LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

New Zealand Herald, Volume 81, Issue 25050, 14 November 1944, Page 4

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The Crooner Sir, —Fancy a real live woman wanting to be made love to in such a dying wail. I know that if I had heard anything like that I should have told him to go home and go to sleep. Gkanma. Bookmaking Sir, —One question which arises regarding bookmaking in New Zealand: What will be the effect on the young people of this fair country if bookmakers are allowed to break the law flagrantly? It must be harmful. It will be even more harmful if this class is to have privilege in the use of postal and telegraph facilities. The bookmaker is a non-producer and the law against bookmaking should be rigidly enforced. It would tend to confine betting on horses to its rightful place, the racecourse. The impudent manner in which bookmakers break the law is astonishing. Moralist. Deferred Army Discharge

Sir, —What of the married, grade one meri with over two children ? I am one witli a few months' overseas service and over a year in the home forces behind me, and am now on indefinite leave without pay, doing farm work. There are many such, and our position is obscure. I am not entitled to any rehabilitation benefits until my discharge after the war, and in any case the local rehabilitation officer said that I am so far down the priority list that I may as well count them out. My family is growing up and I am in no position to give them the good schooling they need. Is there a good and sufficient reason why men in my class should not receive their discharge and some opportunity _ for an independent start on a farm without taking anything away from the more deserving boys who went at the beginning'of hostilities? V. St. George. Sank of New Zealand

Sir, —A great deal of interest is taken in Mr Nash's seconding of the proposal to take over the Bank of New Zealand, and the more militant members of the Labour Party are most anxious to have their theory put into practice at once. A number of the arguments against the proposal seem to centre oh the cost to the country, which is strange, as at least it would be an expenditure of public money on solid value. To the average person a change of ownership in a largo financial organisation is hardly of passing interest, and even in the business world its effects would probably not be felt for some considerable time, but State ownership of a trading bank is merely a stop to much bigger changes. A trading bank, as a Government department, means that no transaction, however small, by a depositor is free from direct Government surveillance. Suppose the depositor docs not support financially the party at tho time in office. Has human nature changed so much that he will receive equal consideration with a party supporter when seeking an overdraft to finance, say, a Government-controlled licence? Would he even receive the licence? To avoid such a contretemps, the customer who supports the "out" party may change his bank, and here is the next step. The State-owned bank does not want to lose its customers., so another proposal from a Government-supporting political group is seconded by a Minister of Finance, and trading licences are refused to banks other than the State-operated one. Now. the State controls the overdraft of every bank customer in the country. What is tho man to do who needs an overdraft to support his business? Does he support financially the proper party machine? He cannot change his bank, so perhaps he changes his political ideas, and the Government has his support, and the support of thousands like him, forever under its control. Do the local manufacturers and business people -rt'ho now support tho present Government endorse this proposal of the Labour Party? Tt would be interesting to know. Ij. M. Kirk,