General Election

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31225, 24 November 1966, Page 16

General Election

Sir, —The Prime Minister is reported today as having said he believed the Aid Rhodesia Movement was satisfied and pleased with the action taken and with statements made both in New Zealand and overseas. The boycott suggestion was just ridiculous and would have no support from those who knew. The Aid Rhodesia Movement wishes to say that nothing short of removing sanctions from Rhodesia can be regarded as satisfactory or pleasing and it remains to be seen if the boycott on voting is “just ridiculous.” There are very few people in New Zealand who know the truth on Rhodesia. The Government and nearly all news media have taken widespread action to ensure that the truth is suppressed.—Yours, etc., J. A. D. ANDERSON, Hon. Sec., Canterbury • Division, Aid Rhodesia Movement. November 23, 1966.

Sir, —Mr Lake’s statement certainly outlines every reason why New Zealand troops should not be in Vietnam. We have no aims to interfere politically or militarily, so why should we be the tools of the aggressive Americans in bombing the country and its people? Aid after destruction will be poor consolation to peasants whose homes, families and means of existence have been wiped out. The money wasted on war materials would be better spent on economic aid, and would have more influence against • communism.—Yours, etc., R.A.B. November 23, 1966.

Sir,—So the National candidate for Riccarton would turn Ham university campus into a university community, complete with shops and services. If he lived in the area he would realize that already Ham has been planned as a university community complete with library, theatres, sports, banking, shopping, eating, and other services.— Yours, etc.,

VARSITY. November 23, 1966.

Sir,—Mr H. J. Walker did not say why the National Party decided to wait until after the election before reviewing social security payments, which include claims made by doctors on behalf of patients. The Tories made a similar promise in 1960, when they promised to repeal the 1958 “vicious” taxes on beer, tobacco, and petrol, but nothing has been done. The Social Crediters are six years late with a specialist benefit, as one was in Labour’s 1960 election policy. Labour offers dynamic economic expansion while the National Party and their Social Credit allies only offer debts, more overseas take-overs, and stagnation. —Yours etc.

DISILLUSIONED NATIONALIST. November 21, 1966.

Sir, —It is interesting to learn from the “Public Service Journal” that the Labour Party states it will, if returned as the Government, introduce without further investigation legislation to provide annual increases to Government superannuation annuities. It is easily seen the party proposes to introduce class distinction. I spent over 40 years in the Government [service and it would cause much surprise to learn of any i member who had not drawn i out of the fund during his, or : her, first five years more than Ihe paid into the fund during Ithe whole of his service. No doubt we all want more money, but why try and saddle the Government with that responsibility? It would be advisable for Mr Kirk and his party to look elsewhere for their votes.—Yours, etc., BE FAIR. November 22, 1966.

Sir, —Before my marriage I was so little interested in politics that I did not bother to vote. At the last election I voted as my husband advised me. Since having for the first time really to face up to the stern realities of life—costs of children’s shoes, clothes, food and services, and the persistent rise in the cost of these commodities—l have become intensely . interested in politics. I have attended the meetings 'of the three leaders, and also viewed them on television, and of the

three, I have been most impressed by the quiet sincerity of Mr V. Cracknell (Social Credit) and his calm appraisal of the true position of our economy. Our future appears to be dependent upon our going into debt, and I object to governments taking from my husband’s pay envelope what I require for my family’s needs.—Yours, etc., INFORMED VOTER. November 22, 1966.

Sir, —It is to be hoped that the women of New Zealand will realise the power they have to improve the moral tone of our country where drinking has become a real menace, especially to the younger generation. The destruction caused by vandalism alone has assumed enormous proportions, and time after time it was evident that the drinking of intoxicants has incited these youths. Then there are the numerous cases of ghastly crime; also terrible accidents on the roads, which have the background of drinking alcohol. It is not fair of the women voters to sit idly by and not cast a vote against this terrible curse. If they do, they cannot escape the fact that they are largely responsible, especially when they have been given the privilege of voting. Women voters should use their votes for the good of their children and everyone else.—Yours, etc., PRO BONO PUBLICO, November 23, 1966.

Sir, —Pictured by Labour Is a couple, probably in a North Island city, paying £64 in rates. Labour promises help from the taxpayer. This could mean, for example, that the ratepayers of Rangiora and Kaiapoi, besides having to pay their own full rates, would subsidise North Island city-dwellers. Labour forgets that while the working man in country districts may not pay £64 in rates, he is involved in transport and other costs unknown to those in the city.— Yours, etc.,

DAVID November 23, 1966.

Sir, —As a future member of our armed forces I find Mr Holyoake's assertions on the opinions of New Zealand soldiers serving in Vietnam of great interest. My impression that servicemen were forbidden to express their personal opinions on Government policy and public opinion to the press seems to have been mistaken. It is to be hoped that Mr Holyoake and the National Party will state their guarantee of servicemen’s complete freedom of speech more explicitly before Saturday and thus dispel their detractors’ claim that this is merely another political gimmick.— Yours, etc., SOLDIER BOY ’67. November 22, 1966.

Sir, —Labour’s policy is imbued with the philosophy and programme of socialism—a heavy poultice of restrictions of goods by import control, regimentation, and pandering to militant unions—the complete return to drastic measures of State control. Socialism is Marxist in origin and repugnant to Christian social principles. Harry Pollitt, the British Communist leader, said: “Socialism is communism in its working clothes.” The Labour Party is pledged to socialism. To quote Sir Walter Nash: “I am an ardent Socialist. Socialism has always been part of the Labour philosophy and it is the objective now.” Mr Kirk condemns the New Zealand and American defensive role in Vietnam. Does he favour the substitution of Communist “cold war”? Electors have it in their own hands to defeat the “red menace” of communism by the election of the National Party, stalwarts of true democracy and sane leadership.—Yours, etc., WISE ELECTOR. November 23, 1966.

Sir, —There seems a basis of political necessity in the creedal explanation of a local member of Parliament regarding Vietnam, as appeared last May regarding “teach-ins.” He is concerned about “confusion” among electors over a-party commitment contrary to our United Nations obligations. The national conscience is thrilled with United States personnel at Harewood in their gift to Ferndale School, but not of United States politicians regarding civilian casualties in Vietnam. What is of prime relevance to be evaluated with objectivity in thesi

days of increased hazards and appalling waste of creative talent, is that our way of life in our blood, bones, and business means the sovereignty of citizens at all levels of authority, and this implies the primary aim of politicians is to express public opinion in action. Here the national conscience and the National Party part company.—Yours, etc., WEST WIND. November 23, 1966,