PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 128, Issue 21369, 13 March 1941, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents whose letters are welcome, but for whoso views we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested to write in ink. It I s essential that anonymous writers enclose their proper names a? a guarantee of good faith. Unless this rule is complied with, their letters will not appear. FASCINATING THING, MONEY (To the Editor) ( Sir,—One is still awaiting the re- j ‘ ply of “Magog” to my last letter. 1 His definition of money should be a ' valuable quota to modem economics. I Here is another thing about 1 money. When we are at war we can I obtain as much money as we wish; j when we revert back to peace, money is restricted. Why ? Fur- ' ther, how can we distinguish be- ! j tween real money and counterfeit J lor spurious money? Why has the : \ character of money changed from j ; being a token to being a commodity? j jj Finally, why should humanity be | burdened by groups of people who i arrange finance by dealing in some- ! j thing that does not belong to them, ; 1 and levying a tax on posterity with j j first call?—I am, etc.. j ONE A MINUTE. j Hamilton, March 12. i . I DISPOSAL OF APPLES (To the Editor) Sir, —Early last week I read in a Sydney newspaper in the public libj rary the following statement: “A ! surplus of 500.000.000 apples in Australia’s crop this year is forecast by ; a Sydney fruit expert, who said that | the fruit would be left to rot.” Com- | meriting editorially on this statement j the paper says: “The logical course would be to encourage home conI sumption. A directly opposite course i is being followed in Commonwealth : marketing policy, however.” j A few days later the Waikato | Times published an announcement | ! by the Dominion Minister of Mar- ! keting to the effect that the Labour j Government was going to meet a j similar state of affairs in New ZeaI land by making a free distribution of apples to all the schools in this ; country. Although it does not require a very brainy person to suggest ways of making use of surplus food, I think the Labour Government should be given credit for departing from the usual practice of destroying valuable produce so as not to disturb the market, which, of course, means keeping the price up. The new method adopted by New Zealand means that the community will pay for it, the community will get the benefit, and the growers will be saved from a ruinous loss.—l am, etc., C.G.R. Hamilton, March 11. MEDICAL BENEFITS (To the Editor) Sir, —I read with interest and a fellow feeling the letter of “Patient” in this evening’s Times. I am a mother of a young family and I have asked several friends in a similar position what they are doing about free medical service. Their answers are in effect almost invariably the same. “I find it very difficult,” says one. “We have had Doctor X for so many years that I find it hard to approach him for free service when I know how much the doctors are against it and that there is every chance of a refusal. And then I haven’t the time to trudge around the thirteen other doctors in the same vain hope. I don’t know what to do.” It seems to me very unfair of the Government to put this onus on to the public. On the other hand it appears to me that the medical profession is capitalising the war. They know that the war has placed the Government in a position where it is unable to import qualified medical men from other countries and that therefore the local doctors hold the big end of the stick. But however blameworthy we feel the doctors to be for their non-co-operation, it is surely not right of the Government to expect us to go out and get that for which we have been paying the Government. Could not the Government have done the job itself? A house-to-house canvass has been made before for less serious matters, and a short questionaire would soon have made the position clear. “Who is your doctor? Do you wish for free medical service from him? In the event of his refusal, would you go to any other doctor who would come under the new scheme?” If anyone cavils at this as expensive I would retort that based on the income of this family I have paid £l7 during the last two years for this service—fourpence out of every shilling of the Social Security tax we were told would be devoted to medical benefits—and it would not cost an official £l7 to canvass me and hand the list to my doctor or find me another one willing to work under the scheme, that is if one could be found.—l am, etc., ONE FOOT IN THE GRAVE. Hamilton, March 11. NEED FOR ELECTION (To the Editor) Sir, —As the question whether an election will or will not be held has ; an important influence on New Zea- ! land’s war effort, it is time a decision was made. Without an election lit is apparent that the necessary; ! unity will not be established. The offer of the Leader of the j j Opposition is a fair and straight- j i forward one, and the only reply re- * ' ceived by Mr Holland from Labour j | circles is a bitter and misleading I j personal attack by its official news- j I paper, the Standard. It is truly a j 1 disgusting example and a barrier put up when unity and co-operation i are so vital. j In my humble opinion there can be no coalition of the Labour Party at present in Parliament and the Opposition, as the principles for

which they stand are so directly opposed. What is the difference if they coin another name, say, perhaps, “No Party Government”? It is reasonable to assume the present Government under a coalition would retain a majority in the Ministry and have an overwhelming vote in the House. In other words, it would still be able to dominate the country and make the Opposition share in the results. Eighteen months nave passed since the Labour Government was asked j to form a united Government, and

it in its wisdom chose to continue in office without interruption. Now at the eleventh hour of the term I say the Government has run its course and should let the people decide for the future. It is for the people to say whether or not we want to continue with the present Government’s domination or i benefit by the result of an election, j which I feel sure will produce a | fairer representation. We would then \ be in a position to form a truly “No i ) Party Government'’ and gain the t support of every New Zealander in . c the demands of war. 1 i The average New Zealander is j i eagerly looking for inspiring leader- i 1 ship, but this cannot be forthcoming !' from a Government that is legislat- j 1 ing for one section—a position that j > should net be tolerated. But it is ■; j most unfortunate that we are still j J hampered by party politics after i J nearly two years of war.—l am, etc., • PATRIOT. J J Hamilton, March 12. rrrt. rr- w: ! (