RADIO BROADCASTING

Otago Witness, Issue 4042, 1 September 1931, Page 33

RADIO BROADCASTING

NEW SYSTEM OF CONTROL. AN INDEPENDENT BOARD. WELLINGTON, August 29. The Government has decided that the New Zealand broadcasting service will, at the expiration of the company’s lease, be placed under the control of an independent board, according to a statement issued from the office of the Post-master-general (Mr J. B. Donald) today. As the agreement with the company automatically expires at the end of December it was necessary to decide what system of control would be best to meet the needs of the Dominion in the future. Cabinet appointed a committee, consisting of Mr Donald, Mr H. Atmore, Mr A. J. Stallworthy, and Mr A. J. Murdoch, to go into the question, and this committee considered the methods in vogue in other countries, and heard evidence from the directors of the present lessee company. It was unanimously decided that the British Broadcasting Corporation was the model which could most readily be adapted to the needs of the Dominion, offering as it did all the advantages of non-political direction with none of the disadvantages attaching to a private monopoly of a public utility. Cabinet has confirmed the decision of the committee, and a Bill to give effect to it is now ready for presentation to Parliament. The proposed board will be vested with the ownership of all stations and equipment, and with the entire control of the technical and studio staffs. The Post and Telegraph Department, as at present, will collect the license fees and allot the wave lengths, etc. The intention is that the board shall consist of the chairman and four others, all appointed by the Government.

THE GOVERNMENT’S SCHEME “PURCHASE AND NATIONALISATION.” *. CHRISTCHURCH, August 30. Interviewed regarding the Government’s alternative scheme for the control of broadcasting in New Zealand, Mr A. R. Harris, general manager of the Radio Broadcasting Company, said: “In effect the Government's proposal means the purchase and nationalisation of the present broadcast service, and a further extension of State ownership in the field of public services. The personnel of the board appointed by the Government will have no monetary liability in the undertaking. Once this is done all incentive to efficiency is. gone. Also I understand the intention is to place the board beyond political control, but it remains to be seen how this is to be done without jeopardising the public interest. Such a board, having no monetary obligations, would be subject to some form of political veto. It is not possible to dissociate Government ownership from Government control. Two and a-half years ago the company expressed the opinion that additional radio coverage was required to provide an efficient broadcast service, and recommended to the Government a scheme of relay stations, and offered to provide these conditional on the license being extended for a period so that the company would have a reasonable chance of reimbursing itself for the additional capital expenditure and operating expenses involved in the wider service. The period was for a total of five years, including the unexpired term. Under the existing legislation the Government had no power to grant a longer period. Over two years of that period have now elapsed, and had the proposals been accepted the additional services would have been well under way. With less than three years to complete the whole scheme before the company’s extended license had expired the obligations would have been contractual without liability of any kind to the State. As it is, the extensions that are so vitally required are still uninitiated. Under the proposed board there will be no contractual obligation or any guarantee of continuity of any one policy. This is what actually happened in Great Britain and Australia. In one case a plan for regional stations was proposed, and in the other a system of relay stations. In neither case have they been carried out to schedule. There is no doubt that contractual obligations under private enterprise with adequate safeguards to the public is the only sound method for progressive and efficient development. The company’s figures also show, particularly in the first few years of operation, that had it not adhered to a rigid policy a big deficit would have been carried forward, and. as it was, losses were made. Only in the last year has it been able to place the service on a sound financial footing.