asked the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defensive Measures whether permission was refused to publish Press reports of supplementary questions relating to Dáil question re censoring of the election campaign speeches in Monaghan, but that subsequently the newspapers were notified that they could publish a version of these supplementary questions compiled in the Censor's office; and that no other report of the proceedings would be allowed to be published.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Press Reports of Dáil Questions.
Permission was at no time refused to the Press to publish a complete or a fairly balanced report of the discussion on the question raised by the Deputy on 4th February relating to Press censorship during the preelection period. Permission was refused for the publication of reports which had been so summarised as to give a wrong impression of a reply to a supplementary question on an issue of vital significance to the nation.
It is true to say, then, that the only version the newspapers would be allowed to publish was the version supplied by the Minister from his own Department?
That is not true.
Is it true that the version was prepared in the Minister's Department?
I have answered the Deputy's question, if he wants to take it in.
I want to know—the question is quite clear—whether the newspapers were notified that they could publish a version of these supplementary questions compiled in the Censor's office. Is that true or not?
I have already answered the Deputy's question. Permission was at no time refused to the Press to publish a complete or fairly balanced report of the discussion, prepared in the newspaper offices.
Is it not true that there was a version compiled in the Minister's office which was sent to the Press for publication and, when the newspapers refused to use it, they would be allowed to publish nothing?
The Deputy has seen the report in the newspapers.
I have seen it four days after I put down a Parliamentary question, but is it not true that the papers were refused permission to publish anything except what had been compiled in the Minister's office?
The paper that published that report was quite free to publish a balanced report on the day after the discussion took place in the Dáil.
Is it not true that they were refused permission to publish a report of what actually passed in the House, but only the version compiled in the Minister's office?
I said that permission was refused to publish a report which was so summarised as to give a wrong impression of the replies to a supplementary question on an issue of vital importance to the nation.
Is it not true that they were invited to publish a version of the discussion edited by the Minister, from which certain paragraphs were abstracted and in which certain words were inserted by him?
We abstracted no paragraph from it.
And in which words were inserted by him?
No.
Yes.
Words spoken by me on a question of vital importance to the nation were deleted, and it was suggested to the newspapers that unless they gave the people a fair report they should not publish it. Any paper that gave a fair report was allowed to publish it.
A report as drafted by the Minister.
A fair report.
asked the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defensive Measures whether a leading article or any article submitted for censorship since February 4th, 1943, condemning his treatment of Press reports of Dáil questions submitted by a Dublin newspaper were suppressed, and, if so, why.
The Press Censor is not only authorised, but instructed, to facilitate newspapers in the publication of matter which they desire to publish and which, as originally submitted, is prejudicial to the public safety or the preservation of the State, provided that it is so amended as not to be prejudicial to these vital interests. The Press Censor is not authorised, nor has he ever sought, to compel a newspaper to publish matter which was submitted originally in an unobjectionable form or which had been so amended as to be unobjectionable.