THE SECRET CONFERENCE

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIV, Issue 183, 4 August 1943, Page 2

THE SECRET CONFERENCE

THE Auckland City Council at its last meeting approved the issue of, ■*■ and agreed to bear the cost of issuing, "an appeal to the citizens of Auckland," signed by the religious as well as by the civic leaders of the community. In that appeal, as drafted, the citizens are informed that the good name of the community is in danger, and their help is besought to preserve it. "We cannot do without your help," runs the appeal. "The force of public opinion is required to enable us to carry out measures in restraint of excessive drinking and immoral conduct." The force of public opinion is required, yes; but before that opinion can be enlisted and brought to bear it must be fully and responsibly informed, first of the conditions which it is desired to remedy, and then of the measures by which it is proposed to remedy them. An excellent opportunity so to inform the public occurred yesterday, when a conference was held in the Town Hall. It was a representative gathering of men and women of widely varied experience, who might among them have thrown light upon the problem which is the source of great anxiety in the community. Perhaps they did, but the public, for whose benefit the conference was held, and whose servants, in some capacity, most of the delegates are, was not admitted, and the Press was excluded.

This was the second conference of the kind which has been held in secret, and the public is entitled to inquire why. Why should citizens not be trusted to near what is said about them and on their behalf? Why, when they are not trusted, should they be expected to support decisions which are (presumably) the outcome of statements and arguments of which they are unaware? If the subject' matter of the conference had been discussed in Parliament, it would have been discussed publicly, and the people would have been aware of the reasons for any decisions reached. Of yesterday's decisions they know nothing, except the meagre information in a report given out by the Mayor, who was chairman. According to this report there was a consensus of opinion that there should be more police, including more women in uniform, and a further "suggestion" (whose?) that "the sale of liquor in bars for consumption off the premises should be stopped in the meantime in an endeavour to cope with such nuisances as broken bottles in the streets." If the collective wisdom of the conference was expressed in this "suggestion" (as doubtless it was not), then it would have to be judged as an exceedingly unfruitful gathering. The nuisance caused by broken bottles in the streets is by no stretch of the imagination a moral problem, and it was moral problems with which the conference was concerned. As to the method suggested for ending the nuisance, the conference might better have proposed that beer should be sold in tins, or, as a more practicable step, that disciplinary measures be enforced against the bottle-smashers. Perhaps these and other suggestions were made, but the public is not to know. It was entitled to expect leadership from such an assemblage, and it has received little except an intimation that its representatives do not trust it to learn its own business. How, then, can it help them?