Submission to Local Bills Committee re. Films Bill

Mr Gascoigne outlined the submission prepared on behalf of the Federation to the Select Committee considering the Films Bill. He said that this Government Bill had been promoted as a recodification of the 1976 Cinematographic Films Act and largely an administrative measure. It had been seen by some as an opportunity to assert a moral point of view and promote a toughening in censorship legislation. Mr. Gascoigne felt that it was important for the Federation, as the only body representing film-goers, to present another point of view. The general import of the Federation's submission was that censorship had been functioning well and that this had been reflected in the results of a Departmentally commissioned survey which, in the Minister's words, demonstrated that "it is quite clear... that there is no widespread support for tougher censorship." Mr. Gascoigne suggested that there were three reasons for this public support for the status quo. The 1976 Act had introduced a balanced and reasonable regime for film censorship. It had been served by a capable and sensitive adjudicator in the retiring censor, Mr. Tunnicliffe. We had also been fortunate to have had a Minister for Internal Affairs who had resisted the temptation to intervene in the censorship process which the 1976 Act had given him the right to do.

The Federation's submission had requested an amendment in the Act's definition of a Film Society, suggesting that it mean "any Incorporated Society which has, as a primary purpose, the exhibition of films with a view to promoting the study of film as a means of cultural expression." Had this change been, incorporated into the new Act, the age restriction to membership would have been waived, along with restrictions on advertising and public attendance. Unfortuantely our recommendation had not been heeded and the 1976 definition of a Film Society had been retained in the new Act. Mr. Gascoigne hoped that our recommendation would take priority in any future changes to the Act.

The Federation had also requested the removal of the section of the Act regarding the censorship of publicity material, pointing out that no other publicity material was subject to such inspection. This recommendation had not been taken up in the Act, but exemptions were available in special circumstances. The Federation's submission had protested at the retention of the Ministerial right to withdraw a film from exhibition for resubmission to the Board of Review, a provision which leaves the way open for political censorship. This Ministerial right had been retained in the new Act.

The submission had supported the Government's move to make the censor's classifications variable depending on the circumstances of screening so that certain restricted films could be screened to minors accompanied by their parents or with parental permission. This proposed change had drawn particular fire from the morals campaigners, but seemed a worthwhile move to the Federation, in light of the educative value of some restricted titles.

Finally the Federation had recommended the abandonment of the Film Trade Board, querying the need for statutory backing for a compulsory trade organisation. This recommendation had been taken up by the new Act which had provided for the continuation of the Film Trade Board until June 1985.