LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33987, 30 October 1975, Page 16

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

<ll Letters to De considered tor this column must not exceed 150 words They should be on only one side of the paper for printing; nor does he preferably typewritten otherwise clearly written in ink and ample margins and space between lines should be left for convenience in subediting. (21 A legible signature and full address — not a P.O. box number — are required whether these are to be printed or not. <3> The correspondent must say whether the letter has been or is to be submitted elsewhere. <4> The edltoi cannot return or keep any letter not accepted undertake to acknowledge or enter into correspondence concerning letters, although an acknowledgement will be made where this seems to be necessary or helpful (51 As a general rule correspondence on news items in other publications or carried on radio and television is not acceptable (61 Letters on the General Election and party policies will be printed only over the signatures of correspondents; pseudonyms will not be accepted. New town’s site I Sir, — The Rolleston project continues its paraidoxical progress with the release last week of reports by I both the Rolleston Planning ‘Group and Ministry of i Works and Development. | The 440-page, two-volume report by the planning group on how the new town could be developed impresses as a professional approach to a difficult task. The 12 pages (plus appendix) from the [Ministry on why the new itown is necessary appears, by contrast, a disgraceful attempt to shift the emphasis lof responsibility for the [decision to establish a new; itown at Rolleston on to the Canterbury Regional Planning Authority. Had the Canterbury Regional Planning Authority been given the opportunity to consider the future growth of Christchurch in the wider region, we can be sure that body would have produced more than 12 pages of reasoning for its decision. — Yours, etc. B. THOMPSON.

October 21, 1975. [The Interim Commissioner for Rolleston New Town (Mr Neil Isaac) replies: "The introduction to ‘Strategy and [Site Selection’ claims no more hhan that the document summarises issues covered in Government statements and departmental releases over the last two years. The Phase I [report of the consultants, | however, is quite different in 'its content and purpose.

There is no question but that the Planning Authority has been the prime mover in over-all strategy. In the planning data (1968) the review of the ‘urban fence’ new town development was specifically mentioned though the need was seen as unlikely to arise until after 1976. The authority, however, was not responsible for site selection, for which the Government takes full responsibility. If Mr Thompson cares to raise with me any particular aspect of site selection, I shall do my utmost to obtain a satisfactory answer.”] The General Election Sir, — I am fed up with the slobs and egocentric boors and with what the militant have been getting away with. We do more than permit it, we dignify it with introspective flagellation. The majority I believe are fine, but minorities threaten to tyranise the threaten to tyrannise the that the majority takes it. Tactics have become childish, brutal, naive, dangerous, and the essence of arrogant tyranny. We are taxed and damn nearly run into the ground, in the cause of social justice and reform. Nurtured in depression, invested in sweat, I am tired of tolerance and “reaching out.” We cannot permit any longer the occupation of our premises yet are asked to; suffer Exel and his “Clergy- ' men, lawyers, sociologists, I political scientists, psychologists, and senior academic staff.” It is time to call a halt, and the abdication of responsibility, and make it ; clear quite dispassionately that expulsion is the inevitable consequence of violation of the rules. — Yours, etc., W. G. HENDERSON. October 27, 1975. Sir, — As the “Citizens for Rowling” campaign amounts to vicious propaganda. people should not lose sight of the real political issues. Since assuming office in 1972. the Labour Party has pursued distinctly Leftist policies, the results of which indicate a dramatic increase in support for the (National Party. As New Zea-, danders are basically individ-i ■ualistic in character, the at-' itempts by Mr Rowling’s; (Labour Government to push 'this country down the road ' towards totalitarian social-; [ ism are resented by the . majority. The mounting of I this despicable, vicious propa-

