THE GENERAL ELECTION

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27502, 9 November 1954, Page 17

THE GENERAL ELECTION

Sir, —I know that taking notes in the dark makes reporting very difficult, and I appreciate that your, reporter gave a very fair summary of an election address of mine in Saturday’s paper. However, in yesterday’s paper there is a slight error in words that makes a large difference in meaning. I did not say “the ideals I have placed before you are also the heart and soul of the Labour Party,” but “the ideas I have placed before you are also the heart and soul of labour politics.” I was pointing out that the present leaders of the Labour Party had deserted the “Red-fed” policies on which the Labour Party was built up to win in 1935, and that the working people of New Zealand are still in dire need of those old, traditional labour policies. Your note made it appear that I said there is no difference between the Labour and Communist Parties, whereas I was pointing out that there should notjoe, but is.—Yours, etc., aLec ostler. Communist Candidate for Central November 8, 1954. Sir, —The Labour Party has abandoned the noble principles of socialism that were its foundation. The fear of the smear of communism causes them to deny a socialist objective. The 193538 glorious achievements of progressive legislation is now in the discard. The Labour Party supports the Tory party by doing the same things to the working people: deregistering unions, hostility to militant unions, neither for nor against industrial struggles, conscription in peace time, supporting war in Korea, rearmament of Japan and Germany, and servility to American aggression. The desire for power makes traitors of our labour leaders. — Yours, etc., F. ELIOTT. November 8, 1954.

Sir, —Mr Owen stated that his party would not interfere with the trading banks. It is not publicised by the local social creditors that the Albertan social creditors passed “an act to provide for the restriction of civil rights for certain persons,” which asserted that any employee of a banker unlicensed under the Credit of Alberta Regulation Act would not be allowed to bring, maintain, or defend any action in the courts. In other words, if you don’t work for people approved by the Star Chamber, your rights as a citizen will be taken away from you. Nice people, these social creditors, but why is this part of their policy being carefully omitted from their propaganda? They cannot deny wnat is written above; and it speaks for itself. —Yours, etc., DERCOS. Oct 29, 1954. [The Dominion Secretary of the New Zealand Social Credit Political League (Mr J. E. Colechin) said: “ ‘Dercos’ either does not know or prefers to be silent on the real situation in Alberta which prompted the drafting of the act which he quotes. The act was never implemented, but it was conceived as a reply to just such baseless charges and misrepresentations as ‘Dercos’ himself indulges in. Just what the draft legislation of the Alberta government of 1937 has to do with us in New Zealand in 1954 passes comprehension. We have previously stated in these columns that we were not interested in answering anonymous attacks—we happen to be too busy winning an election—and in any case the public will be able to decide between the assertions of ‘Dercos’ and the claim of the Social Credit Political League on November 13. We will gladly accept the public verdict and have every confidence in their good judgment and common sense.”]

Sir, —How difficult it is to tie the Social Credit candidate down to a firm statement as shown by the letter of George Lynn (Sydenham), who is not prepared to give a clear answer as to how he would vote on a no-confidence motion moved by labour. In this, of course, he follows Mr Owen, who at Akaroa flatly refifsed to answer the same question. The public are entitled to a clear answer not hedged round with vague generalities. Their debtfree money theory is now shown to be a myth. They will charge interest (the amount is not important; the principle is) and having by their admission preached the principle of non-interest-bearing money, the whole crazy edifice crashes. Finally, what happens when production falls (drought, power breakdown), and they start to withdraw mondy in line with the fall in production? From whom do they take it; when, and how? Their theory cannot work only one way. Money must rise and fall with production.—Yours, etc., ANTI-CONTROLS November 8, 1954.

Sir,—Your reply to my letter regarding Reserve Bank Credit admits that the Social Credit Political League does acknowledge a limit, although that limit is beyond your imagination. Social Credit believes that the total price bill presented to the public during the production of a newspaper is more than the total incomes distributed during that production. Incomes plus borrowing will bridge the “gap.” The Social Credit Political League will bridge this “gap” by debt-free credit from the Reserve Bank, instead of borrowing. The gross national production of New Zealand for the year ended March 31, 1954, was £ 827,000,000. Therefore the issuing of Reserve Bank credit of £190,000,090 is less than 25 per cent, of that gross national production.—Yours, etc., DRAMBUIE. November 8. 1954.

Sir, —SociaL Creditors at their meetings and in their literature have stated that they intend to be cautious in their approach to monetary reform and propose to create approximately 50 per cent, of what they consider to be the safe limit. As an unbiased elector, I find their proposals sound and sincere and certainly not indicative of the creation of “virtually unlimited credit.” Your, leader writer apparently approves of the creation of credit provided it is not created by the government. We remember the results when the present Government recently gave the green light to trading banks to issue credit. I put this to your leader writer. What would he think of a reform to debt finance, as exists today, if a social credit finance was already established? My guess is that he would say social credit is common sense and proceed to reduce debt finance to an absurdity.—Your.:, etc.,

November 8, 1954. [We have understood that the imaginary “gap” between incomes and- prices was to be accurately determined and precisely filled. If only 50 per cent, of the money needed to fill the “gap” is to be ■ issued, half of the “gap” will remain. Yet the Social Credit literature says that anything above or below this precisely determined amount is fraud.—Ed., “The Press.”]

,Sir, —While schools, houses and clinics await finance on our doorstep, tens of thousands of pounds in one direction are buried irretrievably in the Milford Sound hostel. In the other direction I hear they propose to build an aerodrome costing over £5OO a man on the Chatham Islands. Nobody grudges the isolated community a landing strip and aii*service when required, but let’s keep our international airports to Harewood. The next government, no doubt, will know how to cut extravagances.—Yours, etc., CUT OUT WASTE. November 8, 1954.

Sir, —“R.S.” wishes to know why. if the value of goods for sale is so much in excess of incomes, there is not a larger proportion of goods unsold, and consequent unemployment. Quite! If the Government ceased to borrow book entries from the trading banks or from the Reserve Bank for the prosecution of our public amenities, those consequences would naturally follow, If “R.S.” will find out what the people owe at any one period of time, National Debt, local body debts, actual, not written-down, overdrafts, trade debts, and overseas loans, and deduct therefrom the total purchasing power available to the people (not including, please, the whole £206,000,000 alleged to be held in the savings banks because probably £200,000,000 of it has been spent long ago), he will arrive at a figure which represents the accumulated shortages of purchasing power during 100 years.—Yours, etc.. SENEX DAVID. November 8, 1954..