It seems likely that a Students' Association scholarship for Salient editors will shortly be established. Before the 1963-1964 executive completed its term of office, it adopted by a large majority a publications committee recommendation to this effect. As the 1963-1964 executive was then nearing the end of its term of office, it contented itself with a resolution recommending the incoming officers to implement the proposals.

The acceptance of the publications committee recommendation came as a surprise to many; especially when considering that when the scheme was initially suggested the executive was almost unanimously opposed to it. This change of attitudes was probably brought about by a detailed report presented by the 1963-1964 publications committee chairman and the thorough manner in which the committee dealt with the problem, both before and after the presentation of the report.

In a report to the publications committee on "Aspects Relating to Compensatory Payment to Salient Editors" it was suggested that Salient working conditions had changed so much in the last five years that, unless a compensatory scheme was immediately adopted, much injustice would be done to Salient editors.

In support of the view that some sort of compensatory scheme was desirable, the report presented one detailed case study, an analysis of Salient production figures dating back to 1940. and an attempt to define the principle of voluntary services by students. It was also suggested that a compensatory scheme would accelerate the advent of the day when Salient become financially independent, The report also commented on the dangers of compensatory payment in relation to the notion of "student press freedom" and suggested safeguards to guarantee press freedom in the event of the scheme being adopted by the executive.

Acceptance Unanimous

The report found the unanimous acceptance and approval of the publications committee. Nevertheless the recommendations for compensatory payment made therein were largely ignored. Instead it was resolved that a Salient scholarship be set up. It seemed to be the feeling of the committee that a scholarship scheme would be a satisfactory compromise between those who opposed paying students for services on principle' and those who felt that Salient constituted one of those cases where an exception was necessary and justifiable.

It now remains for the publications committee, under the guidance of its chairman, Chris Robertson, to present a detailed draft of the terms and conditions for the scholarship. This draft, after it has been reviewed by the education committee, would then be submitted to the executive for final approval and implementation.

Because many of the present executive members were present neither at the publications committee nor the executive meetings which discussed the proposals, there could be a tendency for the executive to re-argue the issue. It might even question the recommendation of Its predecessors. The latter course would constitute a retrograde step; the question has been discussed generally for the last five years and in detail for the last 12 months. Any further procrastination would jeopardize the existence of Salient and the financial and philosophical welfare of the association.

Tact Needed

Much therefore depends on the political tact of the publications officer. He will have to guide the scholarship scheme through its final stages, and see that the work of both the past executive and the publications committee is not wasted. It would be ironical if after prolonged debates and extensive discussion, the present executive refuses to implement the recommendations of its predecessors.

Among the publication officer's problems will be the question of actual finance. Non-student sources have been suggested. Other alternatives were Cappicade profits, a system of compulsory subscriptions, and that £200 per annum be taken out of general association funds.

The scholarship will, it is hoped solve finally and conclusively Salient's constant financial and administrative difficulties. Editors sometimes worry more about Salient administration than the actual content of the newspaper. Even the most vociferous supporters of the scheme, however, are unwilling to give an unqualified guarantee of success to the venture.

New Approach

Nevertheless, in the words of one supporter, it has been said that "it is better that we risk losing £200 in a year, and be able to say that we have tried, than to continue subsidising Salient at the rate of some £500 or £600 per annum." The time has come for a new approach. The alternative would be to reduce the production of Salient to some six or seven times a year, which no executive would be likely to do or else to continue paying rising Salient costs. The University of Auckland association now faces an annual subsidisation cost of some £1000. They have no compensatory scheme or scholarship scheme in force.