PATRIOTIC FUNDS

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 60, Issue 4231, 15 January 1940, Page 4

PATRIOTIC FUNDS

RESPONSE IN SHARP CONTRAST WITH 1914. COMMENTS MADE ON CAUSES. MINOR WEAKNESSES SEEN IN ORGANISATION. Comment on the sharp contrast bebetween the generous giving to patriotic funds in 1914 and the poor response in 1939, has been made by officers of interested organisations who were interviewed by Press” /(■Christchurch) last week. Opinions were invited on the causes' of the sluggish response, and among the causes suggested were (1) the comparative lack of money in New Zealand; (2) minor weaknesses in the patriotic fund organisation; and (3) the apathy of the public, or their failure to realise their responsibilities. No major to the present patriotic fund system was advocated, and views were expressed ranging from hopefulness to confidence j*hat the system, with improvewould meet with the desired success. Those approached were the Hon. Sir R. Heaton Rhodes, M.LjC., president of the New Zealand Red Cross Society and head of the Order of St. John (embracing the ambulance association, brigade, and the nursing services); the Mayor, Mr R. M. Macfarlane, M.P., chairman of the Canterbury Metropolitan Patriotic Council; Sir Hugh Acland, president of the North Canterbury Centre of the Red Cross Society; Lady Wigram, vice-president of the centre; and Mr C. J. Ronaldson, chairman of the centre’s committee.

A reference to the files of “The Press” of December 26, 1914, showed that to that date the total money sent from New Zealand for the poor of Britain and Belgium Fund was £49,200; that the Canterbury Patriotic Fund total was £16,126; the Belgium Relief Fund was £3350; and the Belgium Christmas Fund was £BOO. By about the same period Auckland had raised £50,000 for patriotic purposes and £20,000 for Belgian relief. Compared with these figures, a statement from Wellington on Thursday gave the donations acknowledged to the patriotic fund as almost £BOOO, and the periods represented in the last and the present war are similar. According to a statement published yesterday, the Canterbury Patriotic Fund donations are about £4OOO. VERY FAIR RESPONSE EXPECTED. The opinion that the fund was now proceeding quite satisfactorily was expressed by the Mayor as chairman of the Metropolitan Council. Declining to comment at length, he said that the organisation had started a little late for results to have fully appeared before now, and that no appeal had been made to businesses earlier because of the approach of Christmas. The organisation was really only now under way, and he was confident that there would be no difficulty in getting “a very fair response to the appeals.” “I can only say I hope the system and arrangements for the raising and administering of patriotic funds will be successful,’ ’was the comment made by Sir R. Heaton Rhodes. “In the last war there were about 600 organisations handling the matter, and there was necessarily overlapping and waste, so I think the present Government is quite right in having a central organisation to see to the proper management of the funds. But of course towards the end of the last war things were much better, and the organisation was working properly. If the Government can achieve this at the start of the war, so much the better. It is true that there may be weaknesses in he present system, but I think they are minor ones and can be overcome.

“I quite agree with the Mayor,” he added, “that just before Christmas is not a suitable time to launch a fund appeal, but now that Christmas has passed I think people will be looking to him for a lead.” The Mayor had called the initial meeting, which was well attended, and committee had been formed; but since then no meeting had been called. There were many hoping to play their parts as soon as possible. APATHY AND LESS MONEY. What he considered to be two main reasons for the comparatively poor response to appeals in this war- were that there was less money and less incentive to give, and that no enthusiasm had ben created. On the first point, it had been made easy to give money in the last war. There were flag days, raffles or auctions, and queen carnivals. For instance, people bought flags for 10s or £l, and he knew that a bunch of violets, for example, had been sold by auction for £95. Another small point in which he thought there had been an oversight at present was the failure to place patriotic seals for sale at the post offices, as was done with health stamps. Referring to the apparent lack of public enthusiasm, the people, he said, seemed to be looking to someone to take a lead, and they seemed to want it from the Government as it was taking control. There were many possible reasons for this apathy. Everything was done quietly, and he did not blame the Government for that. It was right that matters such as details of troop departures should be kept quiet, but in the last war there were bands, lined streets, ceremony, and publicity, and much to arouse the public. In the last war, too, there was more enthusiasm among the troops—and this was reflected in civilians—because recruiting was by regiments. Tradition and pride of regiment were a strong force, and the omission of this factor at present he regarded as a mistake. There was an inevitable small loss of enthusiasm now also, as the patriotic fund system tended to do away with the localised or small community’s pride of effort; but this would probably be overcome. When the Red Cross Society and Order of St. John launched their appeal in February for the sick and wounded fund, he hoped every effort would be made to organise in such a

way that people would be induct'd to give. The announcement of casualties would undoubtedly stir the people to respond to appeal; generously. The hope was also expressed by Sir Heaton Rhodes that a Red Cross Commissioner would be appointed and committees set up similar to the Red Cross and War Contingent Association’s committees in the last war. Sir Heaton (who was commissioner in the last war. and had control of the Red Cross organisation in London), emphasised the value of this move. The commissioner would have an advisory committee in London, and his duties would probably be supervisory as in the last war. “SYSTEM MISUNDERSTOOD.” Asked to comment, Sir Hugh Acland, whose opinions were endorsed by Mr Ronaldson as “covering the ground from A. to Z,” said that it had to be admitted that the response to the appeal was very poor and compared unfavourably with the position in 1914. The system under the National Fund Board and Provincial Councils had some weaknesses, but also had much to be said for it, and would ultimately, with improvements, work effectively, he thought. “The reasons for the comparative failure of the appeals so far are (1) that there is much less money in New Zealand now than in the last war period when money was plentiful; and (2) that the present scheme of collection and administration probably appears cumbersome to the people, and is undoubtedly misunderstood in many aspects with the result that people so far do not appeal willing to put their hands in their pockets as readily as they might be expected to,” he said. ‘lmprovements eould be made without a doubt, and an effort is being made in one such direction now—to have the name of the ‘sick and wounded fund’ ehanged to the ‘Red Cross and St. John fund,’ thus letting the people know more clearly to what they are subscribing. NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT “The charge may be made that the present system is too impersonal to be efficacious, and that collectors are not enthusiastic about collecting for a fund which is general; but this will probably be rectified with time.” There was, he said, a further point to be remembered (when relatively small collections were under question) that so far there had been little call for the sick and wounded. To the present time, funds were mainly needed for the entertainment, recreation and moral welfare of troops who had not left, and for the establishment of ‘ facilities at the camps. These latter funds were a matter for the various provincial councils which had charge of collection and administration. The suggestion that improvements in the present system -were needed was also made by Lady Wigram, who emphasised that to change the name of the “sick and wounded” fund, so as to show people the connexion of the fund with the Red Cross Society and Order of St. John, which jointly administered it, would be a step in the right direction. Lady Wigram also expressed the opinion that the impersonal nature of the present arrangements and some aspects which might be regarded as clumsy. 4 could be attended to with advantage. “As for the results themselves, compared with those during the last war,” she said, “the amount collected for the whole fund throughout the Dominion is only a very small percentage of what was collected in 1914. At this stage in the the fund collected was many, thousands. The greater part of £300,000 was collected during the Great War period in the Canterbury, Westland, Nelson, and Marlborough Red Cross Centres’ area alone.”