Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DEBATES IN HOUSE

PROTECTING OUTSIDERS

MEMBERS' PRIVILEGES

THE LAW OF LIBEI

AMENDMENT- SUGGESTED

"If the broadcasting of Parliamentary debates is to be continued—and it certainly has been a great factor in stimulating interest in public affairs —•we must press for an amendment of the law of libel to protect people outside the House from the tear of defamatory attacks by those inside," said Mr. O. C. Mazengarb, National candidate lor the new Wellington Suburbs seat, in an address at a meeting of supporters at the Assembly Hall, Johnsonville,

"The privilege given to our legislators of immunity from libel suits for anything said in Parliament was never intended to encourage them to broadcast attacks on the character or reputation of other persons," Mr. Mazengarb said.

Following Mr. Mazengarb's address, Ihe following motion moved by the branch secretary, Mr. F. C. Jacobs, was carried unanimously:—"That this meeting voices its protest against the use some members of Parliament are making of the radio to broadcast attacks on the character of people outside the House." Two Speeches Quoted

Speaking generally, Mr. Mazengarb said, Parliamentary privilege had not been abused. In those few cases where previously the conduct of an outsider was criticised in Parliament, the audience had been a limited one, and the press had always exercised a wise discretion in the publicity it had given to personal criticism. "But now that the Parliamentary audience has been extended to include all listeners-in, different considerations apply," he said. "There have been plain indications lately that Parliamentary broadcasts can be used most oppressively and unfairly. "Two outstanding illustrations of tills occurred last week in the speeches of the Minister of Lands, the Hon. F. Langstone, and the Minister of Public Works, the Hon. R. Semple. These Ministers selected evening hours for their addresses, well knowing that at these times many thousands of people would tune in. "First of all, Mr. Langstone compared the Nationalist speakers to 'rats' and 'snakes,' 'leaving a trail of slime wherever they go,' " Mr. Mazengarb said. "The Speaker of the House very properly asked if the Minister was referring to any member of Parliament, and then allowed him to proceed on being assured that the remarks applied to people outside the House. Isn't it delightful to know that in Parliamentary debate -a man is not allowed to speak disrespectfully of another member, although he is there to defend himself, but has complete freedom to speak derogatively of people outside the House? The people who arei humiliated have not the opportunity of replying over the air, and even although they are slandered in this way they are debarred from bringing a libel suit to re-establish their character "

The other outstanding illustration occurred in the speech of Mr. Semple, Mr. Mazengarb said. He had devoted a portion of his speech to an attack upon a woman.

"This New Tyranny"

"What is the remedy for this new tyranny which Parliamentarians have discovered?" Mr. Mazengarb asked. "What protection can private citizens obtain from the wanton and unscrupulous use of the air?

"One thing that suggests itself is to elect to the House men who will not meanly abuse their Parliamentary privileges. But that is perhaps a counsel of perfection in a democracy. As the Government has chosen to broadcast the proceedings of Parliament its good name could be preserved by a rule of debate which prevented a member from making a personal attack on people outside the Mouse without first submitting a draft of his intended remarks to the Speaker. The public could surely

rely upon the influence of the Speaker to restrain .a member from the unfair use of his rights; if necessary, the Speaker could 'cut him off' the air while the attack was being made. "But perhaps the best corrective would come from an amendment to the law of libel disallowing the privilege which members of Parliament now have of slandering other people in a broadcast speech."

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBH19380803.2.121

Bibliographic details

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19699, 3 August 1938, Page 8

Word Count
654

DEBATES IN HOUSE Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19699, 3 August 1938, Page 8

DEBATES IN HOUSE Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19699, 3 August 1938, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert