ONE MAN FOR TWO FULLTIME JOBS

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22506, 14 September 1938, Page 7

ONE MAN FOR TWO FULLTIME JOBS

TO THE EDITOB O g THE PRESS. Sir, —Your correspondent, “One Man One Job,” is evidently suffering from what one might term “sour grapes.” He draws a dismal picture of our Mayor absent from the city for six or seven months every year attending to Parliamentary business. Well, that is just too bad for your correspondent, because it is going to happen—in other words, Mr Macfarlane Is go ! ng to Parliament.

There is one statement your correspondent makes that Is evidence of warped vision. He says, “I don’t care what qualifications Mr Macfarlane might have.” What he does not care about will not worry the electors who desire to be represented by a man whose knowledge, ability, and integrity are unquestioned. However, that is by the way. Let us analyse this wail by “One Man One Job.” Would your correspondent say that when a man enters Parliament he should immediately devote his whole energy to that task, and drop everything else? Probably your correspondent will say that the position of the Nationalist candidaie managing a business is not analogous with that of the Mayor who holds a public office. I might even concede him the point, but in doing so I would ask him this question. Must every man who accepts the mayoralty drop all other interests and devote his whole attention to the civic business entailed 1 That, in substance, is what your correspondent demands, if his, or her letter is carefully read. The position is impossible, and your correspondent knows it. A man who is in business must devote time to his own business, and he does so, devoting as much time as he can spare to civic affairs. Mr Macfarlane is fulfilling his Mayoral duties admirably—a point which cannot be denied. There is no warrant for saying that his attention to civic affairs will be any less efficient. The position of Mayor and member of Parliament combined is no new thing in Christchurch. The best mayors this city has ever had were the late \T. E. Taylor, then Dr. H. T. J. Thacker' and our esteemed friend, D. G. Sullivan. :Will your correspondent, or anyone else, dare suggest that the city sujtergd .because these men were members of Parliament also? And I might 5 instance the fact that men elected to mayoral office in Wellington, Napier, Gisborne, and many other centres have been in Parliament during their terms of civic office. Unless your correspondent can produce some fundamental complaint the evidence available is against his contention that it is not in the best interests of the city for the Mayor to be in Parliament. The two positions have been filled by the men mentioned, and with Mr Macfarlane in Parliament the position will be that history will repeat itself—the electors of Christchurch North will be represented in Parliament and the affairs of the city will be in good keeping.— Yours, etc., , ■ C. HEPBURN. September 13, 1938.

TO THE EDITOB OT THE PRESS. Sir,—While I agree with “One Man One Job” that no man should hold the important positions of member of Parliament and mayor of a city, I do not think your correspondent need worry in the least about Mr Macfarlane holding that dual office. His Worship has a better chance of shooting mosquitoes with a revolver, or of catching elephants with fly-papers, than he has of ousting Mr S. G. Holland from Christchurch North. However, I have thought for a long time that the Labour Party suffers from a dearth of reasonable, longsighted, and practical men, otherwise the party would not persist with its blatant, bombastic gas- bags, its conglomeration of financial' cranks, its plausible, sobbing dreamers, and its policy of two important jobs for one man.—Yours, etc., HUMBUG HATER. September 13. 1938.