BROADCAST G BILL PASSED

Greymouth Evening Star, 11 June 1936, Page 4

BROADCAST G BILL PASSED

LONG DEBATE ENDED

HOUSE TO ADJOURN. TO DAY

[per press association.]

WELLINGTON, June 10. In the House, the Fair Rents Bill, was received back from the Le » is [alive Council, with amendments. Mr Mason explained that most o the amendments were those he ha indicated while the Bill was befoi the House, but he moved that th House disagree with an amendmen not permitting a landlord to distiain any rent due without the consent of the Magistrate. , , . Mr Mason explained it was largely a matter of expression. The managers were set up to confer with managers from the Legislative Council. , _ . Resuming the debate on the broadtasting Bill, Mr Forbes said it was significant there was no ex l’ res ® lon of opinion from members on the Gov ernment side of the House. Talah* over’control of wireless was bound to 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. Regarding treatment, by newspapers, Ml' Forbes said the Opposition s remarks were published in tabloid form, but everything the Prime Minister said was published in full. _ h he thought the Press was not giving him a 1 fair run. what would he want from broadcasting. He (Mr Forbes) thought commercial advertising over the' air was a retrograde step and said that the power had been taken entirely as a weapon against newspapers. He objected to the State going into the market to sell advertising over the air. It was opening up a new avenue, and it would mean additional cost to the people, as one advertiser would be forced to take advantage of wireless, if a competitoi did. , , . Mr Schramm said Mr Forbes had said the Bill established tyranny, and he (Mr Schramm) 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 a Minister should have control. Talk of political control was only a bogey. After all, the control was that of the political party in power, it appointed persons to the positions they occupied. Mr Smith contended that 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.. The House was told that was fair and just. Broadcasting should be used in the national interest and as a national service, but in future, it would bo used to bolster up the Government. The Broadcasting Board had improved the position in New Zealand, and had done extremely good work, yet it was to be abolished.

13. STATIONS. * Mr Jones, in reply, said the opposition to the measure came under four heads, abolition of the Broadcasting Board, granting of subsidies to B Stations, use of license fees, and commercial .stations. He claimed that Ministerial control was a step forward, and said Ministerial control had existed under the last Government. Regarding Mr Coates’s statement that the Government had an agreement with 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 out by the past Government, and other B Stalion proprietors were concerned lest they would be forced off the air. At the present time, license fees were being used to subsidise stations. The Government spent more than £20,000 on advertising. Why should some of that not be used to advertise over the air. It seemed the only fear of members was that advertising would be lost to the newspapers. Parliamentary broadcasts had assisted to popularise broadcasting, and he predicted the number of licenses would show an increase during the present year. Regarding rents that were paid for premises, Mr Jones said that in Wellington in all for three buildings, £1973 ' a year was paid. He did not say there was anything wrong in that. It might be necessary. In Christchurch £B5O was paid. In Dunedin, the premises of the “Evening Star” building was used, the amount paid being £670. •> The second reading was challenged, but was passed by 49 to 19. The House went into committee to consider the Bill. Speaking on the short title, Mr Hamilton said that most 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 twenty-one 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 that the 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 the legislation to go through, hut it is reasonable to think something is being done to support our legislation, but that seldom appears in newspapers. Mr Clyde Carr asked if some arrangement were not entered into between newspapers and broadcasting authorities that newspapers would not use news picked up on short-wave

from continental and American stations, if the broadcasting authorities did not advertise. He realised there was nothing on the Department’s files regarding an agreement, i Mr. Jones assured the House that nothing would be put over the air from a Government commercial station that was not decent. The station would be run on business lines. No advertising rates had yet been determined. Mr. Hoiyoake asked on what basis the B. stations to be subsidised would be subsidised. Mr. JonOs said that a survey would be made. Mr. Savage moved the closure, and t

this was carried by 43 to 15. The short title was then passed by 43 to 16.

NO LISTENERS’ REPRESENTATIVE

Replying to further questions, Mr. Jones said, it was not intended by tne Government to appoint a direct listeners’ representative on the Advisory Council. The Government contended that 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 staffing, or into new buildings, but in the main its work would be to deal with programmes. 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 broadeating, and a new Minister of Broadcasting would look after the cultural side if at any time the Government was of opinion the senior minister or a minister better qualified, should fill the important position of broadcasting, it would be easy to make the appointment. 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. The Prime Minister said it was not a question of appointing the Board. It was appointing the people to advise’ the Minister. Members of council

would be appointed because of what they knew of broadcasting, not because they happened to be listeners, and not because they happened to be organisers of the Reform Party, or of the Labour Party, or of any other Party, lie had told the people all ovei’ the country that so long as there was a Board, listeners were entitled to be represented on it. but when this Bill was passed, the Board would be past, and an advisory council would be substituted.

