R.S.A.

Southland Times, Issue 18618, 16 August 1919, Page 5

R.S.A.

THE AUCKLAND DISPUTE. REPLY TO HEADQUARTERS’ STATEMENT. (Per United Press Association). AUCKLAND, August 15. The secession from the N.Z. Returned Soldiers’ Association by the Auckland branch is regarded by many Auckland members as inevitable. A statement in reply to the criticisms of the National Executive was issued this morning by the Auckland Association. In explaining the attitude of the Auckland executive, Mr F. Andrews remarked that on the occasion of the last dominion conference of the Association, the New Zealand executive brought down a scheme by which the headquarters would control the provincial organisers and also the organising fund. A sub-committee was set up, which propounded a proposal for the existing scheme of giving the provincial committees control of the organisers and of the funds for organising work. The scheme stipulated that the local association should pay a capitation fee of 2s to headquarters and 2s to the provincial committees. The proposal was approved by a large majority of the conference, although the president of the New Zealand Association and several members of the present dominion executive fought very bitterly against it, declaring when it was carried that it would be a failure. Subsequently it was pointed out that the dual capitation fund would involve two returns from each association and that a simpler way would be to remit the 4s to the headquarters so that the funds could be delivered to the different provincial organisations to which they were attached. The conference agreed to this modification. Immediately after the conference, the Auckland Association appointed its organiser and went to considerable expense and trouble in mapping out the district and in due course applied to the dominion executive for funds. At that time about £6OO was due. The association received no reply to its wires and letters until after the dominion executive had met and then the Auckland Association was informed that the dominion executive claimed control over the funds. The executive intimated that a certain amount was being placed in a bank to the credit of the Auckland provincial district and that they were nominating certain members of the provincial committee to operate on the fund, but that the funds would remain the property of the executive and they claimed the right to stop payment at any time and place. Naturally the Auckland provincial committee objected to that course as being absolutely contrary to the intention and decision of the conference and regarded the attitude of the executive as an endeavour to force branches to accept the scheme the executive had unsuccessfully brought before the conference. Already expenses to an amount of well over £IOO had been incurred in connection with the organisation scheme and members of the association had had to find the money privately, as there were no funds available.

“Since the conference,” continued Mr Andrews, “headquarters have tried by every means in their power to hamper the scheme of the provincial organisation.” Moreover their intention was revealed by the resolution passed at the executive meeting since the conference to the effect that subject to notification and reasons being sent to branch associations, the decisions of the conference might be modified if in its opinion such modifications were vital and immediately necessary in view of new conditions having arisen. With regard to political action Mr Andrews remarked that there was a certain impression amongst the Auckland members that the determined efforts made by beadquarters to prevent the organising scheme being carried out in Auckland province, were the result of the attitude of the local association toward political action and that the central executive did not wish the Auckland Association to become any stronger than at present. Already the Auckland province represented 40 per cent, of the total membership of the dominion. It should be understood, moreover, that the Auckland organiser had received definite instructions that be was not to push political action in connection with his duties. It was certainly the intention of the Auckland Association to battle for political action, but the cost of so doing would be defrayed from the local association’s funds. The organisation fund would not be used for that purpose. In conclusion Mr Andrews pointed out that the strongest opponents of political action had been members holding appointments under the Government and that Civil Servants were represented strongly on the dominion executive.