Coupon Inspectors Defended in House

Manawatu Times, Volume 69, Issue 206, 31 August 1944, Page 4

Coupon Inspectors Defended in House

BRISK SKIRMISH FOLLOWS MR. DOIDGE’S ALLEGATIONS (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 30. A lengthy discussion on a point of order regarding what Mr. S. G. Holland called “an obviously put-up job between the junior Government Whip and the Minister of Supply” preceded and delayed the resumption of the Budget debate when the House met this afternoon. Mr. D. W. Coleman (Gisborne) gave notice to ask the Minister whether he would have an investigation made into charges made by Mr. F. W. Doidge against an inspector visiting Tauranga in the performance of his duties and whether if the charges were correct the Minister would have the inspector dismissed. A note to the question said the inspector was alleged to have purchased a pair of socks and when the young lady who served him asked for a half coupon he snatched his money back and then browbeat the young lady and later her employer, stating that if he wished he could have her license to sell certain goods cancelled. The inspector was alleged by M r * Doidge to have adopted the same tactics when served with a meal at an hotel when he refused to give up his meat coupon, also at another shop when he purchased a pillow case, added Mr. Cole-

When Mr. Sullivan asked the indulgence of the House to make an immediate reply the Opposition demurred, pointing out that Mr. Doidge’s statements had been made the previous evening in the course of the financial debate and the Government could if it wished reply through its members, including Ministers who had not yet spoken in that debate. Mr. Holland said the Minister had a typed reply in his hand and the question was clearly a pretext to give the Minister an opportunity for a second speech in the debate. “If we are going to have these methods of conducting the debate the whole standing orders will have to go overboard,” declared Mr. Holland. Mr. Fraser said there had been an accusation against a public servant that was a matter of sufficient public Interest to warrant an immediate reply and the House should not deny the Minister a chance to give information. Mr. Fraser said that during the war power necessarily had been vested in the hands of people not accustomed to power, and it might have been that in this or other instances that that power had been used unfairly and tyranically through inexperience, but at least the facts should be givenAfter the matter had been discussed for nearly threequarters of an hour the House agreed that Mr. Sullivan should read his reply. The Minister said that clothing rationing operated under the “honour” system, but due to the increasing defection of a number of retailers in taking coupons the New Zealand Drapers’ Federation recommended to the Rationing Controller that steps should be taken by means of test purchases lo bring the offenders to book.

The Inspection referred to by Mr. DoidßQ was the same as any other routine inspection and the inspector denied absolutely having used any of the methods attributed to him. He was the chief inspector for Auckland province and one of the most experienced of the Department s outside staff. The prosecution against the retailer who sold the pillow slips was dismissed due to the fact that the police officer conducting the prosecution failed to produce tho required evidence that the pillow slips were rationed goods which, of course, they were. That matter is being further examined. Mr. Sullivan read an extract from a letter from the retailer concerned regarding the prosecution. “Also I have to admit a breach of the regulations regarding the sale of a pair of pillow cases for which I failed to ask for two coupons due to a temporary lapse of memory. At the time I was busy preparing correspondence for the mail and this might have had some bearing. I fully realise the seriousness and have nothing to add other than that the officer was most courteous In his carrying out of his duty.”