TAKEN TO TASK.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VII, Issue 2026, 12 August 1920, Page 14 (Supplement)

TAKEN TO TASK.

FOR CRITICISING BOARD. A REPATRIATION TROUBLE. MEMBER'S PUBLIC STATEMENTS RESENTED. •Meetings of the Canterbury Repatrintion Board have of late provided indications that one member is persona nou grata with most of the others. This attitude culminated yesterday in heated recriminations, following the member concerned, Mr AV. E. Leadley, being taken to task for a criticism of the board made at a meeting of tuberculous soldiers. Mr A. F. Drayton said that a public statement had been made by Mr Leadley to the effect that the Repatriation Board, in dealing with T.B. men, had shown itself unsympathetic. For the past 18 months the board had given a great deal of time and attention to the problem of the T.B. man. Indeed, members, of the board had given more consideration to this section than to any other class of disabled man. The chairman (Mr A. AV. Jamieson) said that the statement referred to was published in The Sun. Mr Leadley had said that the board was unsympathetic to T.B. men.

Mr Leadley: I never saw that in The Sun*. I "certainly made the statement that the Repatriation Board had done excellent work in the past, but that it was apathetic regarding T.B. men. The word "unsympathetic" was not used. But I have used it to the board in committee. You can't say that -what I have said outside I am afraid to say to. the board. Mr Drayton said that he had not corhe provided with a clipping from The Son containing the report referred to, and he therefore suggested that the matter should be deferred until the next meeting. Mr Leadley: Oh! I'm quite prepared to justify any statement I've made in public. The chairman said that the board had done everything it could in urging the Government to set up men as quickly as possible. No doubt mistakes had been made in the past, and mighi happen again. But so far they had been few and far betweeu. For anyone to say that the board was unsympathetic— Mr Leadley: L'nsympathetie! I contradicted that. The chairman: "Well, apathetic rather implies a lack of sympathy. Members ba,ve spared no effort and given every consideration possible towards setting T?JB. men up in business. Mr Leadley remarked that if the board would accept his statement that he had said that it had done a lot, but •was apathetic to T.B. men, he was prepared to proceed to justify this. Members: Why did you not correct the report regarding "unsympathetic" arid ''apathetic''? Mr Leadiey: The difference was so %light, it was not worth while. The chairman: AVell, both cast a stigma on the board. Mr Leadley proceeded to say that at a meeting held recently, which was pre-: sided over by Air Drayton, he had in-1 formed the board of a case where a TJJ. man received unsympathetic treatment from the Repatriation Department. Mr Drayton interjected that the department was not the board. Mr Leadley: But when the matter came before the board, it did nothing. -f~ asked for a special inquiry on the treatment of T.B. men, but I was even ruled out of order. Turned down by the board. I had a right to go to the public. The chairman, interrupting, said that ir. the case mentioned he had conferred with Mr Leadley and the man concerned. He .saw that the department had made a mistake, and so brought the matter to the notice of the Repatriation Officer. He understood thdt the matter had been put right. The public had gained the impression that there was feeling against the After-Care Officer. •

Mr Leadley continued that, before dealing with the apathy of the board, lie would like to correct the remark concerning the After-care Officer. The chairman should not have made this statement, as he had previously been given the assurauce that there was no personal feeling against this official, who was a sympathetic man. They objected to him, however, because the present After-care Officer had not had T.B. experience. Mr Leadley went on to say that at the last meeting of the board he presented the ease of two T.B. men employed by the Post Office in delivering telegrams at night. Dr G. J. Blaekniore, Director of the Sanatorium, had told him that this was the worst possible job the men could have been put to. In spite of this, no member of the board hail commented on tin case,

although these men had been placed in the position through the efforts of the board. "I took it that the board was unsympathetic, or did nothing, because it was myself who brought the matter forward,'' added Mr Leadley. Months ago it was stated that land would be obtained suitable for the settlement of T.B. nlfn. But the matter had been put off and nothing done, with the exception of acquiring an area on Mt. Pleasant, which was unsuitable. Mr AV. Goss: It was recommended by Dr Blackmore. Mr Leadley: Yes,.from the health point of view. But there is no water there. Mr IT. S' J. Goodman: You knew we had nothing to do with this. Mr Drayton, replying to a remark from Mr Leadley, explained that he had been opposed all the time to the purchase at Mt. Pleasant. Turning to Mr Leadley, he added: "You are a standing disgrace to talk as you do!" At this, Mr Leadley jumped excitedly to his feet: "I want that remark to go in the newspapers!" The chairman: You ought to state facts. As » member of the board, you ought to know that the Lands Department has absolute control in the purchase of lands. Mr Leadley: We have to do the re-_ commending. Didn't you go to Darfield. Mr Chairman, for the purpose of a proposed settlement for T.B. men? Mr Goss: He went because, he is sympathetic. It is foolish for us to "recommend. We have no power. Mr Leadley: A recommendation from this board carries weight. Mr Goss: The experience is jus,t opposite. Mr Leadley (to the chairman): I refuse to go on unless I have your ruling that Mr Drayton's remark is out of order. There was a rapid exchange of remarks across the table at this stage, several members speaking at once. Mr Leadley contended that the board had shown it was unsympathetic, when it had not discussed the case of the two men in uncongenial employment. The'chairman replied that the men were in the positions at their own request. A T.B. officer from AVellington, together with the Canterbury After-care Officer, had gone into the matter, and were endeavouring to arrange other employment. The board had not remained silent —it had immediately "gone to work and done something. Concerning Mt. Pleasant, arrangements were going to be made to remedy the defect with reference to the lack of water. The board had nothing to do with the purchase of this property. He did not think that the charges justified the claim that the board was apathetic, and he asked Mr Leadley to withdraw his statement.

Mr Leadley: I don't know how you jean sit there, Air Chairman, and ask ]me to Withdraw, when you allow Mr 'Drayton to make a remark no other chairman would permit. It's absolutely beyond a joke to treat me like that. The chairman: I ruled that out. Mr Leadley: I've as much right to speak here as anyone. Most of you are business men, and Air Goss and Mr Drayton, particularly, think, when speaking to me, they are addressing an employee. Members: Oh! No!

Mr Goss: If I've done that, you've merited it. (Laughter.) Mr Leadley (heatedly): Tou forget you are just a member of the board. Mr Goss: There is only one member here who thinks he controls it. Mr Leadley: And that's Mr Goss! Mr Goss: I will say that if any other member had made the statement you did, I'd have taken more notice. Mr Leadley: Oh, we love each other. Mr Goss: The trouble is, facts don't worry you. But we are business men, and want facts. It is absurd for you to say we had anything to do with Mt. Pleasant. "We recommended it," replied Mr Leadley. Member?: Oh! No. Mr Leadley: I didn't know that. Mr Drayton and Mr Charters visited the place, and I thought that they recommended it.

Mr Goss said that Mr Drayton had reported against it, as there was no water there. There was further cross-table discussion, at the conclusion of which the chairman delivered a little homily to Mr Leadley. He stated that members had been irritated at other meetings by the manner in which questions were asked by him. Mr Leadley would be wise to inquire into facts first. He added that the cases cited were no justification for the'attack on the board made by Mr Leadley.