NEW DEAL REJECTED

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 55, Issue 238, 22 July 1935, Page 5

NEW DEAL REJECTED

GOVERNMENT STATES REASONS. STEPS ALREADY UNDERTAKEN. THE AGRICULTURAL POLICY. PRICE OF FOOD WOULD RISE. (United tress Association— Copyright). (Received This Day, 9.50 a.m.) LONDON, July 21. “In every field Mr Lloyd.' George explores, the Government has already taken action which has produced results wider, more comprehensive and more beneficial than any his programme can effect,” says the Government in a long statement rejecting the “New Deal.”

“Lloyd George apparently believes that the people can be shaken out of, blank pessimism, not by concrete measures but by establishment of some Spectaoular new machinery of government which is vaguely expected to evolve the whole new programme of national regeneration in twelve months,” says the statement. Mr Lloyd George’s proposal to raise a big loan in advance of the time when it is required to be spent would involve financial dislocation and be deflationary in effect. The Government argues that beyond the public works programme there is nothing in the plan likely directly to affect the amount of employment available for a considerable time. It traverses the Government’s record in this respect and its future projects. It expresses the opinion that progress would be slower under Mr Lloyd George’s new machinery than at present. His proposed settlement of 500,000 workers in agriculture could be achieved only, if at all, at the cost of a large increase in the price of food and injury to the friendly relations with the Dominions and other countries.

Some of the most important parts of the Empire would be gravely affected by exclusion of £92,000,000 worth of foodstuffs. New Zealand 1 might lose at least a quarter of her trade; Australia and Canada, though that might find some compensation for serious losses—in increases in the sales of animal feeding stuffs—could not escape severe dislocation of industries. The Government is of opinion that no single statutory body could carry out the work the plan seeks to impose on the national development board. A small instead of a large Cabinet would intensify, rather than simplify, the problem.