LABOUR & RADIO

Waikato Times, Volume 127, Issue 21191, 14 August 1940, Page 9

LABOUR & RADIO

UNFAIR USE ALLEGED RESOLUTIONS AT AUCKLAND MR ALGIE ATTACKS POLICY (Special to Times) AUCKLAND, Tuesday All loyal citizens would agree that, at the present time, criticism of the Government should be avoided so far as that was possible, said Mr R. M. Algie in an address at the Auckland Chamber of Commerce today. The war must and should come first. The task of winning it was so completely all-embracing that very few people had either the will or the power to give much attention to anything else. If, therefore, one could honourably escape from the task of criticising the broadcasting policy of the Government, one would be more than glad to do so. Unfortunately, however, the unfair and undemocratic use of radio by the Labour Party had not been solely a war-time activity, nor was it even a war-time necessity.

“It is high time that listeners protested—and protested in emphatic terms—against the excessive fees charged by the Government for the broadcasting service,” said Mr Algie. The sum paid by New Zealanders was far too high when compared with that paid by listeners in other parts of the world. In general, New Zealanders paid 5s a year more than license holders in other countries, and 7s or 8s a year more than was needed by the Government to provide the service received. The failure of the Government to reduce license fees was just one more example of a steadily growing total of broken promises. When the Hon. F. Jones introduced the Broadcasting Bill in 1936 he contended that the service should be controlled by the Government so that it could be run “in the interests of the people.” “Back to the People” “Was it in their interests,” asked Mr Algie, “to charge them 7s or 8s a year more than was necessary?” In his speech in the House Mr Jones went further and said that if profits were made they would come back to the people. In point of fact, huge profits had been made; they already reached the enormous sum of nearly £700,000. Had those profits, or any part of them, been returned to the people in the form of reduced fees? Mr Jones seemed to be in some doubt as to the value of his promise, for he went on to say that the Government could use such profits for the improvement of the service or for “any other purpose that may be necessary-” Did that look like giving the profits “back to the people?” Labour members had repeatedly stated that the broadcasting service was to be operated in the interests “of the people.” In spite of their many protestations to this effect it was worth remembering that early in the present year the privilege of paying license fees by quarterly instalments had been taken away from the people and in its place they had been requested to make their contribution half-yearly in advance. In other words the conditions of payment had been made harder by a Government which boasted loudly and repeatedly by its burning desire to look after the interests of “all the people all the time.” “Determined From Beginning” “There is not a shadow of doubt,” declared the speaker, “that some members of the Government had determined from the very beginning to use the radio services for the purpose of disseminating party propaganda.” The most glaring example of the evil complained of was afforded by the long-continued and regular broadcasts from the commerical broadcasting stations on Sunday evenings. It was to the lasting credit of Mr P. Fraser that he had done so much to effect a marked improvement in this respect; and, in acting as he had done, he had followed a line that was perfectly consistent with his previous speeches regarding radio policy. As long ago as 1936, Mr S. G. Smith, M.P., said, “The Government will use the air to defend itself, but the people who oppose the Government will not have the same opportunity I want to put on record my opinion that, in the days to come the air will be flooded with purely party political propaganda and those in opposition to the Government will have their case heard very infrequently.” That prediction had been abundantly fulfilled, and the Government stood convicted of a use of broadcasting that had been partisan, unfair and decidedly undemocratic. Master Of Own Publicity In 1936, during the early stages of the debate upon the Broadcasting Bill, Colonel Hargest drew the attention of the House to the fact that the Prime Minister, the late Mr Savage, had declared that the Government intended to be “the master of its own publicity.” That was a clear hint that a service paid for by the whole of the people was to be used for the special benefit of one political party and those who supported it. Listeners, it seemed, were to pay 25s a year to enable the Labour Party to trim the wings oi' the newspapers to a degree that would be in conformity with the taste of the members of that party. Was that a proper use to make of a public utility paid for entirely by the people as a whole?. “The dangers incidental to the political control of radio services have been pointed out over and over again,” said Mr Algie. Germany, Italy and Russia provided glaring illustrations of the evil results that could be secured by the extreme j application of such a system. In j Great Britain all the best opinion j appeared to be strenuously opposed to the placing of radio broadcasting services within the reach of political influence. Resolutions Passed The meeting passed the following resolutions: — (1 ) That in view of the financial position of'the radio services as disclosed in the reports submitted to j

Parliament, the Government be asked to give favourable consideration to the question of the reduction of the annual fees paid by license holders. (2) That the Government be asked to refrain, as far as possible, from the use of Sunday evenings for the purposes of the making of broadcasts of a political nature. (3) That in its use of the radio it be requested to adhere to those principles of justice and fair play which are the basis of a democratic system; and that, in the light of such principles, it be urged to extend to the official Opposition, as a matter of right, an opportunity to broadcast equivalent to that which it claims and exercises for itself.