TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 136, 6 December 1926, Page 8

TOPICS OF THE DAY

Having decided to make certain narrow streets available for one-way traffic only, the City Council should mako the fact plain to all motorists. On one of these streets, Woodward street, the bar on two-way traffic is notified, but there are many other local regulations of which tho motorist may remain in ignorance until ho is instructed by a Magistrate. Fines aro expensive fees to pay for knowledge of traffic bylaws, and there is no sound reason for charging the well-intentioned motorist in this way. Instead of making it difficult for tho law-abiding citizen to learn and keep the bylaws, the Council should give him all assistance. This may be done in two ways: by a liberal use of street signs and by the issue of up-to-date copies of the traffic regulations. In the first method an example is set to Wellington by Petone and Hutt, whore traffic signs aro painted prominently upon the road\. The driver who disregards such signs' certainly cannot plead ignorance. Where this method of publicity cannot be used there should be a plain-language edition of the bylaws to guide the motorigt. At present the motorist must trust to good luck or long experience if he is to avoid breaches—not to turn in this street, not to leave Ms car unattended in that, to park the right way here, and not to park at all there. Bylaws, however, are made to bo observed, and it is hindering observance when the motorist cannot, without great trouble, learn what is required of him. The motorlicensing authority has certain obligations for the fees which it obtains, and one of these obligations should be to supply an up-to-date copy of the traffic bylaws (or better still a plain-language summary) to every driver whom it licenses.

In his jocular reference at Worcester to the Imperial Conference Mr. Coates voiced a keen criticism of the attitude of several of his colleagues at that Conference. After listening to all the speeches (he said) he thought that Britain ought to feel very pleased that she had been admitted to the Empire. In truth, the speeches of the Canadian | and South African spokesmen at least would not have been out of place if Britain had been suing for admission to this union of free and self-sufficient nations. Nor would greater humility have been demanded from a suppliant for favour than was evinced in the unfailing courtesy of the British Ministers. It appeared that the daughter nations had everything to offer and Britain everything to gain. Lot us suppose for one moment that tho negotiations had really been between free nations for an alliance. What would the younger and weaker havo had to offer for the protection and favour of tho stronger. What would Canada and South Africa, or even Australia and New Zealand, have offered for Britain's naval power! What would any of them have offered for the free British market? Sir- George Elliott asked recently what would be tho result if Britain adopted a riroteetivo trade policy? Consideration of such questions as these gives point to Mr. Coates's jocular remark. It is fortunate indeed for tho Empire,, that Britain can sec the joke.

Complaint that criticism is "entirely destructive" is no answer to' the statements that are constantly made regarding tho unsatisfactory broadcasting.service. Tho service is unsatisfactory in two respects: tho quality of tho transmission and the standard of tho programmes. In both respects tho faults are evident, and tho only constructive advice it should bo necessary to offer to an intelligent managemont is to go ahead and remove the obvious defects. The faulty transmission is the chief cause of complaint.' Listeners, it may be safely asserted, would sooner hear poor programmes well transmitted than good music' murdered. The fact that some stations at times give excellent results is proof that there is no difficulty hero requiring constructive criticism for its removal. With competent technical supervision, faultj transmis-

sion should quickly be made a rare exception rather than a frequent experience. Improvement of tho programmes again calls for merely tho application of common-sense. If it is known that an artist is not worth listening to the critic can scarcely bo accused of boing merely destructive when ho says: "Take him off and givo us someone better." Ono fact is plain: that improvement cannot proceed far without a proper system of payment. Concert artists must be paid, and paid adequately. If they _ro not, all tho constructive criticism in the world will not induce them to perform. In this matter tho Post and Telegraph Department has a clear and definite duty to the public. Tho provision of entertainment by wireless has been taken out.. of private hands and made a monopoly. As representing tho public, ty_ Government must see that that monopoly is justified by results.