VIEWS ON CURRENT TOPICS

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 23 April 1935, Page 2

VIEWS ON CURRENT TOPICS

THE AIRPORT “TRAGEDY"

(To the Editor)

Sir, —We have read your leader of yesterday’s date with mingled feelings. Deaf, dear, what a trouncing you give us, and you will pursue your illogical course We quite see that you are insisting in side-tracking the main issue by beating the air about the local necessity for a large airport. We have dealt at some length with this aspect in our letter of yesterday. We do not propose to elaborate it any more and will content ourselves in answering some of your questions. The autogiro principle has not been adopted for large capacity carrying machines and we do hot think it at all likely it will ever be so. The tendency to-day is for larger machines with multiple engines, much greater power and greater lahdmg speeds. The “Southern Cross’> did land at our present aerodrome with a light load but its navigator refused to operate it with the necessarily heavier passenger loads. The “Faith in Australia” had better lifting power and had the advantage of a perfect flying day with a strong wind in the right direction for our present limited ground, and, further, it was fitted with brakes. We do not know of any other trans-Tasman machines that have been here. As to the Aero Club guaranteeing that air traffic will stop at Hawera should the projected air port be established, all we can say. is this, and we can only repeat it again, i that the traffic will not stop if there be no facilities and with a "large margin of safety for landing and taking off. It may interest you to know that our present aerodrome was condemned by the authorities long ago for these purposes. Oh Saturday it was reported in the papers that Feilding, aided by public monies, was developing an aerodrome; and yet Feilding is not mentioned as being on any licensed air route; nor is it very far from Palmerston North, which is to he the pivot centre of the North Island. We. maintain that you are obviously trying to side-track the main, issue—the main issue being the much vexed attitude of the Borough Council in turning down our request for subsidy and your endorsement of the council’s action, whereas, ih previous comments, you gave us credit for the scheme and you also gave your imprimatur (on, the council’s decision in seeking the necessary legislation and authority for the subsidy. At one time you blow hot and at another icy blasts sweep from yourj facile pen. You are dense (please pardon iis, wo only ihean it in the editorial sense) in that you cannot and will not see that the Hawera Aero Club was public spirited enough to come forward with a scheme to lift the burden froin off the of the Borough Council and in asking for only a comparatively small sum to provide an urgent need for the town and to keep in step with the action of other towns. To put it bluntly, we asked, for a total sum of £2OOO, whereas it wiil cost the borough £20,000 for the heed that will surely come. As the Ratepayers have as much “horsesense” as presumably the average person is supposed to have —barring the officials of the Aero Club—wo will leave it- to them arid perhaps to your own judgriierit to say which was the more preferable scheme.—We are yours, etc.. ... ~ , Hawera Aero Club- (liic.)> W. F. BUIST, President.

[Some of our (correspondents persist in attempting to read into our editorial remarks of December 18 a whole-hearted recommendation of the scheme. Tho project had then come before an open meeting of the Borough Council for the first time. We reviewed the points that had been advanced in support of the scheme, but we were careful to make dertain reservations, for the very good reason that we did not propose to rush in and recommend the project to the ratepayers on the information then before us; nor did we think that the public, who were learning of the proposal for the first time, could be reasonably expected to declare: “This is a good idea.. Let’s have an airport. The Aero Club says its all right.” Tho public naturally looks to its Borough Council for a lead, and that body has not yet declared the project to be “alright.” It was bfecause we held these reservations of opinion that we said in our article of December 18:

“No one can say what the next ten years may hold for avia* tion in this country, nor can it be forecast with certainty that Ha-te-era will occupy a major part in future plans. ... It is for the Aero Club to explain. . . the prospects of obtaining an adequate return, directly or indirectly from the outlay.”—Ed. ” Star ”j.

(To tho Editor)

Sir, —In matters aeronautical as affecting our town and district the events of the week just ended are of more than passing interest. I refer firstly to your leader of Wednesday last, “Abandonhjettt of Airport—ls it a Tragedy?”; secondly to the cleverly conceived and well executed propaganda which, the Aero Club has so effectively employed to focus attention on its activities, and thirdly to the fact that the contributions of your correspondents ‘‘Looking On” and “Ratepayer” in Thursday’s issue disclose that facts published as news in the daily Press either escape public notice or that your correspondents have deplorably short memories. Not the least important matter to which I now desire to draw attention is your own fickleness as disclosed by a comparison of your leader of Wednesday last and that of Tuesday, December 18, titled “Hawera Aerodrome Project.” I refer you to the following passage in your leader of the 17th instant: “In the first place the ratepayers know nothing about- the terms of sale of the property, the terms of the binding agreement which the club wishes the council to sign, the plans for the proposed aerodrome, iidr the form of administration

