Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

General Election

Sir, —ln reply to “Disillusioned Nationalist,” when all points are considered there is little difference between National and Labour. They are both trying to confuse the voters. What he says about “Simple on a SoapBox” is rubbish. Jack Lee and three or four other members of the party in caucus hammered Labour’s policy in face of strong opposition from the first Labour Prime Minister and others who held high office. Jack Lee was expelled because he had much more brain matter than the leaders. Many of the rank and' file backed him up. Labour and National have had their day. Social Credit is the coming party.—Yours, etc..

E. L. HAMPTON, i November 20. 1963. Sir,—A. F. Palmer displays | neither common knowledge nor common sense when he states that oil was the means ■whereby Alberta was able to wipe out public debt, because if such was the case, there should be high standards of , living to be found in Saudi Arabia and the other oilbearing States in the Middle ! East, South America and ; Borneo; whereas, in actual j fact, these areas are among the most backward in the ! world. Alberta had begun i paying off the provincial i debt before the oil-fields were exploited. Texas has been a prolific exporter of oil but has still managed io accumulate a considerable ! State debt. As regards unemployment in Alberta, just ■as flies swarm around a ; honey pot, so do the unemployed from tl le esatern states pour into Alberta, so that it becomes an utter impossibility to find them all jobs. Not Social Credit, but I.M.F. sanctions will create unemployment.—Yours, etc., LOUISE FORSTER. November 20, 1963. Sir, —Mt Mathison reminded Social Creditors that half the public debt is owed to the State Advances Corporation and the Public Trust but he overlooked that the people paid the interest and were taxed to do so. A Social Credit Government would get the money from the Reserve Bank interest-free, but neither cf the other parties advocates anything so simple, , and effective to reduce taxes. . Further information for i ‘‘Disillusioned Nationalist” is that voters in British Col- . umbia, after 11 years of I Social Credit Government, I elected it in June this year l with a bigger majority than i ever, the final voting being Social Credit 44, New Democrats 13. Liberals five, Con--1 servatives nil. Hie mere fact that the only two Social 1 Credit Governments in the world have never been ; defeated should alert us to , give them a trial here in I New Zealand. —Yours, etc., F. W. STEVENS. : November 29, 1963. ; Sir, —I suggest all payments ! other than child benefit be on a means test. Raise the I benefit to £7 a week and the : allowed income to £8 a I week; £l5 in all. That would ! bring all the needy in, and ! those on low incomes.— Yours, etc., FAR BACK DAN. I November 20. 1963. Sir, —In their election j speeches the candidates of I both parties deal with allowI able income for war veterans. ! National raises it to £4 a week and Labour goes as | high as £7 with certain restrictions, £2 if £7 is the amount earned—a complicated business which needs an accountant to understand it I take it that applies to men of the First War who are |on a war veteran’s allow- ! ance or economic plus disi ability pension. As most of ■ these man are past their al- | lotted span—very few will be j under—what on earth is the :iuse of raising the allowable r ! income when they are unable .to take advanta’ge of such • generous treatment—a very s I belated concession which will 1 ! cost nobody anything, least of all the Government. Why J a means test at all? The extra . earned wpuld still cost the :. Government nothing—Yours, etc., 1914-18. November 18. 1963. .. Sir,—While one does not : expect perfection from any ! I human organisation. one ;; could hope and ask for the ■ amelioration of the more i glaring anomalies in the social security system as it comes up for its eleetion-year U review. This one, for ’ instance, a member of my s family was in hospital for • many months. As the com- • plaint is incurable I brought , the patient home to ensure

an unbroken family for as long as possible. The only drug adequate to relieve the continual distress costs almost £1 to the purchaser, with social security deduction off. yet in hospital it was part of the treatment. Sometimes it amounts to £5 in a month, which is hard on a small income of under £3O for the same period. Surely such an anomaly could be wiped out?—Yours, etc..

HOME NURSING. November 10. 1963. (The Minister of Health , (Mr McKay) said: “If a 1 patient requires a drug iwhich is not in the free list, !an application for a free isupply may be made by the jdoctor in charge of the case to the Division of Clinical Services. No reasonable aip- ! plication is ever refused.”] ! Sir, —I should like to protest at the advertisement in “The Press” of November 18. Although an erstwhile National supporter, I was rather disgusted at the portrayal of Mr Nordmeyer and the condemnation of the Labour Party because of the “Black Budget” of 1958. There are more people than Mr Nordmeyer in the Labour Party, and anyhow history may have a different verdict on the 1958 Budget than that ; which is generally ascribed to it today. The Budget was presumably presented for the good of the country by Mr Nordmeyer as Minister of Finance, not as Prime Minister. If a Labour Government were to be elected next election Mr Nordmeyer would probably not be Minister of Finance and would not present a Budget. Everyone appears to be so concerned at the economic situation in this country, and yet when an effort is made to assuage it, j there is only protest- Perhaps the Social Credit Party may offer a real change.—Yours, etc., HELICON. November 18, 1963.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19631121.2.8.4

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30294, 21 November 1963, Page 3

Word Count
996

General Election Press, Volume CII, Issue 30294, 21 November 1963, Page 3

General Election Press, Volume CII, Issue 30294, 21 November 1963, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert