DRIVERS' WAGES

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21465, 6 May 1935, Page 18

DRIVERS' WAGES

TO TUB EDITOR OP TUB PHJS33. Sir,—At last night's meeting of the Citizens' Association's candidates at Sydenham, Cr. T. Milliken is reported to have stated that the Labour council in its dying hours had attempted to raise the rates of pay for drivers to a point, far above those ruling m the industry. I have previously had to refute misstatements hy this candidate in regard t.o a coal contract, and now he attempts to get away with another untrue statement. The award relating to council drivers was renewed on October 10, 1934, Such mis-statements can only be made for the purpose of misleading the electors, and I trust you will allow the space to refute them. —Yours, etc., E. PARLA.NE. May 3, 1935. [When this letter was referred to Cr. Milliken yesterday, he said that in Lis address at Sydenham he quoted figures showing the disparity in the rates of pay of council drivers and the drivers of private firms. As an instance he said that a two-horse driver for the council receives £5 Is Gel a week, together with other benefits, as against the £4 13s a week received by a brewer's driver driving a five and a half to 10-ton lorry. This was no misstatement of fact. Mr Milliken said ho referred : n his address to the date of the a war'.. "I repeat that it is impossible Cor Mr Parlane to refute my statements regarding the coal contract, and I now give him the opportunity to attempt to do so," concluded Mr Milliken! THE NEW ST AMI' ISStT. to nil EPiTOu or ri.'E ram Sir,--Are all Englishmen as atrabilious as our friend who criticises New Zealanders and their stamps in your issue of Saturday last? And ifiust. we be everlastingly singing "God Save the King" in order to attest. outloyal ty? The halfpenny stamp for which I was responsible is not merely a drawing of a bird but a design as well, and if a design has no merit as a pattern then it is not a good design. The pattern is not destroyed by placing I lie design in any position, and in any ease a designer may surely lake it for granted that people can read. "Englishman" may be gratified to notice that I have'placed the Imperial crown in a prominent position in my design for the fourpenny stamp, but New Zealand should not be accused of aggressive nationalism merely because she lays claim to some small individuality of her own. Nor are New Zealanders bound to conform to any type dictated to them by others, either in their art or in any other direction. —Yours, etc., JAS. FITZGERALD. May 4, 1935. to ina cunoj or nir. eat ».•* Sir, — I come dowri from my high pedestal of Aotearoa manhood to meet "Englishman" upon his own level. His remarks about our new issue of stamps are quite uncalled-for. The halfpenny beetle-green, 1 think, is a most delightful design and portrays a friendly little bird, the fantail, which all who have wandered in our forests must have seen. The arutmie penny may not be as well executed on the stamp as on the lettercard, but it is far superior to the stamp it has displaced. The latter was anything but beautiful. The same might be said of the halfpenny of the previous issue, too. I have some copies of it which are very badly' executed and it is nearly impossible to read the words "postage and revenue" along ihe ton This I ask "Englishman." If we cannot be loyal to his Majesty the King without seeing his portrait every time we send away or receive a letter, is our patriotism worth anything? I remember hearing a lecture some years ago by a fellow of the Royal PhilatelicSociety, and if I remember correctly he stated that the King approved of pictorial stamps if it was going to be a benefit to the countries concerned. However, we are to have the Silver Jubilee stamps in a day or two and they ought to show any who'are doubtful of our loyalty to the King that we still honour his Majesty.—Yours, etc., ERUERA T. ROPATA. May 4, IC3T). THE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS jo te« bditob or rue rrtn.'i Sir,—Two statements have been made by a councillor of the present City Council which no Labour supporter has attempted to contradict. Ratepayers must conclude the statements are correct and will understand Labour's silence. The statements are: first, that the charges for the Mayoral car amount to about £7 a week C£3f>4 a year); second, a member of the council staff getting £.lO a week is allowed £3 10:; a week car allowance. It is time this kind of thmg was looked into. I notice that in speaking of I'oad and street improvement Labour speakers omit all reference to the fact that the present council has had £300,000 loan money to work on. Then the councillors talk of what they have saved.-—Yours, etc., RATEPAYER. May 4, 1935. TO TUB BPITOH OK THE PiißnN.' Sir, —There is a real battle at this election which should rouse the apathy of the elector who usually does not trouble to vote. Shall the Trades Hall council continue to make such a largo difference between the men in their sheltered industry, working for a concern which pays wages, superannuation, sick pay, and holidays out of rates, and the men in other industries who are competing with other labour all over the world. Wages ,in England are two-thirds of ours, in Germany nne-third, 111 Japan

