State Sector Bill

Press, 18 March 1988, Page 20

State Sector Bill

Sir, —The Government is, as usual, trying, deliberately, to mislead the public. The basic objective of the State Sector Bill is to politicise the Public Service, the most dangerous move against democracy this country has ever known. This central issue is being played down or ignored deliberately by the Minister and; is in danger of being lost sight of; in all the uproar about conditions; of service. These are of very! secondary importance beside the, central issue. I am amazed that!

the president of Federated Farmers seems incapable of dis-i tinguishing what the real issue is,; according to his reported re-! marks. — Yours, etc., L. ANDERSON. March 14, 1988.

Sir, —What a cynical waste of our, the taxpayers’ money for those full-page advertisements that seek to allay the fears of all State employees about the provisions of the State Sector Bill. As if public servants, teachers, nurses and others in the l State sector are likely to take those advertisements with anything more than the proverbial grain of salt. After all, they will recall the ‘'hand-on-heart” promises, right, left and centre (not politically speaking, of course) about the alleged inviolability of national superannuation. They also remember the solemn assertions that no good farmer would have to walk off his land. Those who are protesting in such an unprecedented manner are protesting against the smug arrogance of this present Government. They know only too well that Labour’s promises are like pie-crust — made to be broken. — Yours, etc., L. A. H. BOGREN. March 15, 1988.

Sir, —I have read the statements from both sides and, on the surface, cannot see rpuch to get so excited about. However, if the P.S.A. thinks this is such a “bad bill,” then my gut feeling is that for the average taxpayer, who foots the cost, it must per se. be a "good bill.” For far too long the community has pampered and spoonfed this section of the work force. Mr Rodger should "hang in” and see it through. — Yours, etc., P. HALL. March 16, 1988. Sir, —I object strongly to comments made by the president of Federated Farmers, Brian Chamberlin (March 14), against the action taken by the P.S.A. He should keep his nose out of the argument. As a taxpayer, too. I carried the farmer with subsidies

for years, as did other taxpayers. So ■ who is calling the kettle black? —| Yours, etc., JIM RUSSELL. March 14, 1988.

Sir, —1 1 am shocked and dismayed l that the president of Federated Farmers has attacked the integrity of the Public Service (March 14). I do not think it becomes an organisation like the federation to comment on the problems! of other organisations with the Government, especially when the problems include broken promises, undemocratic actions and insults instead of fair comment! and; reasoned argument. Unlike Brian Chamberlin, I support! the State sector unions in their i fight i for a just and sensible system of employment. It is interesting to analyse how the farming sector and the public sector are interwoven — many farmers are, or have been, public; servants. Most of us rely on the public servants’ impartiality to protect the; market place.' I hope other farmers will also repudiate the I president’s comments. —L Yours, etc., ROSS MANSON. March! 14, 1988.