GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 235, 10 November 1909, Page 2

GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING.

A grout deal of tile time of the House of Representatives was Uken up on Friday l»si in diseiissin-,' a motion,-or, rather, an amendment to a motion, in comuH'lioii witll tin- distribution of (Nnminient advertising. Tim resolution c'!!;!nati' l l']'i>iu Mr. Wrijjht. ami was to (he c/IVcl thitt f-'overmuoni m-'iits ,-liould Ik* distributed to the l'res> rruardlcss of political opinions. A \\A-l.'n-ton morning paper, he said, had fiv-

• [iientjy inserted (Jovernment advertisements at its own eost, not having received tliem in tiie ordinary way, while ether papers ihad been supplied with adveitisemenJs regardless of the fact that the journal referred to had a large einnla (ion. Other Opposition member* t<u/K' up the refrain, alleging speoilie diserinunation in the distribution of advertise ments by the (Jovennnent. The Premier . in the course of his reply. said tiie f!o\* .•rnment had distributed ndverli*.ementt.i throughout the eountiy with perfect fairness, and quoted from a return of the amount spent in the leading Dominion journals during the past nin? 'month* in sup|)ort of hi* *tatement. [ The Opposition, Sir .Joseph Ward said.

took up tlip position that any timu ii ii; vr pjiper started tlic Government. «boulil (rive it tlie same advertisements as had lieen supplied to older-established jui'.rnaK This, lie said, t/lic Government iuul no in toiition of doing. He also explfinod that Wellington journals rercivinj*: tho Imlk of advertisements were 0:1 (lie opposite side of polities, and that tile whole of tile f.'overnnient advertising was conlrolled hy the Advertising IV-p-irlincnl. who conducted it in a system, at ii- manner. This eharjre of favoritism i'l regard lo (ho distribution of Govern ni'nt ndvi'il is an old one. It used io 111' regularly made in I lie late Jlr

lime until, in response to a by the Opposition, a rot urn was t.:Ued of the amounts spent in advertising in She various newspapers. Th? wiifi («,. show that, instead of fho (tavernment papers being "subsidised"— a favorite allocation of the Opponents of tlio Administration —it was proved t'hftt the bulk of the advertising had Itccii jff.fint; to (he Opposition pairs' .\nd, jiul<rin«r by the return read by the Premier, tlu* same condition of nfl'uirs «ti!l obtains, only that the Advantage in , aspect of the Opposition journals is so as to ]je bardlv worth mentioning. And it is only right and proper thai the Government should not specially favor thoK(» journals giving support to Us poiiev anil discriminate against papers 't; lite opposite side of polities. For the 'tavenuneiil is but a trustee, a guardian of tlx- pulilic funds, and must fee that Millie is obtained for every shilling M i 'nt,. apart from any consideration of. " irt v or expediency, whether the money } expended on advertising or anything: ilse. Tn regard to the ease of the "Do- I minion" newspaper, referred to 'bv "Mr ' Wriirht, it seems to us thai if has a 1' L'itimate L'l'ievhnce against the ('tavern- |- will. Tlie paper claims a c'mi-! 1 n t'tioii as big as that enjoyed bv ita ? Wellington contemporaries, but only re- |i reives a fractional piount of the Gov- '< erwmcnt advertising. The paper, it' is «

true, is ultra-conservative in Its policy, am! admittedly the organ of tile capi- , tnlists and the big landholders of ihe , fountrv, and did i' s heal, hyits il.- , advised and unjustifiable criticism, to |. damage the country's linaiieial position j during the recent stringency. Hut tli.'sc | are not valid reasons I'"'. withlioldiug from it the State's advertisements, nor | is the reason that it is a new papc". making a third daily in Wellington, a sound or conclusive one. 'I lie matter is imrelv a business one. and looked at as such there can be no tivo opinions toal the State would be getting better valac from the expenditure of, say, .t' 1(100 in three than in two daily papers. In itself the matter is small and certainly no: worth the time devoted to its ventilation in the ITouse. but there is a principle • involved, and we regret that the I'reinioi. j who is usually fair and broad-minded,' should have taken up the attitude he did il) connection with the subject. The duty of the flovernment in such a matter is plain—it should treat the nows- , paper in question'on its merits, as it has always treated the other Opposition ' journals, and be no party to anything :>v( n suggestive of favoritism.