Parliamentary Salaries

Press, Volume C, Issue 29626, 23 September 1961, Page 3

Parliamentary Salaries

Sir,—ln 1968 the Prime Minister and his colleagues told how the recommended increase in their salaries was of little benefit because of a higher income group. That benefit has now been “swamped” with higher costs and inflation and a further rise is now necessary, which in due course will be inadequate. This applies to all wage and salary earners. Sir Sidney Holland warned that we would price ourselves off the world markets. High costs of production and distribution make it necessary for taxpayers to find about £Bm a year to help the dairy industry produce butter to earn overseas exchange, the need for which is very apparent Wage rises devalue the currency and rob savings of their value. The probable cure for our financial ailments is "Do more and take less.” Certainly. ‘‘Do less and take more” has only brought us trouble Yours, etc., B. CONSTANT. September 21, 1961.

Sir. —As a family man I am all in favour of the rise in salaries and allowances for members of Parliament. They observe no 40-four week and are worthy of their pay; otherwise we should not vote for them. What does disturb me, however, is the statement by "Disillusioned Nationalist” that Labour MP’s are Marxists. If they are, they agree with the proposition that the dictatorship of the proletariat is to be accomplished by revolution. As a parent I think of the children who would be involved in such an upheaval. I feel that Labour members should state whether ‘'Disillusioned Nationalist” is correct or disown him. —Yours, etc., DISTURBED. September 22, 1961.

Sir,—l am not a Communist as I disapprove of the repression in China, Tibet, Hungary, and East Germany. The MP’s referred to by “Disillusioned Farmer Labour Supporter," like myself, only accept Marx’s teaching on improvement of social conditions, eg, housing, working conditions and workers' associations, to improve their conditions. Marx certainly would not have approved of the slavery imposed by the Communists as he saw enough of it, and of repression in his own time. I recall that in 1951 similar allegations to those made by “Disillusioned Farmer Labour Supporter” were made to keep the National Government in power. These allegations were later disproved, but National won the General Election. Labour MR.’s do a grand job in the House, for example, by exposing the Government's “thanksgiving” gift to its wealthy supporters in reduced death duties.—Yours, etc, DISILLUSIONED NATIONALIST. September 21, 1961.

Sir,—l was astounded to see "Disillusioned Nationalist” assert, with some degree of authority, that Labour members of Parliament are Marxists. If they are, then surely by electing these members to Parliament we are paving the way for the takeover by communism of this country. This thought would certainly deter me from ever voting for such a party. Could an authorative statement be obtained from the Labour members in the Christchurch electorates as to whether or not they are followers of the Marxist doctrine? However, I do agree with "Disillusioned Nationalist” that Parliamentarians deserve higher salaries. If we hope to retain the best men in Parliament we should be prepared to see that their financial position is not adversely affected. This salary increase was recommended by an independent commission and it is quite proper for the members to agree to it.—Yours, etc., ' UNIVERSITY STUDENT. September 22. 1961.