ganda campaign indicates just how desperate some Leftist leaning so-called intellectuals are to achieve their grand bureaucratic, socialist ambitions. — Yours, etc., A. SHEW AN. October 29, 1975. Shop Assistants’ Union Sir, — I agree with my former employer, Mr Gordon Tait, that the published statements made by Mr Alderdice of the Shop Assistants’ Union about Mr Tait’s creating difficulties between the union and staff in his bookshop are untrue. For more than ten years I worked for, and with, Mr Tait, at first as his only employee, and later with others as the staff was increased. Mr Tait never placed any obstruction in the way of union officials when they wanted to see staff. He or we supplied our names, and he did not op-: pose any of us in joining the union. Therefore, I wish to record my strong objection to Mr Alderdice’s statements. — Yours, etc., ELIZABETH H. KENNEDY October 28, 1975. The drinking driver Sir, — With reference to your leader of October 24 there are problems associated with testing for alcohol by hospital staff. The medical profession has not previously undertaken as a primary function legal duties which are specifically punitive in purpose. The doctor’s over-riding contract is with the health of his' patient; to threaten thej ! patient with punishment destroys the relationship. Many doctors object to the Transport Amendment Act because it compromises their professional duty to their patient. Should a patient who attends a hospital be more liable to legal sanctions than if he had gone to his own home? Blood testing by a medical officer employed by the Police or Ministry of Transport would overcome these objections. However, since breath test- ' ing has now reached aj i degree of accuracy to make lit an acceptable alternative,, ! preventive measures could 'be taken away from the hos-’ ipital and on to the road (where they could be truly preventive. — Yours, etc., P. W. MOLLER. I October 28, 1975.

Canterbury Trust Orchestra Sir, — The futility of the parties trying to resolve the Christchurch Orchestra tangle is now evident, and most of us, like Dr Foster Browne, are bored with it. It seems that we are stuck with two orchestras. The Canterbury Trust Orchestra, without conductor and lacking in players but able to subsidise its losses with public funds and the Christchurch Symphony orchestra, with conductor and players, dependent on subscriber support alone. The solution to the problem lies in the allocation of public funds. If these funds were allocated on a performer/concert basis instead of the present seasonal grant to one orchestra alone, Christchurch would benefit by having more popular well run concerts with less squandering of public funds. — Yours, etc., J. KITSON. I October 28, 1975. Child-care levy Sir, — The suggestion by Cr N. Sutherland that local bodies should be able to strike a special rate for the protection and care of young children astounds me. Already it is apparent that local bodies no longer evaluate reasonably the ability of property owners to meet the burden of rates; no effective worth-while re-! search in the field of local; authority finance seems to> be sponsored by the Council or other local government; agency; and there is a pressing need for rates to be le-| ■vied uniformly and equitably; lover the total area of com-j munity interest. When suchj basic issues need resolving; it is irresponsible for a councillor to promote an-; other increase in the rating' burden particularly in the absence of any reported* justification for the suggestion. — Yours, etc., G. A. HAY. October 29, 1975. Schoolteachers’ pay i Sir, — Infant mistresses! are a dedicated group, with years of experience, and all *earn a high salary irrespective of university degrees. I know a married teacher who , has taught infant classes for ‘many years, and her highest qualification is U.E. and two years student training. She is dedicated, loves the! work, receives a high salary!

as does her teacher husband, and admits that the money is embarrassing. I know younger infant teachers who also earn high salaries, and I feel that: a good infant teacher is worthy of a just reward. But all primary teachers are not of this calibre. The majority have been average pupils at school wfith no more than U.E. to their credit, and not all are good teachers. Furthermore, they are not able to write, punctuate and spell correctly, as was so aptly pointed out in “Reporter’s Diary” in your newspaper of October 23, under the paragraph “A. Principle.” — Yours, etc., QUEEN OF THE KIDS. October 27, 1975. Sir, — Your correspondent “Taxpayer” should acquaint himself with the facts before bursting forth into pedantic prose to attempt to criticise the salaries of primary school teachers. It would appear that “Taxpayer” is under the impression that the “most junior” primary school teacher receives a salary of $6BOO. My wife, a fourth year teacher at a State Primary' School, receives a salary of $5401, plus the recent 4.1 per cent increase, making a grand total of some $5622. Yours, etc., RETIRED WATERSIDER. October 28, 1975.

Sir, — I write as a second|ary school student in reply to “Taxpayer’s” letter. The imost vital and important [years of a child’s life for [learning are before the age lof 7. It is much more difficult ■to teach 5-year-olds the (ABC and requires much more [preparation to find work [geared to their level. It requires years .of specialised [training, which secondary ■school teachers with degrees do not have. Many secondary school teachers teach their pupils at the level of understanding that does not require very much work, apart from finding the [appropriate material from 'textbooks. I consider that [primary school teachers do more real teaching than secondary and universityteachers, so they should receive a higher salary. But just because different sections of teaching are specialised does not mean that one deserves more pay than the other. — Yours, etc., KATHLEEN GRIMWARD. October 24, 1975.