Broadcasting Control

Manawatu Times, Volume 61, Issue 136, 11 June 1936, Page 7

Broadcasting Control

Position of B Stations

VIGOROUS OPPOSITION TO BILL LATE SITTING OP HOUSE Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night. Whcu the Houso met at 10.30 this morning urgency was accorded the pasai: g of the Broadcasting Bill, tho second reading of which was resumed by Mr. W. J. Poison, who criticised Hon. P. Fraser’s statement that the new station to be erected near Wellington would bo used for dissemination of Government propaganda. It had been said that Opposition would be given a fair run, but who was to decide what was a fair ruu, and tho Minister would decide just how much Opposition propaganda would go through that station. C amophone records wero being made of the Ministers’ speeches and they would bo put over the air. Tho Bill was one that provided for tho complete domination of the radio service of this country by a party for the party iu the interests of the party, and tho sooner tho country woke up and realised the intention behind that seemingly innocent measure, the better for tho country. He referred to the danger of political control and said that it should be removed. He thought that when people realised what was happening in that and other measures, they would regard it as abhorrent to every principle of British tradition. Mr. Poison contended that a comparison of tho New Zealand system with that of the 8.8. C. would not stand analysis, and claimed that tho Government went to Hitler to get its broadcasting policy. Dr. D. G. McMillan said the public generally wanted to hear tho policy of

i Government. The Press to-day was fearful lest its jealously-guarded adv ising revenue should be interfere! with.

Mr. J. Hargest (Opposition): Has it expressed any fear? Mr McMillan said t hat in the past there had been a sort of truce between the Press and the broadcasting authorities under which the broadcasting authorities would not advertise and newspapers would not criticiso broadcasting, but all that was now ended. He said the real trouble with advertising iu America was that rnany of the stations were privately-owned, but there could bo no objections if stations were controlled by tho Minister. Mr. McMillan claimed that the Press distorted views, and the public should consider that when considering privatelyowned broadcasting stations. He said nobody could object to political broadcasting provided tho principles of fair play were observed. Ho said it was found that news was not broadcast Until after it had appeared in tho public Press and said that jvdicious suppression of facts enabled the newspapers to deceive their readers. He claimed that opposition to broadcasting controversial matters camo from the Press because as long as pegrammes were kept dull they would not interfere with newspapers. He thought a State-owned service would give ample opportunity to discover and develope New Zealand talent. lie asked the Minister, when replying, to state tho ground rents paid by tho Broadcasting Board for their offices throughout New Zealand, and to whom they were paid. Mr. W. J. Broadi’oot said there were threo ways by which broadcasting could bo administered in the Dominion. It could bo taken over as a State enterprise entirely, which was being done in that Bill. Next, it might have been given over to private commercial interests wholly, and only the control they would have iu such a case would have been censorship as to whether there was any blasphemy or sedition or slander in the talks put over. Tho third way would bo a public utility service, and a public utility service had much to commend itself to the Domiuion. He said the 8.8. C. system was a model system, and countries that had allowed commercial stations had found it later to bo a thorn in their sides. The policy of the Broadcasting Board has been prudently administered and to-day New Zealand had an excellent service. He thought advertising should be barred and the servico kept for educational and amusemont purposes, and he hoped the present Government would handle tho service just as prudently and just as fairly as it had been administered in the past. He thought the people of the Dominion would rue the change, and ho also thought that the statements about the Press and advertising were exaggerated and that the Press would not lose much advertising through the operation of tho Bill.

Mr. H. Atmore looked upon the placing of the control of broadcasting with the public man as a step in tho right direction, and representatives <>£ tho people would now have control of the people’s service. Subsidising of B stations was a matter that required urgent attention and if they were not allowed to advertise they must be subsidised. He supported Parliamentary broadcasting so that the people could hear exactly what was being said, and what was happening in the House. Et. Hon. J. G. Coates criticised the Minister for stating that the Labour Party had promised to give tho B stations assistance and- help if they were returned to power. Mr. Savage: I said on every public platform' that I was talking to the people of the country, not to the B stations. The promise that was made to assist the B stations, continued Mr. Coates, had put the Government in an awkward situation. The Labour Party could not conscientiously or logically support private stations. Tho promise or undertaking definitely must have been made between the B stations and the Government prior to their gaining office. Government voices: No agreement was made.

