General Election

Press, 25 November 1981, Page 24

General Election

Sir,—l note that Mr Pluck, endeavouring to push the Labour cause, is as far off the mark as usual. For his information, Newtons Road, West Melton, is well inside the boundaries of the Selwyn electorate. It is here Ruth Richardson and her husband have chosen to make their home, just as the Labour candidate chose to make his home in the Selwyn electorate some time ago. I have attended several joint candidate meetings during the election campaign and it is obvious that Ruth Richardson is the candidate that will give Selwyn the best representation. Her ability to field a wide range of questions and her knowledge on all facets of government is outstanding. — Yours, etc., - M. G. CLUCAS, Hororata. November 20, 1981.

Sir,—The prospect of the reelection of the National Government next week-end (quite possibly another minority one in terms of total votes cast) is extremely depressing. Worse, is it likely that — upon the retirement of Mr Taiboys — Mr Muldoon might see in his party’s re-election a mandate for himself to become Minister

of Foreign Affairs? It secjms that in New Zealand pantomimes are not just what you go to see at Christmas but rather you have to be an unwilling audience to them all year round. — Yours, etc., F. MINEHAN. November 22, 1981.

Sir,—Your reporting of the. role of “secret reports” on capital projects in Government seems not to have mentioned Labour’s printed views on the subject found in their manifesto. Labour would appear to be planning a complete remodelling of the central investment process which would include capital works. The Public Expenditure Committee is to be greatly expanded and given much more power. One item “forward estimates of expenditure will be published.” Also, together with the private and local authority sectors they will “prepare short and longer term forecasts of investments, matching investment flows with employment needs.” All this to be public. These are changes with wide implications for the central decision-making process and will affect the relationship with all sectors to the Government. Why have we heard so little of these changes which will, at last, allow the community to get early warning of where governments, using our money, are planning to take us? — Yours, etc., TOM McRAE. November 21, 1981.

Sir,—Unemployment is oiir big worry — 3000 school leavers still rotting on the dole; but the money Parliament voted for special work schemes was underspent, revealing callous Government inefficiency. Social Credit’s David Howes was easily the best on last Sunday’s “Newsmakers” unemployment programme. Tax 'reform, lower local body and interest rates would bring the desired results. All those single occupant four-bedroom houses in Sydenham are the sequel to a youth exodus not necessary when the large number of small businesses there could absorb the school leavers if not so battered by the economic climate. Japan is more dependent on oil than we are so the oil price is no excuse. All our trading partners have done better. The election is not a foregone conclusion. Only weeks before his victory; Norman Kirk on a 9 per cent poll said only the last one counted. Sydenham (then called South Christchurch) made history 62 years ago. It is time that electorate and the rest of New Zealand made it again. — Yours, etc., A. M. COATES. November 20, ,1981. Sir,—Although . it does not appear in the Social Credit manifesto in quite the form that your correspondent, E. Webster (November 23) indicates. under our social weltard policy it is clear that we/'do cover tiie unjust "no-faun” situation in tne following words; "We will extend the acciiieni compensation scheme to cover disabling sickness.” At a political executive meeting I well remember Bruce Beetham

getting quite irate at the indifference shown to the majority of the 10 per cent disabled in this country.—Yours, etc., RICHARD BACH. Social Credit candidate for Sydenham. November 23, 1981. Sir,—Once again my letter box is being filled with Labour Party promises. They did the same thing last year with the local body elections. One of their cries then was “think of your rates.” Well. Two things come to mind. City Council rates up 22 per cent, transport board rates up 59 per cent. Guess what will happen to taxes if Labour gets in—Yours, etc P. CLARK. November 23, 1981. Sir,-The statement by L. H. Carmichael (November 21), that Labour is responsible for today’s social ills, unemployment, inflation, lawlessness, etc., is too ridiculous to take seriously. It is reminiscent of the Nazi policy of blaming all problems on the Jews. It is a dangerous attitude to embark upon. National’s failure is their’s alone. Unemployment causes social breakdown and increases lawlessness. The Labour decision to create conditions for full employment will eliminate many accompanying evils. We can either have a fully employed society with exports mainly paying for raw materials to keep people working, or we can have unemployment with exports buying the cheap goods that keep people unemployed. By all means develop resources if the world needs them, but not at the expense of unemployment in our own country or any other country. We can have a quality life- style with full employment or otherwise. Our choice.—Yours, etc., J. SHARP. November 23, 1981. Sir,—Heads you win tails I lose for Labour or National. Heads they win tails we lose lor the majority of the electors. First past the post,

Sir,—Once again my letter box is being filled with Labour Party promises. They did the same thing last year with the local body elections. One of their cries then was “think of your rates.” Well. Two things come to mind. City Council rates up 22 per cent, transport board rates up 59 per cent. Guess what will happen to taxes if Labour gets in—Yours, etc P. CLARK. November 23, 1981. Sir,-The statement by L. H. Carmichael (November 21), that Labour is responsible for today’s social ills, unemployment, inflation, lawlessness, etc., is too ridiculous to take seriously. It is reminiscent of the Nazi policy of blaming all problems on the Jews. It is a dangerous attitude to embark upon. National’s failure is their’s alone. Unemployment causes social breakdown and increases lawlessness. The Labour decision to create conditions for full employment will eliminate many accompanying evils. We can either have a fully employed society with exports mainly paying for raw materials to keep people working, or we can have unemployment with exports buying the cheap goods that keep people unemployed. By all means develop resources if the world needs them, but not at the expense of unemployment in our own country or any other country. We can have a quality life- style with full employment or' otherwise. Our choice.—Yours, etc., J. SHARP. November 23, 1981. Sir,—Heads you win tails I lose for Labour or National. Heads they win tails we lose for the majority of the electors. First past the post, winner takes all. The punters backing the successful winner are a minority, while the majority of us are losers in this unfair, unjust, misrepresentative method of electing a government. The whole country suffers and will continue to do so until we have a genuine electoral basis from with which to elect a government representing the majority of New Zealanders. — Yours, etc L. J. ROBINSON. November 23, 1981.