UNDEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22903, 10 June 1936, Page 9

UNDEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES

DICTATORSHIP OF THE STATE

(FltOM GUI! PAKLIAMENTAIty ReI’OBTER)

WELLINGTON. June 9.

The opinion that the Broadcasting Bill gave the party iu power dictatorial powers that were not in the interests of democracy was expressed by Mr J. Hargest (Opposition, Awarua) during the second reading of the Bill iu the House of Representative to-night. Mr Hargest said the board might have made mistakes, and its progress might not have been very rapid, but its programmes must have had something in them to commend themselves to listeners, otherwise there would not have been the remarkable growth in the number of licences during the last few years. With the exception of Canada, no other part ot the British Empire had a broadcasting system comparable with the system proposed in the Bill. Slate control, in Canada had proved a failure, and tbdre was a strong agitation for the adoption of some other system.

Mr Hargest said the measure was modelled on the State-controlled systems of Italy and Germany, and it was iu line with the dictatorial legislation enacted by the Government in recent weeks, the effect of which would be to deprive many people of their liberty. Behind the State operation of broadcasting there would always be the shadow of the Minister, who would dictate the form which the programmes must follow. In time the listeners as a whole would deeply resent what was now being done. Ultimately, the B stations, which the Government seemed so anxious to assist, would go to the wall, because New Zealand was not large enough to support A stations, B stations, and the proposed commercial C stations. Listeners would soon become heartily tired of advertising over the air, and they would feel that they had been “had.” It was only natural that the Government would use the radio at election times for propaganda purposes.