Mr. Coates said that if it had not been for that promiso, they would not have tho Government introducing a measure of that kind, which not only perpetuated but increased the status of the B stations. The Labour Party wore caught out by an ill-considered promise that was made, and tho Government had to live up to that promise. He thought that tho Government was going far beyond the requirements and the unwritten law of democracy in taking the control of broadcasting. If the Bill became law, it was safe to prophecy that it would far from satisfy the feelings and requirements of the country. Referring to newspaper publicity, Mr. Coates said he had never known a Government that had been given such fulsome reports as the present Government and no sooner had any Government come into office than it had been criticised from one end of the country to the other and even now tho Press found fault with the Opposition because they were not able to stop tho battalions of the Labour Government in passing legislation. He opposed advertising over the air, and said that nowspapers would not object to it, because, in countries where advertising was allowed over the air, newspaper advertisements wero bigger than ever.

Mr. K. A. Wright said that newspapers leading articles were said to have been classed as bigotted and vindictive. He held no brief for newspapers, but as far as ho had been able to read, since the elections newspapers had been most mild iu their criticism. He thought tho references to newspapers' had been rather severe. He was absolutely opposed to advertising in any form and said that no money would be made from advertising unless advertisers were given full value for their money. He did not think that local talent had been treated fairly.

Resuming the debate on the Broadcasting Bill in the House this afternoon Mr. E. A. 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. Ho said taking over the 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 tho Government and when it was loarned how the Government intended to use it, it gave cause for apprehension. It was the case of a new broom sweeping clean and some useful furniture might be swept away in the process. Regarding treatment by the newspapers, Mr. Forbes said the Opposition’s remarks were published in tabloid form, but everything the Prime Minister said was published iu full. Ho added that the past Government had tried to establish a service that was free and unfettered, leaving tho Minister power to veto and it had worked well. Ho 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 over the air and said it was.opening up a new avenue. It. would mean additional cost to the people as ono advertiser would be forced to take advantage of the wireless if his competitor did. Ho felt that tho Labour Party on getting into office had lowered 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. F. Schramm said Mr. Forbes had said the Bill established tyranny and he asked the House to compare it with some of the measures passed by the previous Government. He instanced tho threat of dismissal of civil servants if they criticised tho then Government. Ho agreed that the Minister should have coutrol and the talk of political control was only a bogey. After all. all control was political. The parly in power wero the appointed persons to the positions they occupied. He thought the establishment of C stations and giving them advertising was very necessary. He also agreed with subsidising B stations. Mr. S. G. Smith contended that political control could not possibly lead to fairness of thought. New Zealand should follow the British, system which met with the approval of the people. The Government were changing the system without consulting 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 ancl 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 tho Government. Tho 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 B stations should bo encouraged and he congratulated the Minister on the provision to help them.

Hon. F. Jones, in reply, said the opposition to the measuro came under four heads: The abolition of the Broadcasting Board, granting of subsidies to B stations, use of license fees and commercial stations. The board had refused to allow controve-rsal subjects to be discussed over the air despite past Ministers’ permission. He claimed that Ministerial control was a step forward and said Ministerial control had existed under the last Government. Kegarding Mr. Coates’ statement that the Government had an agreement with B stations, Mr. Jones said all the time he was in the House tho question of support for B stations was repeatedly raised. He mentioned stations that had been bought out by the past Government and other B sta-

