Letters to the Editor

Press, 8 July 1976, Page 20

Letters to the Editor

,1) Letters submitted tor printing in this column must not exceed 150 words They should be written in ink or preferably typed on one side of the paper. Ample space must be left In the margins and between lines for subediting marks (21 Letters written over pen names or initials will not ordinarily be considered for publication. A legible signature and full postal address —not a P.O Box numberare essential. (3) The correspondent must say whether the letter has been or is to be submitted elsewhere. The Editor does not undertake to acknowledge, hold, return or enter into correspondence on any letter not accepted for publication. E.J.R.—lnitials not sufficient. N.V.—Surely the “Skibbereen Eagle” has stopped warning the Tsar. Help for injured Sir, — We have ail been confronted, through the news media, with glaring examples of man’s inhumanity to man, usually far removed from our own back-door. But not until last Saturday night did I realise just how apathetic people in our own country could be. My husband and I had the sad and somewhat shattering experience of witnessing an accident outside a city hotel. A pedestrian was seriously injured. After an ambulance had been called, I requested a blanket from the hotel proprietor in an endeavour to keep the injured person warm. I was informed they had nothing. Upon repeating the request I was then told they only had the blankets on their bed — white blankets. The pedestrian has since died. When has the value of the blanket been greater than that of a human life? — Yours, etc., J. SUTHERLAND. July 7, 1976. Right of entry Sir, — Mr Neary, secretary of the Electrical Workers’ Union, is surely being naive, in shedding “crocodile tears” by referring to the Electricity Amendment Bill as '‘horrifying.” After all, it was his Labour Government that set up a committee to introduce legislation, authorising power authorities to enter premises, for power restrictions, but I did not hear him bleating then. Mr Neary says “It is the greatest violation of human rights” but "human rights” are not violated, when it suits his “compulsory” union rule. How hypocritical can one get? His views will have to be more consistent than that. — Yours, etc., C. G. MARSHALL. July 7, 1976. Sir, — Your news item concerning legislation currently before the House of Representatives seeking tre-

mendous power for representatives of electric power boards, should in my view be given wider publicity for the public to be properly informed on this piece of particularly odious (in its present form) proposed legislation. Apart from power board employees being given right of entry, without a warrant, to one’s home, factory or research laboratory where possibly patentable, confidential research is being carried out, the electric power boards are to be given the power to supply power at the cheapest rate. In an extreme case they could insist on the cheapest reactor generator to be sited in Cathedral Square. Further private individuals will be barred from making even low voltagte power for their own use. This proposed legislation is the most extreme attack on privacy for this particular service seen so far outside a communist State. — Yours, etc. A. KITCHEN. July 7, 1976. Forestry or housing Sir, —I have read in this morning’s edition of “The Press” that some building groups in Christchurch are wanting to take Bottle Lake Forest land for housing. I think that the Christchurch City Council and the Waimairi County Council would be foolish to allow this. They say it is not suitable for forest because of the damage done by the wind on August 1. That big wind damaged forests all over Canterbury. It also took away many roofs —ours was one of them. 1 also think that the New Zealand Government should step in and prevent any forest land close to a city from being taken. Authorities are crying out for clean air. Forests are a breathing place.—Yours, etc., BERNARD R. DUNLOP. July 6, 1976. Car insurance Sir, —Insurance companies, in advocating compulsory third-party property cover for all drivers do so on the grounds that it is “unfair to expect those drivers prudent enough to insure their vehicles to carry those who don’t.” It would seem unfair to expect those drivers prudent enough to stay out of collisions and who save paving high premiums to carry those drivers who desire insurance. After all, insured drivers freely elect to take out cover and insurance companies are free to refuse to issue cover if it is not profitable.—Yours, etc., W. L. HOBBS. June 28, 1976. [Mr E. B. McKessar, gen-

