Extremely Bad Taste

Sirs,—I would like to make the following comments on Mr. Stone's predicament.

I presume that Mr. Stone was fully aware of Section 8 of the Immigration Restriction Amendment Act 1920 which seems to me to be the section under which he was granted his visa. This provides for various contingencies, not the least being sent home. Mr. Irvine, an executor of Government policy under this Act, has written only one statement in his letter that I could find objectionable, and this refers to the absolute extent of the visa, viz. the 15th of December, and this could not possibly be his decision.

Every condition covered by Mr. Irvine comes out of Section 8 of this Act. Perhaps his public relations leave something to be desired, but I do not see this as a justification for a vindictive and splenetic attack on his person or credentials.

For Salient to have picked this material out of the classification list and to have published it is distasteful in the extreme. Salient howls like a stuck pig when one of its ilk reports inaccurately or with bias, but this latest example of immature, overplayed sensationalism is in extremely bad taste. >Certainly Mr. Stone may feel aggrieved but nothing has been done to him that is not in the Act, and it is my contention that as a responsible citizen of a foreign country he should have been familiar with the conditions of entry, etc., that applied to him, one of which is that the visa may not be renewed. This is in the Act and whatever the Embassy staff said at the time could not amend it.

It would not surprise me if the Secretary for Labour did not reply to your article if only for the reason that Frazer Finlayson's infantile acidity certainly does not warrant it and, in any case, your complaint should have been addressed to the Secretary himself —not through an attack on his personnel—or to the Ombudsman, whose office exists for this express purpose.

Nobody pretends that the Public Service is infallible, but where they do make mistakes, in my experience they are only too willing to admit it.

Hitler Tactics?

Sirs,—It is interesting, to say the least, to see what the House of Representatives, that buzzing bunch of bees of Beehive (oops, sorry—Capitol) fame think of the political persuasions of us students! Once the McCarthyites of our government get into stride, even the left wing Opposition is afraid to dissent, for fear of being lumped in with the "Other communists" tag.

But behind this willingness to label freedom-loving free thinkers "Communist" I can perceive the first stirrings of a quasi-Fascist hysteria, which the government is trying to spread in a so far vain attempt to sway the collective mind of the ignorant public to their side in the Vietnam issue.

How long before Cabinet appears in black uniforms and jackboots? How long before Holyoake revives the pre-war German craze of bookburning with the Un-New Zealand Activities and Publications Tribunal as his willing tool? How long before a "Communist attempt to burn down Parliament, our Reichstag?

I fear this government is veering towards Hitlerian tactics when it indiscriminately labels intellectuals, demonstrators, leftists and rightists who oppose its foreign policy, plus of course the pacifists and the few Communists as being all "Communists." After all, we know only too well that the only way to stop the Communists is to form a powerful Right wing (or Fascist) government. Look at South Africa, Rhodesia, Spain, Portugal, Nazi Germany!

Let us have no more of this hysterical name-calling, Mr. Holyoake and Mr. Algiel There are always those who believe in the old maxim "you might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb."

Salient Censorship?

Dear Sirs,—I read with interest your column "On the Grapevine," in the Salient issue of June 15. In this you state your refusal to print a statement made by Mr. Kinsella about the Government education building programme. I seem to recall the NZBC refusing to broadcast a certain programme by Professor Herd of Otago some weeks ago. Surely Salient is not going to resort to similar practices? If the Minister has something to say, why shouldn't we the student body hear it? Why can't the salient points of Mr. Kinsella's statement be printed in a shortened article, if 2500 words takes up so much of Salient's valuable space?

John H. Bradbury

Our correspondent will find the salient points he seeks on the same page as the comment he refers to, under the heading "Impressive Development for Victoria."—Editors.

Robb Reviewed

Sirs,—Peter Robb, who reviewed the production of The Devils in the last edition of Salient tells me that he has not read the play. If he does read the play he might be better placed to "allocate responsibilities" between the play and the producer for the "antidramatic production" which he declares he saw.