P.M. details ‘Labour promises’

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33067, 7 November 1972, Page 20

P.M. details ‘Labour promises’

(From Our Own Reporter) BLENHEIM, Nov. 6. Details of the alleged cost of Labour promises, which he earlier set at S6oom a year, were given last night by the Prime Minister (Mr Marshall).

Mr Marshall said that this figure had been described by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) as “mere Government tactics in a political campaign.” “I can give him fuller details on this,” Mr Marshall said. “I think Mr Kirk will be studying these figures for he obviously does not know what his own policy would cost. Otherwise he would have told us.” Mr Marshall’s breakdown is as follows, giving annual expenditures in each case.— Agriculture, s6.Bm; arts and culture, so.2m; defence sl.Bm; education, $46.5m; environment, $17.6m; finance and taxation, sl44m; fishing, so.sm; forestry, slm; health, s3sm; housing, $80.2m; industrial development, s4sm; industrial relations, $16.6m; local government, s3m; Ministry of Works, so.lm; overseas trade, $2.7m; government charges, s4om; railways, $6.5m; shipping, ss.Bm; social security, $88.35m; social welfare, $4.85m; and transport, $52.7m. Mr Marshall’s figures consisted of current items amounting to $520.6m plus capital items which he had divided by five to give a fig-

ure of $78.2m. making a grand total of $599.2m. The main capital items consisted of sl9m in agriculture, including rural bank and cooperative freezing works; s9m for defence (housing); $34.5m in education, including the establishment of daycare centres and the replacement of pre-fabricated buildings; S3sm for health, including the third medical school plus extra hospital buildings; $28.5m for shipping including the cost of one container ship; and $264m for transport, including the cost of the Auckland rapid rail and electrification of Paraparaumu.

“We have tried to keep these figures at a moderate level,” said Mr Marshall. “Some of these proposals are good, but you can't get something for nothing. “This extravagant outburst of spending by the Labour Party is just another example of desperation.” The Prime Minister (Mr Marshall) had little trouble from interjectors when he spoke to an audience of nearly 400 in Blenheim. He was supporting the local candidate (Mr B. Dalliessi) who spoke briefly, denying that Marlborough or Blenheim had a labour problem, and said that if onethird of school leavers found it necessary to leave the district that was their own affair as young New Zealanders.

Mr Dalliessi maintained that Marlboorugh was one of the fastest growing areas in New Zealand outside of Auckland. Mr Marshall said that the main reason why the Na-

.tional Party had lost the (Marlborough seat was that i people did not turn out to I vote. He believed this would be remedied this time. He said that the National Government did not please everybody because it had never set itself out to please everybody. Mr Marshall was not worried by the small inumber of interjectors whom he either ignored or called upon to speak up. Many of his statements were received

I with applause by the majority. j He described Mr Muldoon as a very important member jof the team. j When interjectors tried to ;break in he gave them this (advice: “Wait until I stop for • breath, then get in. But make your interjection loud : enough for me to hear." He went on: “Mr Muldoon talks • straight—.” I Interjector: “He doesn’t 'look straight”