Ex-emigrant’s Criticism Finds Partial Support In London’s NZ Colony

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27012, 22 February 1949, Page 4

Ex-emigrant’s Criticism Finds Partial Support In London’s NZ Colony

For the Daily Times by Harvey Blanks LONDON.Feb.iI. New Zealanders resident in Britain are by no means unanimous in denouncing the attack on their homeland by a returned emigrant 1 published in one of Britain’s leading national newspapers, the Daily Mail. In fact, the balance of opinion, was the other way. The original attack, by a teacher, Betty Bright, charged New Zealanders with having little sense of moral responsibility to the community, with unkindness, dishonesty, corruption and drunkenness. She also alleged there was less freedom of speech in New Zealand than in Britain.

I approached several dozen New Zealanders who have been living in London for periods ranging from six months to four years, and asked them for their opinions on the article. Nearly three-quarters said that, apart from minor inaccuracies, they thought it was fair comment'. About one in five of this number added that “it needed saying,” and expressed the hope that a few more such articles might help shatter “ that intolerable smugness which is the New Zealander’s besetting sin.” Several thought the article “ only partly correct,” admitting the charge of “ flourishing drunkenness ” but denying that of “ corruption and dishonesty.” Minority Dismisses Article A minority dismissed the whole article as the imaginings of a frustrated female who “ would never settle down happily, anyway.” Here is a selection of comments from various New Zealanders: — Bio-chemist (aged 28): "About time someone shattered the ‘ phony ’ image we have set up of ourselves. After a year over here one can see just how intolerant, backward and smug a people we are. Even if the criticism is wrong in detail it is correct in, its general attitude. But you will not find people back home to acknowledge that.” Musician (aged 31): “I can well understand an English emigrant being shocked by our archaic licensing laws. You can see more drunkards on the streets in New Zealand in a week than you will notice in Britain in a lifetime. That, if nothing else, would prevent me ever returning to New Zealand.” “A Race of Louts” Medical student (aged 24): “This woman’s criticisms are precisely the reasons why I shall not return to New Zealand. The Dominion is fast producing a race of lazy, objectionable louts. . The only thing we have more of than Britain is food. As far as the charge of unkindness is -concerned I can say I have been treated with far more consideration in England than I have ever seen accorded a visitor to New Zealand.”

this unless he had the opportunity to travel extensively.” Author (aged 36): “New Zealand these days is a quaint little pocket of Victoriana —the last outpost of an antiquated Puritanism. This woman is perfectly correct in what she says. And things will not improve until New Zealanders learn to be intellectually honest with themselves.”

Broker (aged 52): “A lot of fuss about nothing. The author of this scurrilous article has obviously had an unfortunate experience, and this has coloured her whole outlook on the country.” Architect (aged about 40): “The section of criticism dealing with homes and ‘primitive’ equipment is partly true from my experience. We are many years behind the times. Design is poor, often faulty, and interior decoration and planning frequently show appalling lack of taste. But the average person would not recognise