one-sixth. It is absolutely unworkable that the discrepancy among the wages in the unsheltered and sheltered and exporting trades should be as great as at present. Local bodies should always set a good standard, but not build up a privileged class as the present majority on the Christchurch City Council is doing. We probably owe our thanks to the present Trades Hall representatives on the council for making the fact so pronounced the month before the election. The majority of the present councillors evidently wished by greatly advancing the wages of drivers, etc., etc., to make the present staff very much interested in seeing that the Trades Hall representatives were again returned as councillors. They forgot that the Trades Hall only represents a small minority of the electors. The battle between the sheltered man (I leave your readers each to reckon up to which class he belongs) and the unsheltered man is being fought all over the world. The election in New South Wales apparently hinges on whether the public servants are taking too great an interest in the elections. In France the public servants are so many that they dominate the elections. In America Roosevelt is trying to hold the balance between the tariff-protected industries and the exporting producers. Wherever unemployment is rife the discrepancy between the sheltered and unsheltered man is very plain. The problem of the exchange and the future of the currency is really very much a wage question, . even more than a financier's. Exchange is the visible sign of the state of the currency. The idea that any one country can expand or inflate its currency irrespective of its creditors or the people who buy from it, cannot be substantiated. What a country can export depends on the enterprise of its people, and at bedrock on the wages it oays to all interested. So, no body of men. even the Christchurch City Council, can pay wages which cannot be paid by the surrounding fanners, market gardeners, shopkeepers, and manufacturers, who really provide the rates of the city. Therefore a council must be placed in office by the ratepayers, which will do the fair thing by all classes and not be dominated bv a comoaratively few men mcetin>.'"at the Trades Hall. I quite grant that they might have done wor<e. but it is Christchurch electors' duty to place in office men who will do the fair thing by all sections of the community.—Yours, etc.. EXCALIBUR. May 4, lfttfj.