Mr. Nash said there were departments such as the Pensions Department that were controlled by two ministers, and that might be the same in regard to brqndcasting, but there was no reason why one Minister should not carry out the two functions. There was a splendid case for listeners being represented on the Advisory Council, but there was no reason why every member of the Advisory Council Council should iiot be a listeners- representative. The Council was charged with one thing only, to satisfy the demands of listeners.

Mr. Coates moved an amendment to Clause Three providing that the Broadcasting Corporation should consist of the Minister and three members, elected by the listeners and two members appointed by the GovernorGeneral. Mr. Sullivan described the amendment as a political stunt. The listeners would not be deceived by tactics of that kind. It was unadulterated humbug and miserable hypocrisy, as when Mr. Coates had power to give the 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 the clause was retained by 43 to 18.

Mr. moved an amendment to Clause 5 dealing with the appointment of the director of broadcasting, deleting the provision that the director shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor-General-in-Council. He said that as the clause read at present, the director could be dismissed at a moment’s notice, and he wondered what sort of a man would accept office under such conditions. The amendment was lost on the voices.

A further amendment that the Advisory Council should consist of the Minister ami three members elected by listeners, and two others appointed by the Governor-General was lost by 47 to 18.

An amendment was moved by Mr. Forbes to Clause 12, to delete the subclause providing that moneys derived from the operation of commercial stations should be paid into the broadcasting account. The amendment was defeated by 48 to IS. Coming to Clause 14, Mr. Forbes moved an amendment to delete the sub-clause giving the Government power to advertise from commercial stations. After some discussion on the lines of earlier remarks, the amendment was defeated by 48 to 18, and the clause was retained by 48 to 18:

The Bill was reported to the House without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Molyneux Gold Dredging Company (Claims Amalgamation) Bill was put through all the remaining stages and passed. MR. SAVAGE’S COMMENT. WELLINGTON, June 10. The protection to be afforded B. stations, and the possibility of the appointment of a Minister of Broadcasting, were discussed to-night, by the Prime Minister, Mr. Savage, in an interview. |

The question of copyright fees for items broadcast by B. stations had re-

ceived considerable attention recently, Mr. Savage said. When the Broadcasting Bill became law, all B. would be subsidised by the Government, which in consequence would have some say regarding payment to outside interests, in the matter of payment of fees to the Performing Rights Association, and firms holding patents. He understood that the Government had undertaken the responsibility for those stations which received subsidies in the past. Outside interests, now making claims in regard to broadcasting rights, would have to deal direct with the Government. The matter had not been fully investigated as yet, but would doubtless be the subject of negotiations in the near future. It could be taken as definite that private B. stations would be placed on a position of equality with those which already received subsidies.

The Bill makes provision, if necessary for the appointment of a special Minister of Broadcasting, Mr. Savage said. So far this question has not been fully discussed by Cabinet, and as yet it is impossible to say whether a new Minister will be appointed or whether an existing member of the Cabinet will be charged with the responsibility of administering broadcasting matters. Until the decision is made, the Post-master-General will be in charge of broadcasting.

THE CLOSING SCENES.

[special to “star.”]

WELLINGTON, June 11

Long hours were observed by Members of the House of representatives in the discussion on the Broadcasting Bill, the last before the midwinter recess.

Morning, afternoon and night sittings were required to complete the passage of this contentious measure. The second reading debate was resumed at 10.30 a.m. yesterday, and the House rose at 2.20 a.m. to-day, after a sitting lasting really 16 hours. During the forenoon yesterday, there did not appear to be exceptional Parliamentary interest, for and/ against the Bill, and on one occasion there was not a quorum present, and the bells had to be rung to bring absent members from their lairs. The discussion became animated in the afternoon when the attendance in public galleries was more inspiring. New points were few, although here and therp the Opposition succeeded, in gleaning some information. When the discussion had become rather tedious, last night, the Prime Minister ' applied the closure. The remaining progress in committee stage became a little faster, but was still incomparably slower than the pace of much more important measures. The only speakers on the third reading were Mr. Hamilton and the Postmast-er-General (Mr. Jones). This was the virtual end of the session for only a brief and formal sitting is to be held this afternoon to receive the report of the Legislative Council on the Broadcasting Bill.