SUPPRESSION CHARGES REFUTED

New Zealand Times, Volume LIII, Issue 12507, 24 July 1926, Page 5

SUPPRESSION CHARGES REFUTED

m HOLLAND S ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE PRESS ASSOCIATION MINISTER READS FACTS TO HOUSE "WE ONLY WANT FAIR PLAY FOR EVERYONE” The Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E. Holland) had some* thing further to say in the House yesterday on the subject of the “Times” cable to London on the Dairy Control Board's policy. He criticised the Press Association, and asked for fair treatment t<> ell parties. The Postmaster-General (Hon. W. Nosworthy) said the Government wanted fair play to all sides.

AVliou t Utt vole* for Post am! Telegraph >alarios came up for discussion in committee of the whole Mr Holland moved that, the vote be reduced by £5 to indicate that it should be made a condition of the substantial concessions to the Press Association in the luattei of telegraph charges that there shall be no suppression of vital facts by the Press Association or its agents and that the association shall accord equal treatment to all parties in its political reporting by telegram. He stated that there was a less to the department of about £60,000 on Press Association messages. Since that was so, and the country found that amount of money it would be a fair thing to insist that the P.A. itself in so far as the matter it sent out under this concession should maintain a standard of fairness as between political parties, and as between other individuals. He again referred in detail to the Dunedin incident in regard to which he said an important statement made by Mr Grounds had not been sent by the Press Association. The centra! office of the Press Association failed to recognise that it must take the responsibility for the acts of its individual agents. He could say that 75 per cent, of them were absolutely fair, but in a number of cases—which were fairly large—individuals allowed their own political party leanings to get the better of them, and they suppressed matter occasionally. He had had exeprience of it himself. There was also the case of the member for Grey Lynn which had already been mentioned. While the Press Association got this huge concession it should be fair to all. “WHY NOT”? The Prime Minister: But the Press Association did not send this cable. Mr Holland: No, but when the reply was received they suppressed. ivir Coates: Why shouldn't they mr Holland: Because it was a matter of vital importance Mr Coates: Why not make them pay. as much as the other chap had to pay? Mr Holland: surely the public press af this country is concerned about giving such a reply to the people, instead of this, however, a misleading report was sent out—two or three lines only, misrepreseutiug what was said. Then when its action was exposed in the House, the Press Association goes t. step further and suppresses the exposure. All this is done while the Press Association is getting huge concessions from the country involving the country in a loss of sixty thousand pounds. The Postmaster-General (the Hon. W. Nosworthy) said that so far as the Government was concerned all that was asked for was a fair and straightforward report of what was said to be furnished to everyone in the country. Mr Holland: I accept that statenieul unreservedly. Mr Nosworthy continued that the Government was anxious to see that the money allowed to the Press Association should be used so that everyone, whether friend or foe of the Goveminent, should receive a correct report. He had received a copy of the instructions sent by the head office of the Presy Association to the fcgent at Dunedin, the chairman of the Dairy Control Board spoke. This letter, which was dated May 31st, notified that Mr Grounds was to speak at either Christchurch or Dunedin in reply to the cable sent by the editor of tlie “Times” to London. The writer (the manager of the Press Association) refused to publish the correspondence in its original form, as it was libellous, but expressed no objection to the

sending of a telegram stating the facts of the denial. The telegram would, however, Have to be of a general nature and nothing to associate the association with the affair. “NOT FAIR SERVICE” The only telegram that was sent of the speech, said Mr Nosworthj’ reported Air Grounds as having said that the press criticism of the board was at times bordering on unfair tactics. None could say that this was a fair denial of the cable sent to tho “Daily Mail.” Tho agent at Dunedin was responsible for not sending the message as he was asked to do. The only way the Press Association could be held responsible was through the failure of one of its officers to execute instructions. This Was the attitude of the Government, and a similar stand would be taken up in respect to anyone else in a similar position. In this attitude he had the backing of his colleagues In referring to the cost of £60,000 referred to by Mr Holland, Mr Noworthy said practically as much as this wont in a year in members of Parliament telegrams. Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton): Special correspondents get a reduced rate, too, Mr Nosworthy: We are not discussing that particular item at the mo* ment. Mr Holland: This lias no Application. Mr Nosworthy continued that the Press Association must realise that it depended upon the Government for the concessions. “Wo only Want fair play,” he said, “for everyone-—politi-cally or in any other way. I would regret very much to read that the Leader of the Opposition had made a speech and that wo could not get a real version of it. One likes to know what is going, whether he agrees or not!” ELECTION SPEECHES Mr W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) said ho was concerned with the instructions the Press Association sent to its agents during the election campaign. He understood the instructions were that they should send only the speeches of tlie party leaders. In that respect an injustice had been done to the party of which he was a member. He had represented the leader of his party in the North Island, and because he was not the actual leader he was ignored. He claimed that his speeches should have been reported under the circumstances. The Hon. Mr Nosworthy: The hon. member might get a whole page. Mr Veitch: If it went by value I would get the whole of the newspaper to myself. (Laughter.) Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said a number of the newspapers suppressed what did not suit them, and consequently gave a distorted view of what happened in public life. He did not know that the Parliament could regulate what the newspapers of the Dominion should or should not do in the way of supplying news to the public, but in what they were doing they Were meeting with their own retribution. The day had been when the people believed what they saw in print, but that day had long since gone. Their news was given in such a way as to influence and bias public opinion in the way that the newspapers wished it tc be biassed. Consequently their readers now took the news with a grain of salt, and the papers were losing their influence in the country. Mr H. E. Holland said that in view of the definite statement of the Post-master-General he would not press fer a division.

The amendment was lost on the voices.