The Dominion WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1928. WHERE CRITICISM FAILS

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 240, 11 July 1928, Page 10

The Dominion WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1928. WHERE CRITICISM FAILS

Criticism is an essential article of efficiency and progress, a valuable social function, wheii properly exercised. It meets us at every point of our daily lives. In its operative effect, it collects our errors of judgment and actions, enables us to see things in their true proportion, and trains us to distinguish between that which is valuable and that which is trash; between the true and the false in argument and assertion. Properly understood and exeicised, criticism is something very far removed from mere fault-hndmg. _ . The value of the right kind of criticism to society in general is so important that its virtue should-be carefully, guarded. Suspicions of exaggeration, irresponsibility, and ulterior, motive,, not only discount the value, of a particular piece, of criticism, but tend to lower the prestige, of criticism in general. It would be a very bad thing for a community were it to develop an attitude of contemptuous indifference to its criticism. It is the duty of the critics, therefoie, 1 to see that they do "hot provoke such , an attitude by their, own

% The strife of party politics abounds; with illustrations in point. The public naturally expects the Opposition in Parliament to criticise the Government.. Such are thq* imperfections of human nature that nobody expects ever to see a Governpient or a political party which is beyond criticism. More than in any other department of life, probably, criticism is the very salt and essence of politics and Parliamentary life. Equally it is all-important that it should be fair, honest, and soundly based. ■ ■ • .■ . .. . , It is unfortunate that in recent times political. criticism here has descended to a rather low levfi, relying largely on bare assertion, innuendo, and distortion of facts. A single failure is exaggerated and presented as a common happening or a general state of affairs. The legitimate grievance of an unemployed relief worker is twisted and distorted to bolster up a general charge of mistreatment of relief workers. This sort of thing may serve a temporary purpose, but in the end it defeats itself. A recent case in point illustrates the position very well. It arose in connection with Opposition criticism of the Government's treatment of the men at the unemployment relief \yorks at Kawatiri, in the Nelson district. The details of the allegations, which were very sweeping, are fresh in the public mind. Here is one: It was alleged, and the statement was widely published, that several men, after a period of arduous work,- had received empty pay envelopes. That is to say, those men—the impression of a .number , was conveyed—under the conditions imposed were able to earn only sufficient to pay the cost of their board.. This charge was made and repeated all over New Zealand to indicate the heartlessness and indifference of the Government to the needs of the unemployed and their families. Circulated in this way it no doubt made an impression on many people, who accepted the allegations at their face-value. Yet the whole story was a gross misrepresentation and distortion of the real position. Unfortunately for the authors of these allegations, the Nelson Sick and Wounded Soldiers’ Fund Committee'investigated the matter on the spot, and in connection with the particular charge abovementiondd, reported: “This is not true, but an extreme case has been discovered whicli seems to have been taken as an ordinary one. This was a married man, .-hid following its custom, the Public Works Department had held back 6s. of his 12s. per day on account of his wife. The man had been absent from work for the greater part of the month, with the result that, after deducting from his wages the amount of orders given by him for the cookhouse, there was not only nothing left to come to him, but he was still in debt.” An exposure of this nature coming as it does from a disinterested source puts a very different complexion on the matter, and serves to enlighten the public as to what is going on. It is interesting to note that in addition to the specific case mentioned the committee of investigation into the conditions at the Kawatiri relief works reached a general conclusion, which is worth recording: “Speaking generally,” the report stated, “the position at the cajnp is satisfactory* and providing a man is a worker there is no necessity for him to suffer any discomforts other than those usually found in camp life. There is no necessity for any anxiety on the part of any local, patriotic or relief society regarding the conditions at the camp or the comfort of the workers.” The public, in the light of the disclosures now made, will infer that the main purpose of the authors of the original allegations was to make political capital out of them—not to serve any useful public purpose, but to further their own political ends. Future criticism along the same or similar lines, emanating from the same source, naturally will be received with a proper degree of suspicion, and deservedly so.