CABINET AND PRESS

Southland Times, Issue 19575, 12 June 1925, Page 5

CABINET AND PRESS

QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE MEMBERS SHOULD NOT WRITE MR BALDWIN’S OPINION. (By Telegraph. -Press .Assn.--Copyright.) (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.) LONDON, June 10. (Received June 11, 5.5 p.m.) The question of the desirability of members of the Cabinet contributing articles to the Press upon any public policy, was raised in the House of Commons by Mr Johnston (Labour), who asked whether the Prime Minister would draw the attention of Lord Birkenhead to the rule held desirable by members of the previous Cabinets. Mr Baldwin said that the Government had carefully considered the question, and had decided to reaffirm the principle that Ministers of the Crown, while holding office, should refrain from writing articles for publication in any way connected with matters bearing on public policy. Members asked whether that applied to a series of articles now being published by Lord Birkenhead in the London papers, including the question of capital punishment, for murderers. Mr Baldwin, replying, said that he seldom saw the evening papers, and asked whether he would read these articles, he replied that he had a good many things to read. Regarding the controversy which has arisen about members of the Cabinet contributing to newspapers, The Times, in an editorial, said that, although the Government unquestionably was committed to the principle that Ministers were debarred from indiscriminate writing on public affairs, it would clearly bo absurd to lay down a hard-and-fast rule that Ministers should, under no circumstances, express their views in the newspapers. “In the public interest,” says the article, “it may certainly be desirable that some statement of policy should be made authoritatively when there is not an occasion for making a public speech. That, however, is entirely different from the publication of articles by Ministers as a re-gularly-paid business. There are obvious objections to this practice, for once the principle of Ministerial journalism is admitted there would be no limit to its extension, to the real detriment of public service.” The Times added that an order debarring editorial payments being made for such work while a Minister was in office would soon put an end to a dangerous practice.