Editorial: Powers that be should value Fourth Estate

It's both ironic and disturbing that the David Henry inquiry into the leaking of the Kitteridge report on the GCSB should try to access the phone records of a journalist charged with reporting on politics and politicians.

The inquiry asked Parliamentary Services for the phone records of Fairfax journalist Andrea Vance. It was declined that request but had been given her parliamentary building access records, effectively detailing her movements.

The inquiry was established under the authority of the Prime Minister, though his office denies claims he knew about the phone records request.

Despite what some bloggers will tell you, we're relatively lucky in New Zealand to enjoy an independent press. Our country ranks eight on the Press Freedom Index 2013 behind seven European countries. Last year we ranked 13.

Press gallery journalists represent us in holding power at the highest level to account. Any undue pressure on them from the political system threatens our perception of their independence.

That's why the Henry inquiry's actions are so disturbing.

Reporters who suspect their communications, interactions and movements may be monitored or scrutinised may well limit their activities as a result, stifling the flow of information about what is going on in the corridors of power.

This is a democracy, run by the people, for the people, and our window on that mechanism is the Press Gallery.

I'm not saying inquiries shouldn't have wide-ranging powers to investigate rule-breaking and indiscretion. But threatening to undermine a whole system of political reporting by targeting a journalist in that investigation seems ludicrous.

John Key's office said: "The Prime Minister has previously said he, like most New Zealanders, values the role of the fourth estate around Parliament and he does not think it's appropriate to start looking at their activities."

Someone should have passed that on to David Henry.

•

It seems some people think it fair to run an election campaign through our letters to the editor column.

The Rotorua Daily Post has been accused of stifling free speech with its election policy of not taking letters or columns from those set to run for office.

The message I have been sent states "We, the public, deserve and expect the right to fully hear and consider the values, attitudes, beliefs, policies, vision and aspirations each candidate has for the Rotorua District, irrespective of their wealth, current community standing, or notoriety".

I'm not sure why they think we won't be giving this election full coverage - as we do every time - and telling our readers all they need to know to make an informed choice.

Rest assured, each official candidate, rich or poor, will be offered the opportunity to have their say in our news pages, and not in your readers' forum that is the letters page.