of the whole scheme. . .” Now Ire fer you, Mr Editor, to the report published in your issue of February 27 last titled. “Hawera Airport,” wherein by way of further explanation Dr W. F. Buist, the club president, gave a long and detailed statement, to a representative of your paper. You report as follows: ‘‘Dr Buist said there was no desire to make a secret of anything in this connection. J.IIO subject had been discussed at some length by the Hawera Borough Council and reported in the “Hawera Star” on 'December IS and he had aiso been interviewed by the ‘Star’ about that date. . . ” One gains the impression while reading your leader of Wednesday last that your real aim in couchling your remarks in the tone adopted I is to protect the ratepayers from some- . thing of which one would assume they had not been able to learn anything. It seems to me that your wings of charity and protection might well have been spread long ago, when the Borough Council was fully considering obtaining empowering legislation. If\ou desired to see the ratepayers so well informed as you now indicate, don’t von think it would have been more helpful if the assiduity which you now reveal had been applied when an open invitation was given by the club for you so to do. I should like your correspondents “Looking On” and “Ratepayer” particularly to note this. Again let me quote from your leader of Wednesday last: “On what grounds does the. club assume that a first-class aerodrome on the outskirts of Hawera would be used by trunk air services?. . .” By way of reply I refer you to your own paper and particularly to your leader of December 18: “The experiences of the last few years of aviation in the North Island have strongly encouraged the belief on the part of those who have kept most closely in touch with the development of aviation in New Zealand tfeat Hawera will loom very large in the plans of commercial aviation if it offer the requisite facilities. . . Hawera is on the main route from Auckland to Wellington; it does, according to expert opinion, provide some very definitely attractive features as a. terminus for the trans-Tasman route. . . ” In view of the foregoing and in view of the fact that in your leader of December 18 you state: “The realisation of such hopes would provide the answer to any question regarding the ratepayers’ responsibilities and prospective benefits, for it does not call for much imagination to appreciate that, the maintenance Of an aiirport under such circumstances would not only be desirable but necessary. . .’’ it seems that an explanation is due from you concerning your most marked change of front. It is, I think, extraordinary that you Should state that it is just as well the council refused the grant otherwise the ratepayers would have had quite a little to say, when actually you have been in the position of controlling what information could be made available to the ratepayers by handling the interviews with the club’s president. The president informed you that there was no desire to make a secret of anything. Neither you nor the ratepayers asked for any further information when it was offered. You await this belated hour when attempting to justify the weakness of a timid council to raise questions in a definitely negative manner which it was in yuur power to dispose of months ago. The ratepayers and your other _ readeis could. I suggest, best appreciate my pS of view if you published side by side your leaders of December 18 last and of last Wednesday and the explanations of the Aero Club as pu ilished in your paper on December lb, 1934, and February 27, 1935.—1 am, etc ’’ looping THE LOOP.

[ln refusing the other day to allow an anonymous correspondent to use two different pen-names, on the grounds that such a practice would mislead the public and would amount to an abuse of the hospitality of our columns, we took the opportunity to utter a verbal warning that where we had good reason to suspect that letters signed by different persons, and ostensibly vouched for by those persons, actually emanated from a single source, we would exercise our right to reject such letters. We now repeat that warning here. —Ed. “Star. ]

(To the Editor.) Sir,— Why all the fuss over the airport? Why all the-talk of tragedy. Whether the Borough Council went to sleep on the job between December and April is beside the point: the Councillors would certainly have ett themselves open to criticism had they made a decision binding the Borough (even if they had the power to do so) four weeks before going out of otfice. But why dwell on the past. We need a good airport,- or we shall get left. Those towns which have the best airports at the start will stand the best chance of becoming permanent important bases. Commercial air licences have been issued, as'you point out, without Hawera being mentioned but trans-Tasman terminals have not yet been fixed. Let tlie Aero Club continue to lead the way. All that is required is £2OOO. If the Club and its energetic secretary will infect the town with even a little of their enthusiasm we should be able to raise this sum by public subscription with in a month. Let’s not wait for loca eet on "I'lbto,!?'

(To the Editor.) g: r The latest development m this matter as disclosed by the Hawera Aero Club’s letter to you, and published in to-night’s issue, is tragic—not for the Aero Club, but foHawera and district. The very rate payers whom the council in its wisdom is striving to assist (?) by avoiding a decision on the important matter of the airport, instead of gaming the £2OOO about which there is an the argument, now stand to lose from £6OOO to £BOOO, the benefit of the Aero Club’s contribution. That is a tragedy in itself, but the loss does not end there. Hawera will cease to be a centre of the nature in which we like to regard it. As Dr. Buist points out, it will slip into the back-water as far as aviation in concerned and in the light of modern trends —this means commercially. Now that the assistance of the Aero Club has been

