page 4

Salient

Official Newspaper of Victoria University of Wellington Students Assn.

Editorial

The Salient-Exec saga took a new turn at the Exec meeting on Monday night and again at the AGM on Wednesday, both of which are covered in this week's issue.

At the Exec meeting, a motion was passed to bring to the editor's attention that the Executive has to carry the can in an event of a libel suit and therefore that the members of the executive have the right to peruse the copy and censor it where they think it could be libellous.

Not only is this interfering in the affairs of Salient and hence threatening the autonomy of the Association newspaper, but it is also overturning previous SRC policy 14/69.—

"That any Student Publication shall be over-ruled on matters of content only where the content would open the Association to legal action and that the only body with power to over-rule the student publication on matters of content shall be the Executive of the Students Association in formal meeting, excepting that the President or the Acting-President shall be able to delay publication 24 hrs in order that it may be referred to a meeting of the Executive".

The Executive have no right to do this, as they are bound by SRC policy and are not permitted to make Association policy themselves

Further to this, two of the Exec members who voted for the motion on Monday night altered the meaning of the motion at the AGM which had the effect of confusing the issue completely. Those at the AGM had no way of knowing what the actual Exec motion was till Wednesday night because the whole affair was conducted in closed committee.

The whole affair has the appearance of being hatchet job on Salient, perhaps by those who resented the criticism of them in issue 5. To back up this assertion, we can vouch that no attempt to meddle in the internal affairs of Salient has been made since 1970. It is no coincidence that this present affair followed heavy criticism made by us of the Executive.

Thankfully, those students at the AGM could see clearly the line of action being taken by Messers Thrush, Underwood and those Exec members who voted for the motion. We believe that many of the Exec members who voted for the motion did so with little idea of what they were doing. We ask them to consider their decisions and ask themselves whether they have been taken for a ride.

As far as Salient goes, we are disturbed by Exec members perusing the pages of the newspaper before it goes to the printers. However, now that we have the backing of an Annual General Meeting of the Students Association to back us as a paper autonomous from the Executive, we feel certain that any further attempt to interfere with Salient will be repulsed.

We don't need the Executive to proof Salient before it is dispatched to Wanganui Newspapers. We have our own legal readers and if there are articles which are particularly contentious, then we would have no hesitation in calling the Association lawyer. The implication of the Exec's actions are the that Salient wants to get the Executive into trouble by getting a law suit. The staff of Salient are the last ones in the Association who wish to receive a libel suit.

This however, will not deter us from critically examining events inside and outside of varsity.