TRANSPORT PUBLICITY

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 569, 23 January 1929, Page 1

TRANSPORT PUBLICITY

ADMISSION OF PRESS DISCUSSED “SOMETIMES UNWISE” ?: v £ SHr—s the Transport Board it f 1 mee, CUP ' ed co "siderab!e tim™ at and caus!d° f board yesterday, ca used a discussion which at times bordered on the acrimonious. tion h of d ih CUSSiOn arose ovcr the ado’pverv on™ anilnS orders, which are d f -° Pen ln their terms, but left the decision as to whether the Press should be admuted to the vote of members « Utere ° f board - when ’ beim- b, y QUCStiun there ; —— men*" mid • unsupported. Y ° alm °st entirely ' that r 't],» o K er - commenced by movin'1 minority^ then T° U , nff ' ‘members in the to disc reasons m open board. r ity of m. ! . St T° nded ’ bllt thp niajor--1 & motion was lost by seven to throe “ALL MEETINGS OPEN” r ' Alorton then moved that -iii Sm? 555 tln «- open^thi der. ’ Mr ’ 1 ottcr providing the seconI do not want to convey the im. behiSdVoiSd doors? wMch St'bl j moUon,” at;tremarked Mr. E. J. Phelan. “i must whin Vm? d eVer ’ tbat there are tunes 11, it do not want the Press present However, the Press generally accepts an indication from the chairman mItVH IS i deslrable to leave a certain matter alone, and there is no harm in their being present. “The impression has been ereated that we do not want our business open to the Press, but that | is entirely wrong.” “ir the Press is to bo present at all meetings. I certainly will not ask them to retrain from publishing anything,” remarked the chairman, Mr. J. A. C. Allum. “Reference has been made to sincerity, but what sincerity am 1 to consider as conveyed when certain members attempt to place this board in a position which no other public body has been asked to occupy. It is absolutely incorrect to suggest that the members of this board lack sincerity in their desire to do their best for the citizens, and let the citizens know what they are doing. “Every sensible business man knows that fn a trading concern like this, there are times when the public must wait a little while before knowing what actibns are contemplated by the board. The members who are so anxious for this amendment will be the first to complain when the time comes.” Messrs. G. Baildon and G. Ashley spoke in favour of leaving the decision to the board. The Press, said Mr. Baildon, had always given the fairest treatment, and it was foolish of the board to tie itself down. NOTHING PERSONAL ! “These suggestions of unfairness and i suspicion should be cut out,” remarked i Air M. J. Coyle. “It is done to give at to the public that certain members are afraid to let the public scrutinise their actions.” Mr. I£J. H. Potter denied that there was anything personal in the amendment, and said the Press could be relied upon to use its discretion. The discussion ending, Mr. Morton rose to make an explanation, and said there had been suggestions of ulterior motives. However, the chairman refused to let him continue, stating that Mr. Morton’s name had not been used in the discussion. Messrs. Morton, Potter, Phelan, and Rhodes voted for the amendment, which * was lost. The final effort to amend the orders ■ was made by Mr. Morton, who objected to there being a penalty attached to a breach of orders, in addition to censure by the chairman. The penalty was limited to £2O, and one of the offences for which it could be imposed was the divulging, outside, of business done when the board or a committee was in committee. Only Messrs. Morton and Potter voted "for an amendment to strike out reference to penalty. «