tion proprietors were concerned Jest they would be forced off the air. At the present time license foes were being used to subsidise stations. The Government spent more than £20,000 on advertising. my should some of that not be used for advertising over tho air? It seemed that the only fear of members was that advertising would be lost to tho newspapers. He said Mr. Coates’ statement, that the newspapers supported tho Government was laughable and said if the day came when the newspapers did come over t.o the Government’s side the Government would have to look to 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. Parliamentary broadcasts had assisted to popularise broadcasting and he predicted that the number of licenses would show au incrcaes during the present year, Regarding the rents that were paid for premises, Mr. Jones said in Wellington in ail for three buildings £1973 per year was paid. Ho did not say there was anything wrong in that. It might be necessary. In Christchurch £SSO was paid. Rev. Clyde Carr: Too much! Mr. Jones: I do not know. lam not a judge of (bat. In Dunedin a portion of the livening Star building was used, tbe amount paid being £O7O. Mr. W. T. Andcrton: Scandalous! The second reading was challenged but was passed at 4.20 by 49 to 19. The House went into Committee to consider tho Bill. Speaking on the short title, Hon. A. Hamilton said most of the B stations bought out by the last Government were poor insignificant stations except two. Mr. W. J. 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. R. A. 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. Kothing is reported from this side of the House because we want legislation to go through, but it is reasonable to think something is being done to support our legislation, but that seldom appears in the newspapers. Mr. W. P. Endean said no one would say the board would not produce a better programme than the Minister and an advisory council. The principle governing tbe judiciary was that it should be free from political control and the same principle should apply to broadcasting. Rev. Clydo Carr asked if some arrangement were not entered into botween the newspapers and the broadcasting authorities that the newspapers would not use news picked up by shortwave from Continental and American stations if the broadcasting authorities did not advertise. He realised that there was nothing on the department’s files regarding the arrangement'. Tho second reading division list was as follows: For the Bill (48) Anderton, Atmore, Barclay, Barnes, Barrcll, C. H. Burnett, Campbell, Carr, Chapman, Christie, Coleman, Cotlerill, Cullen, Denham, Fraser, Herring, Hodgens, Howard, Hunter, Jones, Jordan, Langstone, Lee, Lowry, Lyon, MpDougalJ, McMillan, Mason, Meachen, Moncur, Munro, Nash, Ncilsen, Nordnicyer, O’Brien, Parry, Petrie, Katana, - Richards, Roberts, Robertson, Savage, Schramm, Semple, Sullivan, Thorn, Webb, Wilson. Against the Bill (19): Bodkin, Broadfoot, T. D. Burnett, Coates, Cobbc, Dickie, Endean, Forbes, Hamilton, Largest, Holland, Holvoaikc, Kyle, PoLson, Ransom, Roy, Smith, Wilkinson, Weigh i. Paiist For the Bills Coulter, McCombs. Against the Bill: Ngata, llenare.

Whcu llio House resumed to-night Hon. £. Jone« mid there would be a department of broadcasting under the control of the Minister -who could delegate some of his powers to the DirectorGeneral who would sec that the Government’s policy was carried out. He assured the House that nothing vrould be put over tho air from the Government ■commercial station that was not decent. The station would be run on business lines. No advertising rates had yet been determined and would not be fixed tili the station was established.

Mr. H. S. S. Kyle said the Broadcasting Board was being wiped out, but au advisory council would be established in its place. What was the difference? Mr. K. J. Holyoake asked on what basis were B stations to be subsidised? Mr. Jones said a survey would be made.

Mr. Savage moved the closure at S.lO p.m. and this was carried after a division by 43 votes to 13. The short title was then passed by 43 votes to 16.

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 members of Parliament would be able to represent the listeners very we)!. The Minister might suggest to the council that it should go into the question of staffing or into new buildings, but in 'the mam its work would be to deal with programmes. Pealing with the duties of the Minister, Mr. Jones said he visualised the time when the Postmaster-General would still carry on the work qf supervising the technical side of broadcasting and the new Minister of Broadcasting would look after the cultural side. If at any time the Government were of opinion that a senior Minister or a Minister better qualified should fill the important position of broadcast-

