General Election

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33064, 3 November 1972, Page 8

General Election

Sir, —I would point out to Mr Blumsky that class struggle has been inherent in wage-labour relationships since capitalism was developed, and is not something created by governments or that happens periodically. Struggle occurs over the surplus values created by the workers. The employing capitalist does his best to lower wages as far as is humanly possible, and workers combine into unions to resist this lowering, to protect their interests, and to raise wages as much as possible. This will continue until capitalism is defeated by the workers and the wages system is abolished. This is the political development of the class struggle.—Yours, etc., EDWARD W. HICKS. November 2,1972. Sir, —Criticising Mr Kirk’s statement that private banks will not be permitted to create their own credit, but must borrow from the Reserve Bank, Mr W. B. Owen, New Democrat candidate for Tauranga, said that ownership alone would eventually give Government control of everything and everybody. A thoughtless statement. Does he imagine unlimited credit issued by private banks will benefit all the people, or will he admit that credit by the Reserve Bank is issued for the purpose of keeping the economy on an even keel, not just for the benefit of private enterprise? Mr Kirk, in his inaugural speech, advocated the termination of compulsory military training. I agree whole-heartedly, but, would replace it with a onemonth yearly period of phy-; sical training. Over 35 per cent of men eligible for military service are turned down. I urge lectures on sociology, the ill effects of extreme nationalism on international tolerance and understanding, and a thorough understanding by the individual of Christian values as they affect society in general.— Yours, etc., R. J. GLEN.

November 2, 1972. Sir, —Listening to Mr Marshall one would be inclined to think that he was responsible for inventing the word “environment.” Those of us who know better, however, are aware that pressure groups are responsible for changing government thinking, both at Dominion and local level. In the case of environment, the groups prin-

cipally concerned with the destruction of both public and Government apathy have been the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the New Zealand Clean Air Society, the Manapouri Committee, the New Zealand Scenic Preservation Society, the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, and, latterly, Ecology Action and the Environment Defence Council. Without the efforts of these organisations we would not be hearing Mr Marshall speaking of environment on the local platform, Mr Maclntyre at Stockholm, nor Sir Keith Holyoake at the United Nations.—Yours, etc., JOHN J. FORSTER. November 1, 1972.

Sir, —To Mrs Judith Mackay, Mr Marshall may well sound like “an ageing magician” looking for something new. But does he need to? Since his appointment as Prime Minister he has taken considerable and successful measures to curb inflation, in the form of a wage and price freeze, and has led a Government responsible for a Budget that included many longneeded reforms. Before he became Prime Minister he gained many trade concessions for New Zealand and staunchly argued our case in Europe. He also cleaned up the troublesome seamen’s union by deregistering it. He entered his present position at a time when New Zealand was fraught with problems, both economic and social, and under his leadership we have seen many changes for the good. As for the “Blapk Budget,” it has influenced New Zealand voters for the last 14 years. Well he might mention it! Mr Marshall does not need to look for something new. If he continues the way he has, who can complain?—Yours, etc., PANDA. November 2, 1972. Sir, —“Sunbather” asks, “For goodness sake, why change?” The answer is, for goodness sake. Without change growth cannot exist and without growth life ceases. Political life is not exempt and, as he reminded us on Monday, Mr Marshall changed his executive around to resuscitate it. His boast that, man for man, no Labour contender for a change has it in him to match that result, practically asks a majority of lively New Zealanders to reject it. Confucius, he say, (or was it Mao, or Henry Ford 1), “New broom, corners clean.” — Yours, etc., “A. B. CEDARIAN”. November 2, 1972.

Sir, —When the General Election is over and the results are weighed, the people of New Zealand may well be aware that a tragedy has occurred. The tragedy will be the effect on the over-all result of the new Values Party. This organisation will undoubtedly poll very well, as their well-thought-out policies are attractive to many people, and the intrusion of the Values Party in urban electorates can only be damaging to the Labour candidates. The net result will be a sizable vote for Values (but insufficient to elect any candidate) and a loss of Labour Party votes, thus allowing National in for yet another term of office on a minority vote. As the policies of Labour and Values are similar in almost all respects (apart from defence), voters should ponder well the pros and cons of this situation before casting votes for the idealistic but ill-advised Values Party. — Yours, etc., RAKAIAMAN. November 1, 1972.