THE ELECTION WAIMATE SEAT

Press, Volume LXXXVII, Issue 26512, 29 August 1951, Page 8

THE ELECTION WAIMATE SEAT

LABOUR CANDIDATE’S CAMPAIGN

BUILDING AND TAXATION DISCUSSED

The Tory Government of New Zealand, and other Tory government! throughout the world had by legislation prepared the seed bed for Communism, and sown the seed and cultivated it, said Mr A. G. Braddick, Labour Party candidate for Waimate. In an address at Geraldine. One could not retard the growth by using the big stick with one hand and patting the back with the other, Mr Braddick said. One could not retard that growth by reducing the standard of living, and the only way was the Labour way. The Labour Party gave the people a fair deal, irrespective of colour or creed, and he would hate to think what the country would have been like if Labour had not been the Government for 14 years. All knew, especially the family man, just how the nigh cost of living was affecting everyone said Mr Braddick, It would be seen how in two years the cost of certain goods had increased by more than 30 per cent, and no one could quote one single item that was cheaper to-day than in 1949 when Labour was the Government. He quoted more than 30 lines of groceries for both the months of July, 1949, and 1951. He said the same list of groceries totalling £2 19s in 1949 cost £3 17s lOd in 1951.

Mr Holland had made a good many promises at the last election. One was to make the £ go further, but everyone knew how high the cost of living was to-day and just how those high costs were affecting people. As shown by the lists of goods quoted it was ample proof that the statements made by Mr Holland in his opening broadcast address were untrue, said Mr Braddick. In 1949 it cost £261 to furnish a hourse and to-day £424. Cost of Homes

Building costs had risen to great heights, and vet the National Government had said they would revolutionise the housing problem. Mr Braddick said. The most detrimental thing they could have done was to have lifted controls on both land and houses. By taking the lid off land sales property had soared, and he spoke of an old house he knew of which was first sold for £290. and after the lid had been removed fetched £llOO. and again later was sold for £1450. “Where is this going to get us?" asked Mr Braddick. “Is it reverting back to those days when the Tories were in power and the worker who had put a few hundred into a home lost the lot. Is this going to happen again? To borrow at 4 per cent, and build on to-day’s prices it would cost more than £2 a week, without paying off any of the principal. The average working man cannot do it." Mr Braddick said that under Mr Nash a man with a wife and two children earning £6OO paid income tax on £l5O (exemption. £2OO for himself. £l5O for the wife, and £lOO for the children). The tax amounted to £l9 17s 6d plus 15 per cent., a total of £22 5s fid. less the £l3 rebate. In addition he paid £45 Social Security tax. a total of £52 5s fid. He then received £65 by way of family benefit 12s fid a child, so that he was better off by £l2 14s fid. “Compare this result with Mr Holland's proposals,” said Mr Braddick. “The same man is allowed a £4OO exemption; £5O less than under Labour His tax amounts to £26 ss, plus 10 per cent, giving £2B 17s 6d. The £l5 i ebate brings the figure down to £l3 17s fid. £6 12s more than under Labour’s scheme. He pays £43 Social Security tax. making a total tax of £5B 17s fid. He receives £52 by way of family benefit so that at the end of the year his debit is £6 17s 6d.” Under the present rate of taxation the family man would be paying £65 3s 9d in income and Social Security tax and receiving family benefit amounting to £52. which meant that his net tax was £l3 13s 9d. said Mr Braddick. The net tax under Mr Holland’s scheme would be reduced to £6 17s fid. but under Mr Nash's scheme he would have the £l3 18s <M and receive an additional £l2 14s 6d as family benefit, which would make him £25 18s 3d better off than at present

MR LAKE SPEAKS AT LYTTELTON

BOISTEROUS MEETING Mr H. R. Lake, the National candidate for Lyttelton, addressed an audience of about 100 at Lyttelton last evening. The meeting was boisterous, with continual interjections from a •ection of the audience, but the Mayor (Mr F. G. Briggs), who presided, was only once compelled to intervene. In speaking of the waterfront dispute, Mr Lake repeatedly scored off the interjectors, frequently to the amusement of his hearers. He was accorded a vote of thanks, moved by Mr A, K. Dyne, for his “most enlightening and entertaining address.”

MEETING AT SOUTH BRIGHTON

STATEMENT BY LABOUR PARTY BRANCH A statement on a disturbance at an election meeting held at South Brighton on Monday evening by Mr D. W. Russell. National candidate for Avon, was made last evening by Mr A. C. Pegg, president of the South Brighton branch of the Labour Party, and Mr R. Smyth, a member of the executive of the branch. In “The Press” yesterday it was reported that about 40 persons walked out halfway through the meeting, following an interjector who, after being warned by the police to keep quiet, left the meeting at the request of a sergeant of police. Some other members of the audience, the report said, left the hall earlier in the meeting after being asked by the police to njake less noise. “According to the sergeant of police, • oqly six people were causing trouble, in that they were interjecting, and one, a young lady, was removed because she was laughing,” said the statement made by the Labour Party officials. “Two of these men went out with the sergeant, while appealing to the chairman to ask the police to desist in the ejections. It was then that between 60 and 70 protested and walked out “AH of these people who walked out are respectable residents of this district, of all walks of life, the sergeant of police himself admitting they are ‘highly respectable citizens? Only 32 people remained in the hall, including a number of Labour Party people. Some of those who left drifted back to ask if the candidate agreed with the police action, but he refused to answer questions from anyone who had left the hall and no questions were asked. “We object most strongly to the insinuation that our most respected residents who wanted free speech and decency should be branded ‘rabble’ because they objected to the manner in which the meeting was conducted. According to the sergeant of police, the only organised heckling was between two men in the hall." In a further statement, Mr Pegg said that Mr Russell had made an apology at his meeting last evening in St. Chad’s schoolroom, and that on behalf of the branch he had accepted it and shaken with Mr Russell. Incident at St Chad’s “Will you put that man out, constable?” Mr Russell asked the constable in attendance at his meeting at St. Chad’s schoolroom last evening. Im not going to have my meeting interrupted by a continual fire of comment.” The man he pointed to left his seat and went out of the hall. Mr Russell a few minutes earlier, had given a warning that he would have a man removed. Cries of “Can’t you take it?” •nd “Is this democracy?*' greeted his apnea 1 to the constable. The man who left the hall came back a few minutes later and stood at the back of the halL

LABOUR PARTY CONFERENCE

CANDIDATE’S STATEMENT CHALLENGED An allegation that a statement made by Mr J. K. McAlpine, National Party candidate for Selwyn, was “completely incorrect”'was made yesterday by the secretary of the North Canterbury Labour Representation Committee (Mr J. L. Laby). At a meeting at Riccarton on Monday evening, Mr McAlpine said: “At the last conference of the New Zealand Labour Party there was a motion to remove Communists from the party. It was defeated narrowly—but it was defeated.” “This statement is completely incorrect for the following reasons, Mr Laby said. “First, no Communist can become a member of the Labour Party under the constitution; second, no such motion was ever put to the conference. “We challenge Mr McAlpine; to prove his statement, and if required, to support our statement we are prepared to show the Editor of "rhe Press’ the minutes of the annual conference and the constitution of the New Zealand Labour Party.”