ing it would be easy to make an appointment. All that had been done wa s to provide for the position. Mr. Jones thought they would bo ablo to secure a man with tho necessary qualifications for director in New Zealand. Tho Government visualised the time when they would have one Minister supervising tho technical side and another administering the cultural side. 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 Minister said it was not a question of appointing a board. It was appointing people to advise the Minister. The. members of the Council would be appointed because of what they knew of broadcasting, not because they happened to be listeners nor because they happened to be organisers oi tho Reform Party or of tho Labour Party or any other party. The Government’s job would be to get hold of tboso men or women and appoint them a s advisers to the Minister or his sub ordinates. He had told people all over the country that as long as there was a board listeners were entitled to bo represented on it, but when this Bill was passed the board would be past and the advisory council would be substituted. The council would bo composed of persons to advise not because they were listeners but because of their knowledge, and tho Government’s job would be to get people with that knowledge. Mr. W. J. Broadfoot said the people who paid the price were entitled to construct the tuno at which they were to be taxed.

Mr. W. J. Poison said farmers had certain views on tire question of broadcasting and they were of opinion that some representative of their interests should be on the advisory council. Mr. Poison said tne Minister had said one Minister would look after tiio cultural side.

A voice: The agricultural side? Mr. Poison: No! The Minister does not knew anything about agricultuib. Mr. Poison went on to say the side tho Minister would look after would be that of kultur. Hon. Walter Nash said there was a tendency to make Parliament a farce.

Tho Chairman of Committees: The hon. Minister must not reflect on the chair.

Mr. Nash: I anrnot reflecting on the chair.

Ho went on to say that already there were departments such as the Pensions Department that were controlled by two Ministers and that might bo the same in regard to broadcasting, but there was no reason why one Minister should nod carry out the two functions. Tho Bill provided an easy transfer should the need arise. The technical side of broadcasting was associated with the Post and Telegraph Department 1 and the Postmaster-General was in charge of the scientific side. Then thcro was the other side which was totally different. 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 should not be a listeners’ representative. The council was charged with one thing only : To satisfy the demands of listeners. Mr. Broadfoot: Will the Minister have a veto? Mr. Nash: It is not a case of a veto. It is a case of the Minister being m charge of the department. The Minister has the last word. That is all the Bill says.

Air. Coates moved an amendment to clause 3 providing that the .Broadcasting Corporation should consist of a Minister and three members elected by listeners and two members appointed by the Governor-General. Hon. 1). G. Bullivan described the amendment as a political stunt. Listeners would not be deceived by the tactics of that hind. It was unadulterated humbug and miserable hypocrisy as when Mr. Coates had power to give the listeners representation he refused tc do it. The amendment was lost by 43 votes to 18. Opposition members protested against the abolition of the board, but the clause was retained by 43 votes to 18. Mr Poison moved an amendment to the next clause to provide that the Minister should act only after consulting the Advisory Council. The 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-Gcneral-m-Oouncil. He said as the clause read at present, the Director could bo dismissed at a moment’s notice and he wondered what sort of a 'man would accept office under such conditions. Tho amendment was lost on the voices. A division was called for on clause 6, dealing with tho appointment of officers other than directors, but the clause was retained by 43 to 18. A further amendment, that the Advisory Council should consist of a Minister and three members elected by listeners and two others appointed by the Governor-General, was lost by 47 to 18.

Mr Kyle moved an amendment providing that the Advisory Council should meet as the Council itself decided, not as the Minister decided, but the amendment was lost on the voices.

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 bo paid into the broadcasting account. Mr Poison said the clause was an attack on newspapers. The amendment v;as defeated by 48 to 18.

Coming to clause 14, Mr Forbes moved an amendment to delete the subclause giving the Government, power to advertise from commercial stations. After some discussion on the lines of.

earlier remarks, tlie amendment was defeated by 48 to IS and the clause was retained by 48 to 8. i (Still sitting.) Amendments to Fair Rents Bill In the House this afternoon the Fair Rents Bill was received back from the Legislative Council with amendments. lion. H. G. E. Mason explained that most of tlio amendments were those he had indicated while the Bill was before the House, but he moved that the House disagree with an amendment not permitting a landlord to distrain for any rent due without the consent of a Magistrate. Mr Mason explained that it was largely a matter of expression and managers were set up to confer with managers from the Legislative Council.