NEWSPRINT CUTS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27447, 21 July 1950, Page 7

NEWSPRINT CUTS

British Government Regrets

“MUZZLING” ALLEGED

NZPA Special Correspondent LONDON, July 19. A denial that the British Government wants to muzzle the press by cutting the number of newspaper pages still further by the rationing of newsprint was made by Mr Harold Wilson, the President of the Board of Trade, during, a debate in the House of Com-

mons. He said that the Government regretted the newsprint Crisis that had arisen. He and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir

Stafford Cripps, were considering how many dollars should be spent on newsprint in the second half of

next year. Mr Wilson also said that the export nhxt year of British-made newsprint, which the newspapers say do not earn any dollars, was under consideration. Remarking that the exports went mainly to Australia and South Africa, Mr Wilson added: “I can certainly give no assurance at all about the future of newsprint exports from this country.” Newsprint for periodicals had been freed, but if there were any further cut in the newsprint allocated to the newspapers then periodicals would suffer a corresponding cut. “ I myself and the whole House would like to see our papers a good deal larger than they are now,” Mr Wilson said. He described the allegation of “muzzling" by the Government as nonsense. Mr R. A. Butler told Mr Wilson that the Opposition attached the greatest importance to a “very serious position.” “We shall,” he said, "expect either a statement or a discussion before the House rises next week.” The Manchester Guardian, in a leader, says that if newspapers, which were recently cut to six pages, “are further reduced in size,” they will become once again the miserably attenuated sheets they were during the war. They will be the smallest papers * in any advanced country of the world. The Daily Mail says that the newsprint position is a deplorable record of Government bungling. “All of which,” it says, “adds up to the sinister fact that, whether intended or not, it has applied censorship to the newspapers. It may be indirect, but it is nevertheless a savage blow at our cherished liberties.”