From the New Zealand TV Weekly. November 14, 1966.
The New Zealand TV Weekly invited the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. K. Holyoake, and the Leader of the Opposition, Mr N. E. Kirk, to comment on the introduction of a second television channel.
The reader may judge for himself if the National or Labour Party seriously plans to give viewers a choice of television entertainment by examining the following statements and reading between the lines.
Mr K. Holyoake
While most New Zealanders look forward rather than back it does no harm on occasions to glance bricfly Over our shoulders to see what has been accomplished. This applies to television no less than in any other field of development.
The television industry in New Zealand is a young one but remarkable progress has been made. Approximately half a million sets have been registered in five years compared with the thirty years it took to achieve the same figure in radio. For an amenity that offers so much not only in the field of entertainment to urban dwellers but even more to rural dwellers it is right that people now look to extensions of service— particularly to the establishment of a second television channel, Not unnaturally the question of a second channel is of the greatest concern to those who already enjoy good reception and who seek variety in programes, It is of far less concern to those who have poor reception or none at all.
However desirable it may be for any section of the community, the development of television-indeed the development of the broadcasting industry as a whole-must take its place alongside the other demands for expanded services in other flelds, except where it can be a significant factor in, for example, attacting labour to where it is most needed and thus permit the development of resources in more remote areas. Television can generally be considered a non-productive service. This in no way detracts from the force of television or of its value as a social amenity but development over the relatively short period of five years has required an overall capital investment by the Broadcasting Corporation and the public in excess of £60,000,000. Total Government expenditure relating to television during this time has been well in excess of £100,000,000 taking into account the necessity to establish additional power stations, the cost of electricity for transmission and the additional heating requirements for TV rooms through the winter nights. Clearly existing services must be used to the fullest extent before additional services are considered. Any extension, regardless of the form of control under which it functions or by whom it is used, must place considerable demands on an already limited skilled labour force, and on available finance—particularly overseas funds. It is the policy of Government to bring to the people of New Zealand the widest possible range of goods and services—including television. It is also Government's obvious responsibility to determine the order of priorities. First priority has so far been given to single channel coverage and this must remain until the greatest possible return has been extracted from the capital so far invested and until Government can see its way clear to permit further expansion. Nor is the problem entirely one of economics. There are far-reaching social implications—influenced, if not determined, by the programme standards that are maintained. The medium is essentially one of entertainment in the broadest sense but it also has a tremendous, if expensive, potential in the field of education. These are but some of the problems faced when considering expanded television services.
In my view the first requirement is a further extension of single chan- nel coverage; second, realisation of the fullest potential of the existing system. It is then, and only then, that Government would be justified in considering the question of second channels and how and by whom they might be controlled. Technical de- velopments could) bring sudden and quite far-reachi:g changes of plan but these are i0t immediately apparent. While the cost structure of television remains as at present progress will necessarily be slow.
If the public is sometimes impatient at what appears to be unnecessary delay it should be remembered that In the United Kingdom with its inflnitely greater resources, single channel operation existed for ten years of the post-war period before a second channel was introduced and then only after an enquiry extending over a period of some years. The pattern in New Zealand will not necessarily be the same but this example does illustrate that alternative television programmes are not introduced without a very full investigation of all factors.
Mr N. E. Kirk
Television is still at a limited stage of development in New Zealand, but it has already shown what an im- portant medium of information, edu- cation, and entertainment it can be. Conversely, recent events have shown how this potential can be stultified unless those that control it do so objectively, in the public interest, and are made answerable to the public for their actions.
The Labour Party, despite suggestions to the contrary, supports the general pattern of Corporation control of both television and radio. This was our policy at the 1963 general election, and it is our policy at this election.
We are concerned, however, at the recent controversy over the sup- pression of the Compass programme on decimal currency. The incident itself! was bad enough, but the comments which have — subsequently been made by other — television producers and comperes have suggested that the decimal currency incident is only a small part of a general pattern of censorship.
A Labour Government will therefore increase Ministerial responsibility for the Corporation's actions or lack of action. The last thing we want is Ministerial interference. It seems clear, however, that the legislative provision that instructions from the Minister of Broadcasting must be given to the Corporation in writing is not ensuring that there is no political partiality in programme production or selection.
The only way to ensure this is to make the Minister of Broadcasting answerable to Parliament on matters of administration and programmes. The Government of the day, whether it be Labour or National, will then have to take responsibility for timidity or partiality in programmes of public interest and importance.
The Corporation's declared role is to give the public objective, independent information on matters of public interest, and a Labour Government will ensure that they do this without fear or favour.
This is the climate in which our television system should be developed. Labour supports the progressive extension of coverage and channels as quickly as the economy can meet the additional cost and as soon as staff and facilities can be provided.
We believe that additional channels should be under Corporation and not private control. We also believe that as coverage and channels increase television should be used more and more as an educational rather than a purely entertainment medium.
Certainly the entertainment side should not be neglected—the opportunities television gives for the family to be entertained together within the home are socially very important. Overseas experience has shown that television is one of the greatest educational aids possible, however, and it should be used to educate children and adults within and outside school hours.
Although, as I have said, we believe that modifications are necessary to overcome shortcomings in the present administration of television, we are equally sure that television is developing soundly.
There will always be criticism of the quality and selection of programmes—only a nation of ‘automatons could be in complete agreement on what is interesting or entertaining. I am sure that we are getting some of the best overseas programmes that are available, however, and television staff are regularly demonstrating that New Zealanders are capable of producing excellent programmes themselves.
A Labour Government will do everything it can to maintain and improve the quality and choice of programme. We accept the principle of commercial television, with revenue being used for the development of television itself. At the same time, we will ensure that there is a proper balance between commercial and non-commercial programmes. Television is potentially a most important social and educational force, and Labour will plan and help its development so that New Zealanders can get every possible benefit from it.
Comments powered by CComment