PUBLIC OPINION

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12298, 18 November 1925, Page 6

PUBLIC OPINION

THE DRIVER’S LICENSE (To the Editor “N.Z. Times.”) “Hands up! Stop, please!” and the car came to a standstill in front of a blue-capped official. It was a blessing that the brakes this time acted efficiently; otherwise all the pleasure of life might have been taken away, and for the future there would have been no more dodging of the (umble pedestrian “Your license, please!” “Where the devil are the papers?” passed rapidly through the mind of the driver. Oh, I remember, in the right-hand pocket of the car. A futile search; it must he in the left pocket. Out comes road book, map, instruction book, other odds and ends, and, at last, just at the bottom, where the fingers can barely reach it, to find, the bundle and hand it triumphantly to the inspector. His face, which was at first smiling, is becoming strangely ominous, and his lins .purse up critically. These are what he receives: 1. Receipt for Hutt road fees. 2. Receipt for registration plates. 3. Receipt for registration of vehicle and annual licence for year. 4. Certificate of registration of motor vehicle. " 5. License to use a motor vehicle, to wit, a “Chevrolet.” 6. Certificate of ability to drive and handle a motor-oar, dated 1923. This latter document is rather treasured by the driver, for it was won under examination, and when it was granted, the remark was made that anyone who could drive that particular car could drive anything. Noticing the turning over of the documents by the inspector, the driver asked, “Anything wrong?” “You haven’t a driver’s license,” is the reply. “Well, what about No. s—that is a license to use the car?” “It is not a license to drive it,” says the official. “Well, I don’t see the difference.” “It is a serious difference,” says the inspector, “and I must take your name,” and out comes his little notebook. Now, just a look at this dossier. Six documents, and 1 have had to get a seventh—and, of course, pay for it. There is no use in issuing any' document, unless cash is reoeived for it, and now I have got a little bundle that would do credit to any French or German passport, and I must' always have it with me whenever I touch the wheel. Does it not seem absurd? The fact is that the amount of the collection from the motor-owners for the Hutt read fees, was such a surprise to the official mind that it has appeared to them that a fresh mine of wealth has been opened, which must be tapped to the last shilling. Money to pav salaries and improve the citv and suburban roads is urgently needed; therefore the motorists must pay. God bless King on t But one cannot get all these papers end pay the fees, at one nlace. or, one time. First to the Poet Office, and then to the municipal buildings, waiting •'■our turn stench place, and then wonderinn all the time if you have remembered every document you want, for if ’mu forget and go one or two short, then it may mean a nice little extra sum in the wav of fines, that officialdom fs waiting for. T am ouite snre now that +he taxis earn the fares they charge.—Yours, pt*., C. W. TANNER. November 17th, 1925. LICENSING LEGISLATION (To the Editor, “N.Z. Times.”) Sir,—The correspondence of the New Zealand Licensing Reform Association with the Prime Minister published in your columns to-day calls for some comment. It was to he expected that the L.R.A. would try to make use of the increase in the middle issue vote. It is important, however, to remember that this increase in the vote was cleaTly solicited as a demand for immediate reform as regards the retail sale of liquor. It was not solicited as a meads of showing a demand for reform plus another third issue on the ballot paper. The Ij.R.A. are entitled to use this vote for what it is worth—namely, 8 per cent, of the total vote—as a means of seeking immediate reform of conditions governing the sale of liquor. They may even claim it as an endorsement of the Parliamentary Licensing Committee’s report, although that is rather more than they are justified in doing. In any case the Parliamentary committee did not recommend that the existing State purchase issue should remain on the ballot paper or that any other third issue should go on in its place. The L.R.A., therefore, has gone beyond the limits of legitimate argument in claiming' that the middle issue vote is an endorsement of corporate control. Tho L.R.A. is asking for another ballot paper that will perpetuate a species of fraud upon the electors. Look at the result of the poll just taken. Approximately 45 per 'cent, of the voters, i.e., 278,649, clearly stated that they wished things to remain as they are—they do not even want reform of any sort. The L.R.A. with its little 8 per cent, vote claims to have the right to say to these people: “You are not going to have what you want, you must nave what we want.” Approximately 48 per cent, of the voters, i.e., 301,262, stated clearly that they do not wish either continuance of the present traffic or any attempt at reform, they desired the traffic to be wiped out. The L.R.A. with its little 8 per cent, vote claims the right to say .to these people: “It does not matter what yon want we are going to make you have what we want.” The total result is that a little body of 62,491 voters are to he permitted to make the votes of 679,553 other voters of absolutely no value. In other words the middle issue disfranchises the voters for the other two issues. It is true, as the L.R.A. points out, that the liquor interests who have been asing their money and organisation to secure votes for continuance, also finance and support the corporate control proposal. It, therefore, remains necessary to point out that these interests already have their issue, of continuance on the ballot paper, and that it would be nothing more or less than an outrage to permit these interests to have two issues on the ballot paper as against prohibition. The New Zealand Alliance will heartily support any and every reform that will reduce the consumption of liquor or the evil effects arising from the liquor traffic. Let the new Parliament give us every practical reform that can be conceived, let the people have an experience with this “reformed” trade, and then an opportunity to vote on the straight-out issue—prohibition or continuance. The arrogance of an association representing only 8 per cent, of voters pressing the Prime Minister for presumably exclusive information as to when he intends to deal with licensing legislation, is really a little amusing.— I am, etc., J. MALTON MURRAY, Assistant Secretary N.Z. Alliance. November 17tK: