BANK OF N.Z. SHAREHOLDERS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21811, 17 June 1936, Page 7

BANK OF N.Z. SHAREHOLDERS

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir, —The other day a friend connected with banking, talking about the new Government and prospective low rates of interest, said, “It’s going to be hard on the poor widows.” I said that the new Government proposed increasing pensions and thus the poor widow would be secured against dire poverty. Besides, what had the banks done for the poor widows, anyway? Did they lend overdrafts at a smaller rate because they were poor widows. The present Government is, in fact, securing the existence of the class which includes poor widows. I never heard of poor widows being given a discount at the theatres, being given large rebates at city shops, or even a poor widow being able to buy a newspaper at a lower price than is charged to others. Your leading article this morning talks about unfairness to bank shareholders. This is the same type of cry as the poor widow cry. Of course it is quite premature to talk about unfairness to shareholders in such a wonderful dividend-earner as the Bank of New Zealand, with an unbroken record of 40 years of thumping dividends. They have not lost anything yet, and it will be ample time to consider their case when they have. Why be concerned about these bank shareholders? They certainly do not seem any worse off than the' shareholders in a local petrol company, or those in a well-known chain store. Why not consider the plight of former shareholders in numerous concerns who lost their all during the last five or six years, or shareholders in farms and homes who had to walk out with nothing after a of toil, through the policy of finance* pursued by the late Government at the behest of the banks. The shareholders in the State of New Zealand. Limited (the National Consumers, Limited, if you like) have first consideration. A lady made an appeal recently for funds to help furnish destitute homes. She stresjjpd the shortage of sheets, pillow cases, and towels, and crockery. I do not think any of these householders are shareholders in the Bank of New Zealand.—Yours, etc., K.A.L.-S. June 16, 1936.

tOur correspondent appears to be deliberately ignoring the context in which the reference to unfairness to shareholders appears. Our point was that it would be manifestly unfair to existing shareholders in the Bank of New Zealand, as compared with shareholders in other trading banks, if the Government were to control the bank as though it were a State institution. —Ed., "The Press.”]