a farce. The Chairman of Committees: The hon. the Minister must not reflect on the Chair. Mr Nash: I am not reflecting on the Chair. He went on to say that already there were departments, such as the Pensions Department, that were controlled by two Ministers, and that might be the same in regard to broadcasting; but there was no reason why one Minister should not carry out two functions. The Bill provided for an easy transfer, should the need arise. The technical side of broadcasting was associated with the Post and Telegraph Department, and the Postmaster-Gene-ral was in charge of the scientific side Then there was tho other side, which was totally different. There was a splendid case for the listeners being represented on the Advisory Council, but there was no reason whv every member of the Advisory Council should not be a listener. The representatives on the council were charged with one thing only, to satisfy the demands of the listeners. Mr Broadfoot: Will the Minister have the veto? Mr Nash: It is not acase of veto. It is a case of the Minister being in charge of the department. The Minister has the last word. That is all the Bill says. Mr Jones thought they would be able to secure a man with the necessary qualifications for a director in New Zealand. A CRUCIAL AMENDMENT. Mr Coates moved an amendment to clause 3, providing that the Broadcasting Corporation should consist of a Minister and three members elected by the listeners, and two members appointed by the Governor-General. Mr Sullivan described the amendment as a political stunt. The listeners would not bo deceived by tactics of that kind. It was unadulterated humbug and miserable hypocrisy, as when Mr Coates had the power to give listeners representation he refused to do it. The amendment was lost by 43 to 18. Opposition members protested against the abolition of the board, but tho clause was retained by 43 to 18. ANOTHER TRY. Mr Poison moved an amendment to the next clause to provide that the Minister should act only after consulting the Advisory Council.

This amendment was lost by 43 to 17. The. clause was challenged, but was retained by 43 to 18. Mr Broadfoot moved an amendment to clause 5, dealing with the appointment of a director of broadcasting, deleting the provision that the director shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General-in-Council. He said, as the clause read at present, the director could be dismissed at a moment’s notice, and ho wondered what sort of man would accept office under such conditions. The amendment was lost on the voices. A division was called for on clause 6, dealing with the appointment of officers other tlian directors, but the clause was retained by 43 to IS. A further amendment, that the Advisory Council should consist of tbe Minister and three members elected by the listeners, and two others appointed by the Governor-General, was lost by 47Mr Kyle moved an amendment providing that the Advisory Council should meet as tho council itself decided, not ns tbe Minister decided, but tho amendment was lost on the voices. ADVERTISING MONEY. An amendment was moved by Mr Forbes to clause 12, to delete the subclause providing that the moneys derived from the operation of commercial stations should be paid into the Broadcasting Account. Mr Poison said the clause was an attack on the newspapers. The amendment was defeated by 48Coming to clause 14, Mr Forbes moved an amendment to delete tbe sub-clause giving the Government power to advertise from tho commercial stations. After some disensison on the lines of earlier remarks, the amendment was defeated by 48-18, and the clause was retained by 48-18. BILL PASSES The committee stages were completed, and the Bill was reported to the House without amendment, read a third time, and passed.