BROADCASTING POLITICS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21342, 17 November 1932, Page 13

BROADCASTING POLITICS

QUESTION OF BIGHTS

EQUAL TREATMENT SOUGHT

REPLY TO LABOUR PROTEST

[BY TELEGRAPH —SPECIAL REPORTER] WELLINGTON. Wednesday A complaint that the right to broadcast had been extended to members of the Government, but refused to the Opposition, was made by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. 11. E. Holland, when the Estimates of the I'ost and Telegraph Department were under discussion in the House of Representatives to-day.

Mr. Holland said that if the air were to bo used, and he thought it should be, then it should be available to both sides of the House. Prior to his departure for the Ottawa Conference the Rt. lion. J. G. Coates had broadcast a policy speech on the conference. Mr. Holland said, as Leader of the Opposition, he had then asked for the same right in connection with ail address lie proposed to deliver at Christchurch. He did not receive a reply until he was about to enter his meeting, and it amounted practically to a refusal. Reply by Minister

He communicated with the PostmasterGeneral, the Hon. A. Hamilton, whose attitude was that the Government must have tho right to use the air for policy announcements, and that the Ministers could be relied upon to keep clear of political issues. Since Mr. Coates had returned from Ottawa he had delivered another speech over the air. Items were also broadcast from the press, and listeners frequently heard extracts from Government speeches, but nothing was heard of statements from the Opposition side. Mr. Holland then moved that the vote be reduced by £1 as an indication that the right to broadcast should be conceded to both sides of the House, and not confined to the Government party alone. The amendment was lost by 40 votes to 24.

Replying after the division, Mr. Hamilton said his understanding of the position was that Mr. Holland had wanted to broadcast a public speech, which was quite different from the broadcasting of a prepared statement from a studio. If a statement were submitted to the Broadcasting Board it would probably be considered. Question of Submission Mr. Holland: Was the statement made by Mr. Coaics submitted to the board before he delivered it ?

Mr. Hamilton said the operator in the studio could have switched off it Mr. Coates had said anything that was not in good taste.

Mr. It. Semple (Labour —Wellington East): He soon would have got the sack if he did.

Mr. Hamilton said he could not say whether Mr. Coates had been requested to hand in his statement for submission to the board. It was a public statement. Mr. Semple: A party statement. Mr.* Hamilton: Mr. Coates made his statement from the studio. Mr. Holland: Will you allow me to do that ? Mr. Hamilton said that if Mr. Holland made such a request, no doubt it would be considered. There was no desire to shut out any public man. It was a different thing to broadcast from a public hall. Ministers might have a little more right than ordinary members, but the Leader of the Opposition might be given similar rights to Ministers. The matter was one for the Broadcasting Board. In any case, listeners might not want to listen to broadcasts of public meetings.