TO rilß EUiTOI Or THB 1-RiSfl. .Sir,- One serious mistake the Labour party has made in the municipal elections has been to forget or ignore the fact that the Labour parly if; on the defence, and that its policy and actions for the last term are being challenged. The Very thought that it is so challenged appears to have roused the fury of the Labour candidates, and instead of replying to perfectly legitimate criticism of its administralivo term it has given itself in Disraeli's phrase to "maligning its opponents and magnifying itself." The first leaflet issued by the Labour partv opens with a statement that is unjust and unfair, and in the very worst taste. It refers to Sir Hugh Acland as a brother of Mr H. D. Acland, whom it describes as the worst enemy the workers in New Zealand have'ever had. Mr Acland is quite able to defend himself, if he does not deem such'a charge from such a source beneath contempt; but at the time the charge was published Mr Acland was ill in hospital. In any case what man would think it fair that he should be judged by (he opinions or actions of his brother? Would the Mayor or any of his Labour colleagues in the council be willing 10 be so judged? That opening sentence has antagonised most citizens with any notion of fair play. A great deal has l.v'cn said by both sides about the rating question, but surely by now i( is apparent to everybody that Hie reductions claimed by Labour are merely illusory, and the net result to the ratepayer is that he pays, m spite of the alleged rale reductions, just as much as before. What reduction or apparent reduction has been achieved has been secured, too, by something like financial legerdemain. We are overcharged for the Halswell quarry metal and for our electricity in order to provide surpluses which Labour can apply towards financing anything from a reduction in rates to subsidising the wages of its employees. The quarry and the electricity accounts are not to provide surpluses for other purposes, and if there is a big surplus one year, it should be applied to the reduction of charges the following year. That simple idea seems never to have occurred to Labour. Labour has not declared any policy. It has confined itself to denouncing the clear policy of the Citi/.ens' Association and its denunciation is tainted with the unfairness that characterises its whole propaganda It has made a parrot cry of the statement that Sir Hugh Aciand and the Citizens' candidates will, if returned, reduce wages -and made it in face of an exnlicit assurance to the contrary by Sir Hugh and his colleagues. If Labour fought a clean fight, if Labour Rave an assurance from Mr Sullivan and his colleagues that they would no long- r use the council to serve primarily the interests of the Labour caucus and the Trades Hall, none of us need fear to support thorn. But lacking that assurance I hone Wednesday will see them sent to the wilderness to repent and reflect.—Yours, etc., K. T. FEX. May 4, 10,35. CHEVIOT COUNTY COrXCIL to tub p.mTon or rue prt»<:> Sir,—At present there is a certain amount of controversy about the tarsealing of the main road from the Hurunui bridge to the Cheviot township, and quite a lot of pressure is being brought on the Main Highways Board in this direction. The Main Highways Board is. 1 understand, for the general motoring public, and not just for the benefit of people living in Cheviot township. Two surveyors, both licensed civil engineers, who have a knowledge of these roads, have expressed the conviction that it is only a malter of time when the main road will follow the roadway alongside the railway from Nonoti past Mina and thence straight through to the present road at Phoebe, cutting off about five miles' distance to motorists going through north or south. As several miles of this road are already formed, why saddle ratepayers, and their children in the future, with the cost of tar-sealing and the upkeep of roads, which a few years hence will be superseded by a shorter and straightcr route? As tar-sealing costs, I understand, about £ISOO per mile, the sum saved on five miles, £7500, would pay for quite a lot of culverts, etc. The Cheviot township residents would not lose by this route either, as two miles of bitumen road from the I'ost Office to Mina railway station would place them on the main road, north or south. Men, boards, councils, etc., are remembered by their deeds or misdeeds. We have too many derelict monuments to misdirected and short-sighted policies in our midst, which we are paying for, and I am sure the clearfhinking ratepayers, and the general motoring public will exert, their support if the Highways Board decides to take the proper and shorter route for 'the main highway, and not saddle us with another work which will years hence be pointed out as a waste of public money made by the present Highways Board, planned by the Cheviot Progress League. If the technical adviser to the Highways Board cares to enquire into the position, he can easily verify the facts for himself. Should he decide to go on with f'ne tar-sealing of the road from the Huruuui bridge through Cheviot, township, will he place his

reasons for doing so before the general public. In reply to "Cheviot," the councillors are an honorary body of men, working for the common welfare of the county as a whole, and if their work is not to his liking, at least he need not demean himself by casting slurs, about "sleeping behind a high hedge." It is a very human thing to cast our own characteristics on those in high places. —Yours, etc., CHEVIOT RURAL. Cheviot, May 4, 1935.

•XO TUB KDITOB OF TUT. PRISS. Sir, —"Cheviot" should be congratulated on his attempt to bring to the notice of your readers the state of our roads. The main highway is certainly of considerable importance, but why stop at that? The by-roads in this district are disgraceful. It is a fact that there are still farmers who are isolated in flood times, including a few whose access is very limited in ordinary wet weather, due to greasy and unmetalled roads. The position m case of sickness needing urgent medical aid might easily be acute, and people in such case have no real security. Several creeks m this district when filled with flood water c.re actually rivers, and the present council expects people to ford these to get to their homes. Some of the people concerned have actually offered to give financial assistance towards bridging etc., but nothing has yet been done. Cost would have mattered little if the council had not been so shortsighted as to sell the old Hurumn bridge for a song, and parts of this it had to repurchase to repair existing bridges. ' , .. In its last published report, the council mentions a reduction m rates over five years of 22 \ per cent. This is definitely misleading to the general ratepayer. Twelve and a half per cent, has be°n rebated by the Government and the men's wages have been reduced 15 ner cent., this last item. I understand, accounting f or one-half of the council's income. Then there has been a revaluation of the county, and. altogether, it appears that we pre spending as much money as in 1928. Now what have we and what are we getting for <his mnn»v soenf? In the council yards and river beds are hundreds of nmmds worth of machinery, discarded after a few years' use. one instance tving a sf'vim waggon Undoubtedly, the council has been Ivdlv in the purchase of i's nlant. Again, are we golfing the advantage of th« money b-"ing *a>enf al th<> nresent time? A sum of about 4'8(10 hns ben and is b">n;r spent "n n .side-road, with nrricticnllv no t>-:i"'C. nnd our main roirk and n.-m<-"->al byVP'""ls corre':nor"' ! n ply n ,-,rfpwl«d. Our U""' c;'r>did:.tn« pre all big rntonnvers. who wi'l in their own inlovnqKhav" i-cwn'V at hnart inst as p-ni"h :is th» old nnnnr-illorc.-. T,ot US hi™ 1 it will b" allied to nrni'i-M'i Tf annnnrs as thn""h anv in lh" council ca.i only be for the better —Yours, clc.. CHEVIOT RATEPAYER. Cheviot, May 4, J933.

