CHARITABLE AID

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22823, 6 March 1936, Page 5

CHARITABLE AID

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—lt was apt my intention to interfere in the discussion between Mr I. Neilson, M.P., and my fellow member on the Hospital Board, Dr Newlands. Dr Newlands- says that he is not worried as to whom the public will believe, Mr Neilson or Mr Scurr. Evidently he knows; so do I. Dr Newlands being a strong man uses strong language, but he seems ■to be rather unfortunate in the choice of words; Referring to my criticism of the Hospital Board's outdoor relief policy he says, "It was- a different matter when a member of the board, in the course of a tedious tirade of mislepresentation, repeated the slander, and although my language was strong, one does not stop to mmce words when a valued colleague is being stabbed in the In' the first place Dr Newlands's valued colleague was not stabbed in the back, for the doctor admits that Mr Neilson had used this "garbled version" in the ferment of " electioneering babblement as, a " choice morsel" for his ' select audience." This sarcastic reference to "select audiences" goes to show the tiue value Dr Newlands places on a working class audience. Why was Mr Neilson's statement allowed to go unchallenged and uncontradicted so long/ At the board meeting Dr Newlands said that the statement made by Mr Scurr was that the job of the board was to keep the unemployed above the bread line. Mr Scurr, however, says that what he did say was that it was the business of the board "to keep people who were right down on the bread line." Yes, time and memory play tricks on us all. _I can well understand how tedious to listen to was my criticism of the boards policy or. .outdoor relief to Dr Newlands. It is only out of courtesy to myself that he referred to my speech as a tirade instead of a much stronger term. I wish to thank Dr Newlands for his kind conaideration of my feelings As for my misrepresentations of the boards policy the doctor now has an opportunity 01 showing where I was wrong He has the same data as I have at his disposal; n*y, he has more. When I gave the amount spent on . medical and nursing attendence (other than by the board) as 11, I was told it wad hot correct. This figure was taken from the appendix to the annual report, l»d». On looking up the board s own printed report, 1935. I'frnd that the Government figure was wrong: the amount spent was actually 10s 6d under the above heading. I admit my error. I gave individual easesprom the board's return of the qui to inadequate amount handed out to lht> poor which Dr Newlands can show to be incorrect. Here is another case which came under my notice to-day, that of a Woman with two children, One tour years and the other 16 months old. lliis ease was referred to our efficient officer to act. This woman receives a grocery order for 53. an order for meat 2s (3d. and one quart of milk a day. According to Dr Newlands this "allowance is not handsome, but at' the same time could not be denied to be sufficient. lo me this allowance is below the bread line, but not wishing to raise an unnecesary and undignified discussion, I will say that it is " above the bread line." But then, what is the exact definition of " the bread line"? To the amount mentioned above this woman receives 10s a week maintenance for one child. Thus the total income of this poor woman, including the maintenance allowance, is 19s 6d a week, or 2s 9id a day to feed a sick woman and two young children. Surely the conservative Otago Hospital and Charitable Aid Board has not forgotten that He said some 2000 years ago: "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto Me: for of such is the Kingdom ot Heaven."—l am, etc.,' M. SILVERSTONE.