RIGHTS OF THE PRESS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20993, 2 October 1931, Page 11

RIGHTS OF THE PRESS.

MR. LANG AND HIS CRITICS. EMBARGO ON NEWSPAPER. STATE ADVERTISING DENIED. A statement that in future no Government advertisements calling for tenders for public works in New South Wales would appear in the Sydney Morning Herald was made by the Premier, Mr. Lang, in answer to a que.stion in the Legislative Assembly last week. " Will the Premier inform the House," asked Mr. Weaver, " whether that is a matter of Government policy, and why this change has been made?" Mr. Lang replied:—" The answer to the question is, 'Yes.' It is Government policy —at least the start of it—as far as the Sydney Morning Herald is concerned; and anybody who has read the continual attacks on the best interests of this State by the Herald will agree with it." . . . Mr. Jarvie: What aro you referring to? Mr. Lang: I am referring to that abominable leading article regarding the "Government Savings Bank when it was at its most critical stage.

Tho subject was referred to in the Legislative Council on tho following day by Mr. Beyce. " I bring this matter before the House," ho said, " because in my view a great principle is at stake, in that the right of free criticism by the press upon this or any other Government should be preserved. It is to the public interest that the press should fearlessly d.. what it conceives to be its duty, without lear of punishment, so long as it docs not overstep its legal limits. " The Abominable Article." " When we see what the 'abominable article' was to which the Premier referred," Mr. Boyce said, "we find that there is only one to which he could possibly refer—that of September 2. On that date, when the new Government Savings Bank Act had just been passed, they published a leading article." The speaker then quoted from the article. "They were simply upholding the rights of the old depositors in the old Savings Bank," he said, "for whom they contended the new Bank Act did not make proper provision." In the course of further remarks Mr. Boyce said:—"l propose to put it on the high plane of principle, and to rest it on the rights of the British press to criticise freely without fear or favour. It is a wrong thing to attempt to intimidate a section of tho public jiress, or to endeavour to influence it to support a partisan policy by means of the allocation of public money. ... It is the oldest tradition of the British press that, within proper limits, it is free to criticise public policy." Right of Free Criticism.

Mr. J. Ryan said: —"At no time in the history of the world was it more necessary to preserve the right of free criticism of public men and public affairs. There is no justification for the peremptory and autocratic action taken by the Premier in regard to the Herald." Mr. Concannon, vice-president of the Executive Council, in replying to Mr. Boyce, said:—"The Premier is the one man in the State to judge whether advertisements should be given from one paper to another."Air. Ryan: Is this not punishment for criticism * Mr. Concannon: No. If there is any man who revels in criticism in the press it is the Premier of New South Wales. Mr. Boyce: The lion, member says this is not punishment for free criticism. The Premier says it is punishment for criticism. Ho says he has decided the Herald has gone too far and that is why he has taken the advertisements away. You como back to the principle. The press must be free, keeping to the limits set by law. Once we interfere with the freedom of the press, its right to expose when it should expose, we are in grave danger, and the public interest will surely suffer.