to Tin Ktinoß or run ruasi. Ei'r,—l read "Cheviot's" letter in "The Press" yesterday with interest, and can endorse all he says as to the state of the roads. A few weeks ago travelling on the main highway, my car was thrown by the shingle right off the road and on to the fence at the side It was only when we got oil the road and up on the bank that 1 was able to straighten up, and by a miracle land up on all four wheels on the road again. . . ~ But I do not think "Cheviot is altogether fair to the council. I am not a ratepayer at present, but I expect to beshortly and from what I have seen ol the ratepayers, having, been m and out of Cheviot for many years, I feel then own apathy is greatly to blame. They seem just as sure as the council lhat progress means higher rates, r have lived in two counties during the last few years, and one, as a councillor expressed it to me. is an "All Black county bitumen everywhere. J lie other still has no water ■''PPb' »» d , very little bitumen. The All Black county has reduced it-.<'.s and the otner is highly rated. It seems pretty well .n'knowledge' now that interest and .-in :nig lund on a loan for tar-sealing is a cheaper method of maintaining roads than everlasting shingling, let alone the comfort of it and saving, m cost oi travelling. There is qnh- a .eelmg I know that tallow ca:idl-s must be replaced by some better light, and one sees in Cheviot weird devices to generate light. The high cost of electricity is just on all fours with tarscaling—once have electricity and no one would wish to be without it. Now seems to be the ratepayers chance to say unanimously to thencandidate for the council. "We want tar-sealing and electricity, and wc arcputting you in to get it."—Yours, efe:.. E. P. STANFORD. Oaro, May 4, 1935.

RABBITS ON HANKS rj-ININSI'LA TO TUB KDITOB OF IHE i'UBSH Sir,—The Rabbit Board election will be taking place in a day or so, and in consequence the rabbit question is being discussed more or less wherever farmers meet. Some say rabb' are increasing on (he Peninsula, some say noi: others say some farmers kill Iheir rabbits and some do not. Nearly every farmer says he is killing his neighbour's rabbits. We do not agree in most of these points, but we all are agreed that we all pay rates. Then the question arises whether the rates we pay to the Rabbit Board are expended to the best advantage and whether the policy of the present board is the right policy. The policy of the present board >s based on the belief (and I think quite rightly) that while every farmer knows tnat there are rabbits on his place and knows also that he ought to kill them, he will not do so, unless there is some compelling force behind to make him. So the board appoints inspectors, who, in conjunction with itself, are the compelling force. Personally, I would think I had gone mad, if, when I knew that certain work wanted doing on my property, instead of paying a man to do it for me, I paid him to tell me or order me to do it myself. But that is exactly what the ratepayers are doing in connexion with this rabbit business. They are paying the board rates which, instead of being used to kill rabbits, are used to pay bosses to tell the people who pay the rates (and incidentally their wages) to kill the rabbits also. I would. like to say here that I have nothing whatever against the board's inspectors; I believe they do their duty. However, lite question is, could the board get better results if, instead of employing two inspectors, it employed three permanent expert rabbiters whose duty would bo regularly to go round their respective biocks of the Peninsula systematically killing? I think the board could rely upon the landholders to do the inspecting part of the business, though as previously said they cannot be relied upon to kill the rabbits. In conclusion, I would ask my fellow ratepayers to consider these few remarks of mine. If they still think the old policy of spending money on inspectors is better than spen-'ing it on rabbit killers, they will vote in the same direction as formerly, but I hope they will not do so without giving the matter serious considerat;on. To my mind the present policy should be shelved for at least a year and the other policy of putting on rabbiters given a. trial. It could do no harm and might do a lot of good.— Yours, etc., INTERESTED. ■ May-2, 1935.