WOOL AS ECONOMIC “SCAPEGOAT”

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31344, 14 April 1967, Page 14

WOOL AS ECONOMIC “SCAPEGOAT”

By blaming New Zealand’s present financial difficulties on the “sudden and unexpected” drop in wool prices, the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) was trying to make a scapegoat out of sheep—a biological and political impossibility, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) said last evening.

Speaking as the last of 10 Labour Party speakers, Mr Kirk ended the Labour Party campaign for the Fendalton by-elec-tion. His near hourlong address was well received by a friendly and occasionally boisterously - enthusiastic audience of about 150.

The financial position has been caused by the National Government’s imprudent, improvident and careless policies, Mr Kirk said. In fact New Zealand had not lost even £lO million in overseas exchange because of the drop in wool prices, as was shown by Reserve Bank figures. The actual drop caused by the wool prices was £7J million, and the £4O million loss was a distortion. The Prime Minister had also said meat prices had fallen, and meat could earn £lO million less than estimated, but the Reserve Bank said there had been a “small loss,” and the loss from both meat and wool was more than balanced by an increase in dairy produce income.

Consequently New Zealand still had record export earnings. The National Party had privately conceded it might lose the by-election, Mr Kirk said. If Labour won and Mr B. G. Barclay was elected, Fendalton would have a member who would be available to the people—something the electorate had not had for 30 years.

The Government had already shown it could not be trusted, and before the General Election Mr Holyoake had said the country was

prosperous and strong. He later claimed he had warned the economy was developing too fast. But, said Mr Kirk, he defied anyone to point out where Mr Holyoake said this or said there was a balance of payments problem. Mr Holyoake had set out to conceal the state of the economy from the' country in November, and had conducted a deceitful and dishonest campaign. More economic steps would be announced when Parliament resumed earlier than usual, but it should have been called long before. Since February the people had been worried as to where the axe would fall next. So far economies had been forced on hospitals, and there were staff reductions and closures. It had been report-

ed persons would have to pay for all prescriptions under £1 —under the guise of a crisis the Government was trying to wipe out the Welfare state. Mr Kirk spent about a third of his speech attacking Social Credit, which he described as a “stooge of the National Party.” “You can't have a Social Credit government by voting Social Credit, but you can have a National government by voting Social Credit.” The National Party and some newspapers were trying to help the party scrape home by channelling votes towards Social Credit "... in a lastditch attempt to reduce the swing against the Government.”

A vote passing from National to Labour had the same effect on the former’s majority as two votes; they went down one and Labour went up one. But a vote for Social Credit halved the National loss; they went down one and Labour stayed where it was.