IMMIGRATION TO N.Z.

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27592, 24 February 1955, Page 14

IMMIGRATION TO N.Z.

LEADING article in “ THE PRESS ”

MR MCLAGAN ALLEGES MISQUOTATION

“When ‘The Press’ attacks the Labour Party as it has done over Labour’s statement on immigration, it should at least quote the statement correctly and not misrepresent it,” said Mr A. McLagan, MJP., commenting yesterday on a leading article on immigration in Tuesday’s issue of “The Press.” “Labour in its statement did not ‘set its face against erecting even transit housing for immigrants,’ as ‘The Press’ asserted,” Mr McLagan said. “On the contrary, Labour expressed its objection to a proposal to erect transit housing to he occupied solely by one national group of alien immigrants, and not to be available to any others. “If ‘The Press’ believes that transit housing should be built for exclusive occupation by one group of alien immigrants and froni which all others, including British immigrants, would be barred, it is entitled to say so, but it is not entitled to misquote and misrepresent the Labour Party in order to strengthen its arguments against Labour. ‘“The Press’ also said, ‘The Labour Party still insists that the time has not arrived when the hollaing position permits bringing in_families,’” Mr McLagan said. "Why did ‘The Press’ leave out these words which followed immediately in the same sentence in Labour’s statement: ‘Except where housing can be guaranteed for them?* ‘The Press,’ by misquoting, made it appear that Labour objected to any families at all being brought in, but it must have known, if it had read the statement it/ was attacking, that that was a complete misrepresentation. “As ‘The Press’ has accused the Labour Party of ‘following the usual Labour Party principle of paying lip service to the principle of immigration, but of raising objections to methods necessary to attract immigrants,’ one is justified in asking what principle, or lack of it, was followed by ‘The in this gross misquotation and misrepresentation. “Second Misrepresentation” j “Having wrongly attacked Labour for allegedly (but, not actually) opposing the building of, housing for immigrants, ‘The Press,’ in the course of its second misrepresentation, attacked Labour for saying that immigrants should not be brought to New Zealand unless housing is provided for them,” Mr McLagan said. “Apparently it is no trouble to ‘The Press’ to have it both ways in misrepresentation. But even that inconsistency is dwarfed by another. “ ‘The Press’ argued in favour of putting ‘a little additional strain* on housing* by bringing in families for whom houses are not available, yet in the same editorial it said that ‘experience has taught that the most useful types of potential immigrants want to be assured that housing will be available to them.’ When r The Press’ can contradict ‘The Press’ so flatly and effectively, it might justifiably stop misrepresenting others and concentrate on such self-criticism.

“The facts and experience of immigration, so glibly referred to by ‘The Press,’ show that one of the most effective methods of discouraging immigration is to bring in immigrants for whom housing is not available,” said Mr McLagan. “The news soon gets back to the source of the immigration and tends to cut off the stream.

“In its urge to criticise Labour, ‘The Press’ has gone out of its way to call attention to some Nationalist false propaganda. Just three months ago, during the General Election, the National Party claimed it had given a ‘new. impetus’ to public works. Now that the election is over, we have the confession of the Minister of Works (Mr W. S. Goos man) that public works are lagging, and have been for quite a long time. Omitting his own incompetence, he says the lag is due to the reduction in the number of workers engaged, and that this reduction has been significant between March, 1953, and September, 1954, that is, just when the National Party was claiming that public works were going faster than ever. “This ‘new impetus’ propaganda had no better foundation than the Nationalist election promise to the public of Nelson and Marlborough that the Braebum power scheme would be started and pushed on to completion,” Mr McLagan said. “However, a Nationalist confession of duplicity in connexion with the progress, or rather lack of progress, of public works is not a very effective argument to be used by a Nationalist newspaper against Labour.

Working Population “‘The Press’ is completely wrong in saying that the latest issue of the Labour and Employment Gazette shows a heavy increase in the relative proportion of the 60, years and over age group,” he said. “The latest issue of the Gazette, dated February, 1955, shows that the surveyed labour force increased by 6.9 per cent, during the last two years, as compared with a total population increase of 4.7 per cent, in the some period.

“If ‘The Press’ was referring to the preceding issue of the gazette, for November, 1954, it contains an article, "The Employment Position and Outlook,’ showing a record addition of 20,600 workers to the labour force during the year ended April, 1954,” Mr McLagan said. “It also has an article, ‘Hie Population of Working Age 15-64 Years,’ which shows, on the basis of an assumed 10,000 a year net inflow from immigration, that the expected increase of population between 1952 and

1962 will be 20.4 per cent., the increase of the working group 15-64 years will be 20.5 per cent., and the increase of those working *will be from 59.2 per cent, of the population to 59.6 per cent.

“These figures in the gazette certainly do not support ‘The Press’ in its criticism of Labour’s statement that, in the present circumstances, net immigration should not exceed from 10,000 to 12,000 a year, and that families should not be brought to New Zealand' except to the extent that housing is available for them,” said Mr McLagan. “Finally, in any comparison of the labour force and the population or any section of the population, “The Press’ should remember that in 1936 and the immediately preceding years, owing to the mismanagement of the Coalition Government, a very high percentage of the labour force was unemployed, and was denied any opportunity to contribute to production,” Mr McLagan concluded.