eral manager of the S.I.M.U. Mutual Insurance Association, replies: “Despite the view expressed by your correspondent, Mr- Hobbs, we fully endorse the attitude expressed in recent publicity on this subject simply because it is a fact. Those drivers who insure their vehicles do to a large extent carry the cost of those who do not. Mr Hobbs may have unlimited resources and be willing to write out a cheque in the event of his becoming liable for damage to someone else’s property, but it simply does not follow that all uninsured drivers are in this position. We have not dozens, but hundreds, of examples where such people have incurred a liability well in excess of their ability to pay and it can safely be assumed that they, like Mr Hobbs, thought that they would be prudent enough to stay out of accidents. I am force'd to wonder if Mr Hobbs’s view would be the same if he sustained substantial damage to his vehicle from collision with a vehicle being driven by a person who was completely to blame, uninsured and penniless.”] All Black tour Sir,—l do not believe in apartheid but I do believe that politicians are elected to run the country, union leaders are elected to run union affairs and sportsmen to run sports affairs and otherwise mind their own business. We invite Fijians here and they included no Indians who are in greater numbers in Fiji. We invite Indian cricket teams which only include certain religions. If these people are against

apartheid, why not speak out about Maori All Blacks, Maori electorates, etc., which we are proud of? — Yours, etc., J. COCKS. July 5. 1976. Insurance sales in schools Sir, —I, too, wish to express my disapproval of the practice of selling insurance policies via schools and schoolchildren, and request that the Education Board acts toward ending such activities.—Yours, etc., j. McKinnon. July 5, 1976. Broadcasting changes Sir,—R. L. Pluck’s contention that there will be political control of broadcasting and dreadful implications from the proposed changes is just so much nonsense. His reference to political control of newspapers is also fatuous, but his total disregard for the economics of the present broadcasting setup reflects the typical Labour outlook. Does he not realise that the additional slBm of advertising revenue will eventually come out of the consumer’s pocket just as the extra sl4m in licence fees does? Continuing broadcasting as at present would result in a continuing s9m loss. Such a loss cannot be sustained at the expense of the taxpayer.—Yours etc., J, F. GARVEY. July 6, 1976. Crack the code Sir, — Have any of your readers received a prize in the Crack the Code game?

I think this sort of competition should publish a complete list of prize-winners, also the date the competition was closed if the company did receive 2000 winners. When I phoned A.B. Consolidated nearly three weeks after the official closing date of May 7, I was told that letters would be sent out the following week. Having sent in four entries two weeks before the closing date I expected the results to be announced before now. — Yours, etc., T. BEECH. June 23, 1976. [Mr K. G. Willis, biscuit production manager for A.B. Consolidated, Ltd, replies: “In response to the popularity of this promotion, we provided a further $5OOO prize-money. The first 2000 correct entries shared the $lO,OOO originally offered. Then the next 5000 correct entries shared in the additional $5OOO. This second stage was not required by the conditions of the competition but resulted from the gratuitous gesture of the company. The very success of the competition brought its own problems. We decided to send a formal letter to each entrant whether they won or lost. In our letter to losers we offered to donate their cents to charity with a

matching donation from the company. You may consider this business humbug. However, it is necessary to fulfil the requirements of the Coupons Act. This letter may not specifically answer the inquiry, but it does set out the points that appear to be causing confusion.”] Eradication of hydatids Sir, — The Christchurch City Council is conducting a hydatids eradication scheme which seems a waste of time and money. Dog owners sign an agreement, one part of which says: “The dog(s) will not be fed or allowed access to any raw sheep offal as defined in the Hydatids Act, 1968.” What about the rest of the sheep and any other raw meat that is cut or chopped on the butcher’s block? If there should be hydatids cysts in any of the offal it can be transferred to other meat being cut or chopped on the block. Therefore, raw meat can pass on the cysts to dogs fed on raw meat of any animal. Until just cooked meat is allowed all dogs, there will still be hydatids among us. — Yours, etc. M. MILLI&AN. July 5, 1976.