Waitaki

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29767, 9 March 1962, Page 3

Waitaki

No letters on the Waitaki by-election will be printed tomorrow', polling day.

Sir,—Several years ago an overseas visitor being entertained at Parliament House commerced on the large number of sheep in New Zealand. A voice said, “We call them voters.” Was that jibe justified? With each election National and Labour play the “in” and “out” game with end results being exactly the same, increasing debt, taxation with the resultant rising costs. Why do not people stop to think why? The average voter knows there is something wrong and yet keeps on voting for the system that is basically the cause of his discontent. Surely the fact that Messrs Hoiyoake and Nordmeyer each try to lure Social Credit votes by promising monetary reform is an admission that reform is needed. Social Credit, which would balance money with goods and ser-f-ices. is the answer, and they are “sheep” unless they do some sane thinking.—Yours, etc, LOLA W. THOMSON. March 6, 1962.

Sir, —As a student I must agree whole-heartedly with “S. Ann.” that the abolition of the exemption from social security tax on the first £lO4 of income is no compensation for the personal tax exemption of £4OB. However, no government can give with one hand without taking with the other, and this is particularly pertinent to New Zealand. With this point in mind, all the bickering sur. rounding the coming Waitaki by-election is quite nauseating. No doubt “Disgusted With Labour” will vote National the next time he is at the polls unless he is “Disgusted With National” by then. Moreover, the polices of the Labour and National Governments are, in the main, so similar that it is high time people realised the importance of voting for a man of high integrity rather than a party. If voters were not so worried about the individual gains this country would be far better off.—Yours etc., GJ J* March 8, 1962.

Sir,—"Disguested With Labour” believes that the Labour Party was going to national-

ise the Nelson cotton mill once it was established. If this is true then the men in Mr Nash's Cabinet must have indeed possessed great business ability. Fancy the Labour Ministers being able to fool an organisation like the Commonwealth Fabric Corporation. I only hope I.CJ. don’t hear of this; otherwise they will be after Mr Nash and his colleagues to advise them how to take over Courtaulds. “Disguseted With Labour” should write to Smith and Boyd telling them how fortunate they were in being prevented from establishing their cotton mill at Nelson. No doubt the directors of the firm would be amazed at the intelligence of this brilliant political scientist from Christchurch. Perhaps they might even send him a free meat wrap in appreciation of his concern for the company.— Yours, etc., L.FH. March 8, 1962.

Sir,—A. F. Palmer is a little astray in his comments concerning the cotton mill agreement. This secret agreement signed by a Labour Government assured the company of 80 per cent, of the New Zealand market for all goods produced by them in New Zealand, including prints. Modifications were made to the original stages, meat wraps being transferred to Stage 2 and replaced by drills. If some modifications were made, others could also have been made, and prints would have been a logical one to push forward. The Socialists have secret agreements; they are not prepared to take the people into their confidence. Mr Holyoake's philosophy is “tell the people and trust the people.” I am sure the Waitaki electors are not as gullible as A F. Palmer and the like would wish them to be.—Yours, etc., DISGUSTED WITH LABOUR. March 8, 1962.

Sir,—Kindly permit me to congratulate Mr A. W. Barwood on his ability to force the Government to reduce taxation. While he is about it, make them wipe out all subsidies, reduce wages, raise the pension age for widows and spinsters from 50 years to 65 years. They are all quite capable of working. There would be less doctors’ expenses and patients should pay for their own medicines, there would not be so much put down the drain. People would be much healthier working instead of sitting about feeling sorry for themselves. Of course there is the widow with a young family. That is different if she stays at home to look after them. I am a widow and worked hard until I was 70. I am now over 80. and do not trouble doctors in any way except for my eyes.—Yours, etc., AGE PENSIONER. March 7, 1962.

Sir,—l agree with “Disillusioned Former Labour Supporter’s” statement that all women would be wearing the same dresses once the Nelson cotton mill got into operation. The sinister thing about the agreement was that a monopoly was given to the one mill. Stage IL to go into operation in 1964, must

of necessity have included cotton prints. When, however, one takes into account the millions of pounds required to establish a mill and the smallness of the New Zealand market it is obvious that in order to protect the outlay of so much money a monopoly in all cottons would have to be given to the mill. The great thing was to stop the mill before it started and prevent the danger of an absolute cotton monopoly. I congratulate the Government on obtaining a cancellation of the agreement.—Yours, etc., MERE WOMAN. March 8, 1962.

Sir.—Perhaps readers will not think my talk of expropriation silly, as suggested by A. F. Palmer, when the confiscatory rates of death duty imposed by the Labour Government are compared with the National rates. The duties given would apply where a widower or widow dies, leaving his or her estate to adult children. The effect on small estates and farming estates should be noted. Comparative samples of duty

—Yours, etc., DISILLUSIONED FORMER LABOUR SUPPORTER. March 8, 1962.

are:— Estate's Labour National Value Rates Rates £2.000 £40 Nil £3,000 £90 £60 £5,000 £250 £200 £7,000 £490 £420 £14,000 £1960 £1,680 £20.000 £4,000 £3.000 £30,000 —Vniirc p £9,000 r £6,000