A DENTAL CLINIC FOR OWAKA

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22372, 20 September 1934, Page 6

A DENTAL CLINIC FOR OWAKA

TO THE EDITOR Sib, —I wish to offer a few corrections to several statements iu Mr Rendle’s letter. He writes that he definitely stated the purposes for which the money secured by means of the carnival was wanted. He did to a certain degree only. In so far as he definitely named certain definite works and improvements, I have had no complaint. These things naturally have first call on the money raised, as the carnival was held primarily to raise money for these things. At the householders’ meeting there was no mention of extensively draining the football ground or of installing wireless throughout the school. These latter works have been thought of as a result of the success of the carnival. I was thunderstruck to read in Air Rendle’s letter that the chainnan had ruled me out of order for speaking about a dental clinic. This statement I emphatically deny. I have spoken to three prominent men in Owaka who attended that meeting, and they agree that my remarks were never curtailed by the chairman. I rather regret now that the chairman did not rule me out of order. Had I then known that Mr Rendle stood for a complete renovation of the school and grounds before doing anything in the direction of establishing a clinic, I would not have been a party interested to the extent that T was in the carnival. The question of a dental clinic has been frequently considered since 1925, and has been turned down. To write correctly, however, the reason underlying its being turned down was not one of responsibility but one of money. In bis letter Mr Rendle states that a school committee and an education board have nothing to do with a clinic. How docs this work in with the Owaka District High fschool Committee considering the establishment of such a clinic since 1925? Ts_ it not more correct to state that the idea of establishing a clinic frequently emanates

from a school committee which, in its capacity as a committee in touch with parents, is eminently suitable to initiate such a movement? Once established, a clinic is locally controlled not by,a school committee, but by a special committee under the Health Department. The school committee could be the dental clinic committee, if elected at the householders’ meeting. The real point is that both committees are interested in one thing—the promotion of the welfare of children, be it mental or physical, or both. Some two to three months ago Mr Rendle and I inspected two possible sites at the school for a dental clinic. At that period most people never anticipated the result that we did get at the carnival. It was then mentioned that possibly £25 to £4O would renovate a room temporarily as a clinic. I do not remember ever quoting £7O. I did, however, mention £125 just prior to the meeting, blit before the meeting eventuated additional information made me put the cost up to £l4O. This figure would suffice either to fit out a temporary place at £4O and put £IOO aside until a more convenient time, when the Government subsidy might return, or, if one could get certain promised donations increased, might be sufficient to establish a clinic now. My primary object is to establish a permanent clinic—not a makeshift. Consequently at the meeting I could not move in a direction contrary to these views and remain consistent. Mr Rendle misconstrues this into £l4O or nothing at all. In his letter he states that lie advised me how to change ray motion. The above explains why I could not. Could he not have moved in the direction he advised me to if he was interested in seeing money allocated for a clinic? As he was strong enough to defeat my motion he would have been strong enough very probably to carry his own." It has been stated that all that has happened is that my motion was turned down. That is quite so. The voting, however, was by no means overwhelming, despite the large school Committee representation. A School Committee meeting was held,. however, on September 12. I am pleased to note that the committee at that meeting decided to consider a dental clinic when it had finished work in the drill area. Quite a point was made about a variation in my figures. This I have already dealt with. The original estimate at the householders’ meeting, of doing up the drill area at the school, was fISO. It has grown now to £270, and I believe that, with an additional area that is to be done, another £6O will be spent. This does not include, I believe, additional money that will have to be found to “subsidise” the unemployed. I believe myself that that particular job will cost every penny of £350. I believe that the above demonstrates that at least one of Mr Rendle’s proposals can also grow clearer practically every time it has been mentioned. . My real grievance lies in the fact that at the beginning of the carnival Mr Rendle, most members (if not all) of the School Committee, and also the general public, knew why I was interested in the carnival. I thought from Mr Rcndle’s attitude while inspecting the school and on several social occasions that he was interested more deeply in than “ being not antagonistic ” to, a clinic. _ More plainly, I concluded that, if his improvements were effected, then he would favour a clinic. Several weeks the improvements were limited. Now they appear to me to be unlimited. Had Mr Rendle made clear at the householders’ meeting, at which he was the principal sneaker, exactlv what his attitude was, then perhaps I, as the representative of quite a large section of the public, would have no need to feel as if vve had been let down.

The reason,why my attack was directed against him is explained to a certain extent in the foregoing. Furthermore, despite his able explanation that the matter rests with the School Committee, I still maintain that Mr Kendle, even without a vote, by virtue of his ability as a speaker and by his attendance at School Committee meetings in an advisory capacity, does wield a very material influence with the committee.

A period is referred to when J sat on the School Committee, from which I resigned freely of my owu will approximately one month before my term was up. A resignation was put in by me which duly explained my action, and that resignation was accepted by the committee, but not before Mr Hcmlle’s predecessor hud seen me. That business is no concern of Mr Handle's, and .1 am surprised, after his talk of fairmindedness, at him seizing on this act of mine as a basis for an imputation. Moreover, had I not' unexpectedly been professionally busy until 10.30 on the night of the last School Committee election, I would have been a candidate for election. I did attend the meeting, arriving there at 10.30 p.m., but at that late hour, of course, the ballot was in process of being terminated. If Mr Rendlc sharpens his wits a little he will notice that there is nothing in either of my letters of a contradictory nature. I am pleased to read that I reached Mr Rendle’s emotional depths by my pathetic farewell, not to my great intentions, but to an institution which I am convinced is of paramount importance, and for the of jvliich no better opportunity has existed. * In conclusion, may I suggest that as at least three of the queen committees collected money well outside the area drained bv the Owaka School, it would be a mark of appreciation to the subscribing public if the Owaka School Committee were to call a public meeting and put forward its definite proposals and ask the assembled public its opinion on

those or any other proposals which may be forthcoming? Tins suggestion is made by the writer, not because he doubts the sagacity of the School Committee, but because he believes that as once before a public meeting proved its worth by results, so might it do so again. —I am, etc., Henry N. Johnson. [For the information of the writer of the above letter and of other correspondents, we wish to state that the use of unjustifiable contractions of words renders a letter liable to rejection.— Ed. O.U.T.J

TO THE EDITOE. Sir, —I wish to thank “Katauui” for his interest in my little controversy and for his kind remark, and kindlier advice. I do this because I am assured in my own mind that “ Ratanui ” is quite a likeable fellow. While regretting the necessity, however, I still do not regret the fact of having written my recent letter, which, by the way, was written after quite a lot of cool reflection. To apologise for an incorrect act would be an act that is done forthwith and with grace and with dignity. If “ Ratanui ” were a resident in the Cathns, then perhaps he would be in a position to have a little more knowledge. . I do not know whether Katamn means anything by his reference to “ best lemonade,” but 1 do know that 1 detest real lemonade. In conclusion, may 1 state that I believe that two guesses would suffice to clear up “ Ratanui s identity.—l am, etc., Henry N. Johnson.