MY DAY TO GROWL

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 77, Issue 6567, 17 September 1948, Page 5

MY DAY TO GROWL

ABOUT THIS AND THAT

LIFE’S VICISSITUDES AND ITS PLEASANTRIES

(By

A. Growler)

The most interesting event that has

happened of late in Te Awamutu was the sitting of the No. 1 Transport . Licensing Authority, for several per--1 tinent comments were made during the sitting. First it was refreshing to hegr a Government-appointed authority chastise the Railway Department for sticking to pettifogging little regulations and thus hamper production. There are far too many “trumpery” rules and commandments, all of which seemed to be designed to frustrate man’s inherent right of freedom. Personally I can never see the force of protecting a person against himself when it comes to the embarking forth on some commercial undertaking and spending one’s own money in launching' that undertaking. If I have a thousand pounds of my own to spend on, say a transport business, why in the name of British freedom shouldn’t I be allowed to spend ? After all, it is my money that goes into it, and if I lose it, then someone else has gained, and the money has gone around as it is intended should be done with money. There is far too much of the “I am my brother’s keeper” business applied to commercial life to-day. All the opposition that is launched against an application for a new transport license comes from those who are already established, and it takes a very Wide stretch of imagination to make /one think that all the opposition is purely dis-inter-ested and is put forward in order to protect the other fellow against himself. I wonder if we will ever get back to the old days when one had more freedom, and as a result, more initiative than we have to-day.

I have never b/en very much impressed by the Transport Licensing Authority’s view'that there are sufficient taxis to neet the needs of the people. I am n«£ referring to Te Awamutu so mud as I am to Hamilton. It is very evident that Mr Phelan does not haw to depend on taxis—in fact, he doesi’t, as he has a Government car alvays at his disposal—for if he had e«r had to wait long periods of time to get a taxi in Hamilton, as I and comtless numbers of others have to de he would, I think, be inclined tc grant more taxi licenses. One has -nly to try and get a taxi when thf hotels are emptying out their liqipr-laden patrons, to know that thee is a distinct need for more taxis, a’d the demand is not confined to that period alone. Yes sir, we -lo want nore taxis and less conservation of the monopolistic attitude of existing t«i proprietors.

I ras rather amused at an advertisement that appeared in Wednesday* Courier and signed by ten grocers The amusement was created by thcfact that the signatures of the ten greers also appeared on a document sv»porting the application of a local roident who was seeking from the Jo. 1 Transport Licensing Authority .•license to start a light delivery serice, to operate within the confines of he Borough. The grocers claim that they are already giving that service. If they are, and I am not doubting their word, why did they sign the supporting document? Did they do it out of their goodness of heart, or if it is granted do they intend to discard their present means of service to the public and “pass the buck” for delivery on to the new operator? The most damning statement made by Mr Phelan in his capacity as the Licensing Authority was that when he said: “It seemed as if it was a matter of the public pleasing the business people, and not a case of the business people serving the public. . . . and it looked as if some of the business people were getting plenty of money very easily and that they were having a fairly good time,” and that view has been long held by many others than Mr Phelan. Bound up with the above is the lamentable apathy displayed by the people generally. The position in regards that apathy was admirably set forth in the leader that appeared in Wednesday’s issue. Some of the apathy in attending local meetings can be ascribed to the fact that such meetings are unduly prolonged and that the resultant advantage is nil. So far no finality has been reached in regards a greatly needed rest room, a community centre, and the war memorial. In regards the latter, it looks as if there is every likelihood of another war eventuating before we get a memorial to those who served and made the supreme sacrifice in World War 11. In Te Aroha just on £4OOO has been raised, and that fine sum without half the meetings that have been held in Te Awamutu. There is an urgent need for a “Wake up Te Awamutu” campaign, and Mr Phelan’s remarks should not be resented, but should be taken as a rallying call to greater interest in the town and a greater measure of service to a town that is second to none. Its progress is being hampered by lack of commercial building permits, we know, but apathy is also retarding progress, and that apathy should be thrown into the discard by those who have the power to do SO.

While Mr Semple may have been a good Minister of Public Works, he has never been noted for being a good logician. Confirmation of that view is be had in Mr Semple’s threat about ■fcitroducing power cuts this month, ) wid a recent statement that there ‘ (fill be no power cuts at all next March when the Royal visit is to take place. It would appear as if the King is not to be permitted to see the real New Zealand, which is a small but important gem in his Imperial Crown. What with depriving him of seeing the whole of the King Country, and to decorating the streets of the cities and towns he is to visit, so as to make them almost completely unrecognisable, and putting on for him gaily lighted towns that are often not so gaily lighted, due to power cuts. If it is good enough for New Zealanders to see towns less brilliantly lighted than they ought to be, then surely it should be good enough for the King, and I am sure that he would agree with me.

It would surely be a hard thing to find a more absurd position than that

which has over the non-accept-ance of Australian coinage in New Zealand. We are sister Dominions, only separated by a few hours’ flying time, and we are part of the same Empire, so surely each of those two countries money should have the same face value. A good deal has been heard about monetary reform and I think the experience of many people during the last few weeks in having Australian money refused is about the most striking argument in favour of monetary reform of which I know.

I was pleased to see a member of the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce severely castigate the Minister of Finance over the latter’s heartless action in refusing to give any relief to the victims of the recent tornado that did such damage to many parts of the City of Hamilton. According to Mr Nash, the War Risk and Earthquake fund was solely built up to the tune of £6,000,000 for the benefit of Wellington. The Right Hon. gentleman knows as well as I do that the fund was built up by all people who paid insurance and not merely by the people of the Capital City. Mr Nash’s attitude was in direct contradiction to that of Mr Fraser, who was most sympathetic, even to the extent of giving a personal donation of £25, while Mr Nash, with characteristic aloofness from the common people, failed to be at all sympathetic. I was in Hamilton at the time the Prime ’Minister was there visiting the stricken victims, and his presence was encouraging. I was there for a few hours after Mr Nash’s arrival, and later I spoke to several who had been deprived of homes, and their silence about Mr Nash was more than striking, and in passing they were good supporters of the Party that numbers Mr Nash as a member. I wonder if the portfolio of Finance is such as to make the holder hard-hearted. There might be something in that idea. The decision of the Chamber of Commerce in Hamilton, asking the Government to alter the present Earthquake Fund or to establish a national disaster fund should be supported by every Chamber of Commerce and local body in New Zealand. Such an amendment of the law would make an excellent plank in the National Party’s platform. The thought is commended to Mr Holland.

I wonder how many readers of the press noticed a statement by the Hamilton R.S.A. stating that they did not see much good in supporting a move that is being made for an increase in the working hours per week. After numerous resolutions carried by Chambers of Commerce and other more or less important bodies, it was refreshing to see a sane viewpoint expressed by such an important body as that named. There are those, who like myself, were in Te Awamutu when the 40-hour week was first mooted, aqd some two or three months before the Awards were amended to make a 40-hour week operative the local business people (not the employees, be it noted) all seized on the proposal with avidity and pleading that they might as l well do it voluntarily instead of waiting for its compulsory enforcement, and at once adopted it. With the exception of farmers, the 40-hour week has come to stay, and rightly so, for all the secondary goods needed can be produced within the limits of a 40-hour week or even less, when mass production methods are taken into account. I write as one who has no 40 hours a week job.