THE OPOTIKI NEWS Friday, August 4, 1934. “THEY CAN’T TAKE IT”

Opotiki News, Volume II, Issue 216, 4 August 1939, Page 2

THE OPOTIKI NEWS Friday, August 4, 1934. “THEY CAN’T TAKE IT”

That the points raised by the Opr.tiki News have .sunk hoane is clearly shown by the angry mood displayed by the “Whakatane Beacon'’ in ii leading article, iieaded “Unauthorised Aj'iticism”, which is re-published' elsewhere in this issue (without deletions). We know renders will find it as amusing as we ourselves did. the leader reminding us of an article in Dr. (Joelibel's news organ. When a newspaper has to resort to the language' indulged in by tlu> “Beacon” t« defend a proposition, then it can. be understood that the authorities and the general public will, question the wisdom or otherwise of the cause being championed in such ail undignified manner. If our leader could by any stretch of the imagination bo called "two columns of abuse”, then we hesitate to describe the unwarranted attack on the Opotiki News, as we doubt if a word lit for the occasion is to be found in the English language. it would lie hard to contone of any other paper in Now Zealand venting its feelings in such a ■peculiar way. There is not the slightest sign of criticism on any point raised against the consti notion of a luxury road such as the Coastal route. x We have repeatedly asked tor sound arguments in favour of a road across the Qliiwa mud Hats but none has been forthcoming. We have never conteml--0,, that the reads out of Opotiki are matters of local interest only, and we ar quite willing to stand by any sound investigation oi the merits ol a new coastal highway. 'The amount of use such a road, would receive throughout the year is the only sound basis lor any change. The News, has pointed out repeatedly that the existing highway wil ! still carry far more traffic than any suggested short cutT through a sparsely-populated area, and this has never heeti denied.

Tlh> agitation emanating from Wlmkataue borough in favour of a coastal highway lias been characterised by niisrcproscMitaticjn —-ilt*l i 1 icrato or ol hcrwise—yight from the start. Alter a Whakatane paper had pointed out repeatedly that the road from Qpotiki to Auckland would he shortened by many miles, the “-Beacon” now turns mound and informs O-potiki that it is a matter that eencorns Whakatane —- and Whakatane only. The News has never at any time inferod with purely Whakatane borough affairs and has not the slightest intention of doing so. Y\ e have -dealt with the suggested use ol the hinds of the Dominion. Can the “Beacon say that the cost of the suggested mad er any particular part of it is to be paid by the borough of Whakatane? The expenditure would come out oi national income. The leadiing article in the “Bea.-un” is misleading, the writer having twisti ;i around our criticism to suit the occasion. Our authority IVr the right to criticise the Whakatane agitation is that held by every newspaper in New Zealand, when dealing with the, taxpayers’ money.. Apparently the ••Deacon’’, judging, by its tune, is anxious to do away with the freedom of the Press —in at least one instance. .It certainly . believes in the freedom ol speech as far as it concerns the “beacon”., Alter perusing our contemporary’s efforts our readers will come to the same conclusion as ourselves—that a spanner lias been thrown in the works. “'lhe Beacon” makes the Janie excuse that through lack of space it conk: not publish the whole of cur leader, hut it is a peculiar tiling that the parts omitted were some of the strongest points. ■ As far as the main highway between Qpotiki and Whakatane is concerned, the News lias always (untended that a new road along the coast is quite unjustified and the enermous expense involved would he a shocking .waste of public money. As o.r as road communications are i-on-

corned Opotiki has probably suffered nunc. 1 than any other part of Now Zealand through neglect and we only ask that the present highway ho made? a first-class road to Tanoatiia or Whakatr.ne. Such a work lias boon long overdue and lias no doubt boon greatly hindered by Wlmkatane’s request for a coastal road. Not only Upotiki people but the 'largo number of settlors in the Nukuliou and l Wnimnn'a dlh%nots74f;s-# ) » had to suffer unnecessary discomforts for a number nT years. A good road westwards concerns Opotiki more than it does Wliakataue. 'I be suggested Coastal road would be a National matter.,, but if \Vliakatane is willing! to* : faeptdfie * cost of its cun- - tOlctmuJbviQiayo no The

that he would not build two highways between Qpotiki and Whakatane. - In reprinting portions of the leader in tb© News, dated July 2(J. the “Beacon” in a. head note says: “It is impossible to print the full two columns of abuse”. Near, the end the editor interjects with the words: “What does tin: News mean?” A schoolboy who read the leader bad no difficulty in grasping the meaning, and we can onjy express deep sorrow at the Bedton’s lack of understanding. Another sentence reads: “Why the “News” should object to Whakatane having better access and connected to Qpotiki by a more direct route is a mystery”. Wo can solve the mystery briefly by informing the “Beacon” that the suggested road would be a waste of public money—far more important works are crying out lor attention all over the country. The News regrets that it cannot accede to. tin* advice so graciously proffered by the “Beacon” as it is the policy of this paper not to he dictated to by unauthorised scribes. We. do not even tremble at the thought of the “Beacon” putting forward its arguments!:') in plainer words, as threatened 1 . No doubt tin* public would Hud it splendid reading.