The Hawera Star. MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1934. EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE REPORTS.

Hawera Star, Volume LIII, 9 April 1934, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1934. EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE REPORTS.

Delivered every evening by 5 o’clock in Hawera, Manaia, Kaupokonui, Otakeho, Oeo, Pihama, Opunake, Eltham, Ngaeie, Mangatoki, Kaponga, Awatuna, Te Kiri, Mahoe, Lowgarth, Manutalii, Kakaramea. Alton, Hurleyville, Patea, Whenuakura, Waverley, Mokoia, Whakamara, Ohangai, Meremere, Fraser Road and Ararata-

An Auckland resident, recently returned from Sydney, has expressed the deepest dissatisfaction with the tone of the reports that are sent out from' New Zealand following an earthquake. Thei indignation suffered by a New Zealander abroad when he reads exaggerated accounts of earthquake damage can be well appreciated by every New Zealander at home, and many will give their endorsement to- the Aucklander’s suggestion that the Government should' impose a vigorous censorship upon such overseas Press messages. Censorship, however, is not the iirst need of che position. The subject New Zealand should! set about studying in earnest is' the reduction of risks from earthquake damage and such study can be made’ effective only if the people of this country are prepared to support action designed to minimise damage to property and loss of life. The Government and the people of New Zealand have nothing to congratulate themselves upon in this connection to date. Several years have passed since the Murchison, and then the East Coast, ’quakes came as unpleasant reminders that New Zealand earthquakes can. be-, indeed, very serious in their effects. The Government launched an inquiry with a view to bringing into being building regulations designed to reduce the risk of damage, but this move was’ allowed to languish until the country was reminded again last month that there are in the Dominion, many build- 1 i.ngs that are badly designed for the' withstanding of shocks. Indeed, the’ position- is worse than that; as a Wellington clerk of works expressed it recently, some of .the parapets and signs on New Zealand buildings are “simply* asking for It.” Even, to-day, in the light of last month’s warning, the Government is reluctant to- take vigorous steps to protect life and limib and property, preferring .to- ask local bodies] to assume responsibility for applying | model regulations. With the Govern- I ment apathetic, or fearful of the nature of the task that lies ahead of it, it

would appear that New Zealand must' fall back upon public opinion a® its best safeguard—and public opinion, will become active in its demand® for positive action only when it knows the full facts. Whatever many be needed in the form of censorship of news sent overseas, it is certain that New Zealand’s greatest need is the truth, shorn of sensationalism, for home consumption. New Zealanders have had sufficient experience of earthquakes during the last few' years to enable them to : look facts in the face without panic. One outstanding fact is that, though we can do nothing to 1 avert earthquakes, we can do- a great deal to minimise damage; another is, that no mattef how vigorous the censorship, news will filter out to the world; and, above all, it will, in the long .run, do us less? damage, direct and indirect; 'to be known as a country which sometimes? experiences a ’quake and is prepared for it, than to earn a reputation as an uneasy and unprepared country. If wish action be taken now in the matter of “building fox earthquakes,” there will' be less excuse for sensationalism in reporting earthquake) damage in the future. Sufficient is known about the nature of the damage occasioned by last month’s ’quake to state that enterprising Press photographers could have got few pictures of fallen masonry if commonsense, let alone science, had* been brought to bear upon the designing of some of the damaged buildings.