DISTRIBUTION OF FILM PROCEEDS

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27374, 12 June 1954, Page 8

DISTRIBUTION OF FILM PROCEEDS

WELFARE COUNCIL’S

ATTITUDE

“Recent events can only suggest that there is still active opposition in certain influential quarters to the principle that the problems of our ageing population should be accepted by the community as a whole,” said the chairman of the Aged People’s Welfare Council (Dr. H. R. Donald) yesterday. He had been asked for his opinion on the distribution of the Royal film performance funds. Dr. Donald said the welfare council was asked by Mr W. S. Mac Gibbon to submit to his committee its recommendations on projects best suited for the funds of the film performance. The matter was considered at a special meeting of the full council on Mav 21. The Mayor (Mr R. M. Macfarlane,* - MT.) presided, and the 27 members represented the Church of England, the Social Service Council of the Diocese of Christchurch, the Roman Catholic Church, the Presbyterian Social Service Association, the \ Methodist Church, the Methodist Central Mission, the Salvation Army, the British Medical Association, the North Canterbury Hospital Board, the Red Cross Society, the Nurse Maude Association, the Pensioners’ Welfare Association, the St. John Ambulance Association, the Pensioners’ Association, the Department of Health, the Christchurch City Council, the Mayor’s Social Service Fund, the Riccarton Borough Council, the Lyttelton Borough Council, the Heathcote County Council, the Paparua County Council, and the Hals well County Council. 4i A report of the deliberations and the resolutions of the council were not published at this time to avoid embarrassment to Mr Mac Gibbon’s committee, but in return he was asked to afford the courtesy of an interview either to the president of the council or to the chairman of its executive in the event of his committee being unable to agree with the Welfare Council’s recommendations,” said Dr. Donald. “Since this interview* was not conceded, the council can only publish the recommendations which it made, and which were contained in a letter to Mr Mac Gibbon on May 24. The . letter said: ‘At a special meeting last evening, presided over by the Mayor, the welfare council considered the invite tion of your committee to submit building schemes for the aged which would qualify for the full Government subsidy. After reviewing all possible alternatives and in particular the individual projects sponsored by its constituent organisations, the council unanimously voted for the submission of«i~.s own community scheme at Shirley. _ * “ ‘This decision was undoubtedly I influenced by two principal considera- I lions—the feeling that the historic occasion of Her Majesty’s visit could only : be fittingly commemorated by putting, the maximum effort into a single' worthy objective, and by the fact that ‘ the bulk of the money concerned was ’ contributed by a true cross-section of I the community. Full details of the council’s Shirley scheme will accordingly be forwarded to you under sep-