The Daily News. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1924 SOCIAL LEGISLATION.

Taranaki Daily News, 19 September 1924, Page 4

The Daily News. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1924 SOCIAL LEGISLATION.

While it is unreasonable to expect the Government to be responsible for preserving children from all baneful influences likely to affect their morals, there can be no doubt that the deputation from the women’s branch of the Nsw Zealand Labour Party, which recently waited upon the Minuter for justice (Hon. C. J. Parr) made' out a good case in relation to legislation concerning certain picture shows. At the same time, whatever harmful results may ensue from the attendance of children at these shows and witnessing what the Minister described as “the worst kind of material for a child’s imagination,” the fault is that of the parents or guardians for allowing the young people to be present when such pictures are shown. The problem of providing an effective remedy is by no means free from difficulties. There are many excellent films which are capable of exercising a beneficial influence on the young, while others are good educational aids, and some have a direct appeal to the humorous side of child life without being in any way harmful. No one, however, can truthfully deny that there exists a need for a stricter censorship, together with a proviso that no child under sixteen should be allowed to enter a picture theatre unless all the pictures on view have been certified by the censor as suitable for exhibition before children. Even that, precaution, however, would only be a palliative, the real remedy being the universal adoption of the view expressed by the Minister that “from the point of view of physical health alone the children would be far better at home.’ That contention at onee raises the question of whether parents are debarrad from attending picture

theatres, for, in a very large number of eases, they must either be deprived of this popular form of recreation by having to stay at home with their children or else take the lattei’ with them. The Minister blames parents for taking children to see pictures unsuitable for them. In the abstract he is right, but it may possibly happen that the very pictures which attract the parents are such as may prove harmful to the children. Practically it is a matter of taste, and, on that head, a quarrel is out of the question. It may be argued, not without justice, that certain nights in the week could be set apart for the exhibition of moving pictures of an attractive and elevating type, but even that step would not suit all patrons because of other calls on their time for these particular evenings. It is pleasing to know that the Minister does not blame the picture proprietors, whom he quite rightly credits with a desire to help; but these proprietors have only a limited selection to choose from, or, more correctly, they have to take what is on offer in their particular circuit. Thus they have not a free hand, and most practical people will admit such a position is by no means conducive to the right class of pictures being available. It would seem, therefore, that the whole question of desirable and objectionable films might be overhauled from the first step upwards. In this direction a thorough inquiry by competent judges—men and women—might with advantage be entered upon. The production of cinema films is naturally a costly business, yet there can be no doubt that the fabulous sums paid in the creative work, as well as to the chief actors are beyond all reason, while tending to rely upon sensations that might very much better be eliminated so far as the public are concerned. This craze for extravagance appears to increase rather than to decrease, and there can be no doubt that its effect is harmful. Possibly if a definite move were made by an international organisation, formed after a thorough investigation, it might be possible to revolutionise the present system ‘ in the direction of making it all that ean be desired. Meanwhile all that, seems possible is to exercise an intelligent censorship, and in this respect it is reassuring to know that the Minister is quite in sympathy with the appointment of a woman of discretion on the censorship board. The board knows it can only rely [ upon the co-operation of the pro- i prietors in dealing with the whole matter on sane and just lines, yet it must be admitted who is to move and what is to be done may well tax the resourcefulness of all concerned.