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

Second Edition SPEAKER WILLIS.

PRIVILEGES OE THE PRESS

F URTHER I )ISC USSR)X

(Bj Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) (United Press Association.) (Received 11.15 a.m.) Sydney, September 6. 'On tire debate on Mr Holman's motion, Mr Waddell said ids experience of the great dailies was that whatever their political opinions they generally gave everybody a fair deal. The Telegraph had done noble work for the country, and with its morning contemporary exercised a better influence than all the rest of the literature that was read.

Mr W ood pointed out that this was the third occasion on which the present Government had interfered with the Speaker’s powers. The proposal meant that the Speaker could, with the consent of the House, place himself in opposition to the House.

Mr Cohen was unable to follow the argument that the press had no right to be in, tbo gallery; it had been a custom for 200 years, and established custom was just as strong as law.

Other members urged that the proposal would not improve matters. Mr Griffiths’ amendment, was adopted with the insertion at tine commencement of the quotation of the words “representatives of registered newspapers shall bo admitted to the press gallery during the sittings.”

Mr Fern’s amendment, enabling the Speaker to put a question after 30 minutes’ debate, was carried by 35 votes to 33.

Mr Holman, replying to tbo contention that the motion was unnecessary because the power existed, said the standing orders did not confer the power. They had only the manifestation of power, which always existed in the House. They did not want a full debate and that was when the newspaper representatives desired to enter the House. Wlniat was desired was a standing order applicable to all. The basis of the present press was not recognised in the House, and any right they possessed was based on a custom which was very precarious and might be changed at any time. He wanted the House to say that the Press had a right to be present, instead of depending on custom.

Speakers favoured Mr. Holman’s motion as amended and it was carried by 37 votes to 30.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/STEP19120906.2.40

Bibliographic details

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 12, 6 September 1912, Page 6

Word Count
357

Second Edition SPEAKER WILLIS. Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 12, 6 September 1912, Page 6

Second Edition SPEAKER WILLIS. Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIV, Issue 12, 6 September 1912, Page 6

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