lost to the ratepayers, perhaps the slumbering to which our attention has been drawn will continue until the roar of aeroplanes passing overhead awakens us. Then I foresee an intense and an insistent clamour for an airport—never mind the expense —our town must have it. Another tragedy! Schedules excluding Hawera will already be in operation and will not be varied. Hawera will have its airport; the ratepayers will have a liability (something more than £2OO per annum for 10 years), and as for the airport, well, it will be that in name only. Surely a tragedy! I am, etc., KIWI. Okaiawa, April 22, 1935.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —One member —or all—of the Hawera Aero Club has been brokenhearted, the club as a whole has been crying, your correspondent “Looking On’’ almost wept, and now .1 am at the point of bursting into tears. Mv emotion arises from your leader ol yesterday, and particularly from the following statement therein: “Whereas club officials have given a lot of time and thought to the subject the ratepayers has given little or none .. ” If your statement is true it is deplorable that it is so difficult to provoke thought among the ratepayers. For goodness knows there has surely been enough publicity given to the proposed acquisition of the farm on the Waihi Hoad for an air port. You have published leaders and subleaders, the Aero C'lub has made lengthy statements through yoUr columns, proceedings of club meetings have been published and reports of grc»at length of dfscussions of the Borough Council have also appeared in your paper—and all over a pei'iod of months. If you admit the failure of all this to provoke thought, is it any wonder that the Aero Club requires to use shop windows for publicity purposes ? What other method can be employed to cause the ratepayers to give the matter a little thought ? You also make the statement, “ . . .by a Borough Council which refuses to be rushed into a decision.” Dr. Buist points out in his letter of yesterday . that negotiations between the Aero Club and the Borough Council had continued for many months. We have the evidence of your own paper of 18th December to show that all the facts asked for were discussed even in open council as far back as December last. In the light of this, how can you persist with the assertion that the council is being rushed? If all matters require to be before a council for a period as long as you imply is required for this, what service are we to expect from local bodies? I venture the opinion that the indecision of the council in view of 'the actual developments of air transport shows it to be more sadly lacking in its sense of responsibility to the ratepayers than it would have been if it were persuaded into a favourable decision last week. After all it started on the job of establishing an air port; why leave the job halfdone? or, rather, why lose for the ratepayers the very handsome gift of several thousands Of pounds and continued prosperity for the town? The small town restricted outlook indicated by your recently assumed “this-is-no-good-to-us” attitude in this matter does not spell progress, but it does spell retrogression. I am, etc., LOOKING FORWARD Hawera, April 23, 1935.

(Toi the Editor). Sir, —I should be very pleased if you will spare me a. little space to reply to “Looking Forward’s” letter in Saturday night’s “Star,” re “the aerodrome that nearly was.” I am delighted to think that “Looking Forward” derived some enjoyment from the thought that my bouquet to you may have lost some of its fragrance in transmission. Evidently the “medicine” which accompanied the bouquet has been taken by some of those officials of the Aero Club who were responsible for the plastered window display and has had the effect of stirring them up generally and caused them to stage some “flying tackles.” May X suggest that the two letters by “Looking Forward” are the writings of the same person, but I shall only deal with the reply to “Looking On,” knowing full well that the other will be dealt with by you in a way that you think best. “Looking Forward” is evidently trying to hoodwink the ratepayers into thinking that “Looking On” is not too conversant with the subject matter he is criticising. Unfortunately “Looking Forward” is very far astray in liis judgment, as I can assure him that I know the whole of the history of the aerodrome plot—how it- was hatched discussed, planned, studied and the council stampeded with the idea of catching them napping. But it failed to connect, hence the “window-dressing” specialists got to work and tried to be clever in propaganda matter. X am well aware of the fact that the council endorsed giving assistance, but it was not by a. unanimous vote. 1 also know that a deputation was appointed to gd to Wellington to put the matter before the Minister so as to get a clause inserted in the Local Bodies Empowering Bill giving the council (the ratepayers having no say in the matter), statutory authority to vote away £2OO a year for ten years. 1 suggest that one member of this deputation, being an interested party, should not have taken such an active part in trying to push this matter through. “Looking Forward” seems to think that the result of the propaganda. criticised (plastered shop window, mark you) has been fully. achieved. Personally, I think that is just a matter of the point of view of achievement; intelligence denounces it as most unbecoming, more especially coming from the source from which it originated. The fact of the matter is the Aero Club wanted to saddle the ratepayers with an expenditure they. do not want, and the whole thing is only based on anticipation—anticipate legislative authority, anticipate the council sanctioning a vote, anticipate ’planes using the ’drome, and anticipate a financial success. Now, sir, I think that my ventilation of this matter has brought to light a. mass of information, hitherto held back, from which the ratepayers can form their

own opinions as to the rights or wrongs of this aerodroliie. Thanking you for space, I am etc., looking on.