BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

---

Summary

An item in an Assignment programme broadcast on TV One on 18 June 1998 commencing at 7.30 pm depicted a public meeting of the Act Party in Tauranga. The reporter stated that Act staff had told the broadcaster after the meeting that supporters of the group, Voters’ Voice, had given each Act MP a copy of the recent speeches of Pauline Hansen.

The Chairman of Voters’ Voice (Inc) claimed that the statement was a fabrication. Voters’ Voice took umbrage at the statement, he wrote, for the organisation was constitutionally bound to avoid party political opinion. Act officials could confirm no such event took place, he added.

The broadcaster, Television New Zealand Limited, responded that its investigation revealed that the reporter’s statement was made to him by a senior Act representative in the presence of a witness. It denied that the story was a fabrication and declined to uphold the organisation’s complaint.

Dissatisfied with TVNZ’s response, Voters’ Voice referred its complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons below, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Decision

The members of the Authority have watched a tape of the item complained about, and have read the correspondence (which is listed in the Appendix). On this occasion, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

The Assignment programme broadcast on TV One on 18 June focussed on the Act Party, and one segment depicted a public meeting of the party in Tauranga. The reporter (Mr Richard Harman) noted that supporters of the organisation, Voters’ Voice (Inc), were present at the meeting. His narration included the statement:

Act staff told us that after this meeting Mr Clark and his fellow Voters’ Voice enthusiasts each gave Act MPs a copy of recent Pauline Hansen speeches.

Mr Ray Fidler, the chairman of Voters’ Voice, complained to TVNZ that the statement was a total fabrication. His organisation, he wrote, was constitutionally bound to avoid party political opinion, and had managed to do so throughout its eight years of incorporation. No such event had taken place, he contended, and Act officials had offered written confirmation of that.

In its response, TVNZ advised that it had assessed the complaint under standards G14 and G21 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice. Those standards provide:

G14 News must be presented accurately, objectively and impartially.

G21 Significant errors of fact should be corrected at the earliest opportunity.

TVNZ emphasised that in assessing the complaint, it had not attempted to determine whether or not Voters’ Voice supporters had handed copies of Pauline Hansen speeches to Act MPs. That, it wrote, was not the claim made in the programme. The claim was that Act staff had told the reporter that the distribution of speeches had taken place. Therefore, it continued, the focus of TVNZ’s inquiry had been whether or not the statement had been made to the reporter. Its investigation revealed that the statement described by the reporter had been made to him by a senior Act representative in the presence of a witness, the broadcaster wrote. It was not prepared to name either the source of the statement or the witness.

Where the reporter was quite certain of the information provided to him, and where a witness was also present, TVNZ wrote that it rejected the allegation that the story was a fabrication. It was satisfied that the reporter was told that the speeches were distributed and, it wrote, that was all the programme claimed. It therefore declined to uphold the complaint.

In his referral of the complaint to the Authority, Mr Fidler wrote that because the statement "was made" to the reporter did not give him the justification to proceed with his report. Written statements from all Act representatives present at the Tauranga meeting could be presented to confirm that the reported statement was not made, he said.

In response to a ruling of the Authority pursuant to s.4D(2) of the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1908, TVNZ provided an affidavit of the reporter in which he confirmed that his report was not a fabrication. He swore that a representative of the Act party had given him the information which was reported in the broadcast. The information, he swore, was provided to him in confidence on an "off the record basis".

Responding to the Authority, Mr Fidler stressed that although "the evidence is there, Voters’ Voice did not act in the manner reported on air". He suggested that the statement could not have been true, because at the close of the meeting Voters’ Voice representatives left the meeting and the Act contingent remained. That, he wrote, gave the reporter an opportunity to seek confirmation of the allegations, or to sight a copy of the material. Mr Fidler enclosed a written statement from the chairman of the Tauranga branch of Act (Mr Houlding) in which he confirmed that he had chaired the Act public meeting which was featured in the broadcast. Mr Houlding wrote that he was unaware of the distribution of any written material, including speeches by Pauline Hansen, by Voters’ Voice members present at the meeting. He also wrote that he had spoken with an Act MP who was unaware of any speech distribution, and also unaware of the receipt of the speech material by any of his parliamentary colleagues "as the Assignment programme alleges".

The Authority deals first with the complaint that the reporter’s statement was "a total fabrication". Having considered the information which has been provided to it and which is outlined earlier in this decision, the Authority is of the view that there is nothing in the subsequent information provided by Voters’ Voice which contradicts the statement in the affidavit sworn by the reporter. The Authority therefore accepts the accuracy of the affidavit, and declines to find anything in the challenge to the reporter’s statement which invokes the application of standard G14.

As a result of the Authority’s finding in relation to standard G14, the complaint under standard G21 must be declined. Because the Authority has accepted the accuracy of the statement made by the reporter in his affidavit, it is of the view that there were no matters which required correction in accordance with the dictates of standard G21. Accordingly the Authority declines to uphold the complaint under that standard.

For the reasons set forth above, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
17 December 1998

Appendix

The following correspondence was receieved and considered by the Authority when it determined the complaint:

1. Voters’ Voice (Inc)’s Complaint to Television New Zealand Limited – 10 July 1998
2. TVNZ’s Response to the Formal Complaint – 3 August 1998
3. Letter from Voters’ Voice to TVNZ – 5 August 1998
4. Letter from TVNZ to Voters’ Voice – 6 August 1988
5. Voters’ Voice’s Referral to the Broadcasting Standards Authority – 12 August 1998
6. TVNZ’s Response to the Authority – 26 August 1998
7. Letter from BSA to TVNZ – 9 October 1998
8. Letter from BSA to Voters’ Voice – 9 October 1998
9. Letter from TVNZ to BSA – 14 October 1998
10. Letter from BSA to TVNZ – 15 October 1998
11. Letter from TVNZ to BSA – 22 October 1998
12. Letter from BSA to TVNZ – 28 October 1998
13. Letter from TVNZ to BSA – 30 October 1998
14. Letter from BSA to Voters’ Voice – 5 November 1998
15. Letter from Voters’ Voice to BSA – 12 November 1998