GENERAL ELECTION

Ellesmere Guardian, Volume LVI, Issue 89, 22 November 1935, Page 8

GENERAL ELECTION

MID-CANTERBURY SEAT.

MR JAMES CARR AT LEESTON,

A BRIGHT .MEETING.

Good-humoured interjections, principally from one man, enlivened proceedings at the address given by Mr James Carr, the National candidate for the Mid-Canterbury seat, at Leeston Town Hall on Tuesday night. There was a good attendance and the meeting was presided over by Mr W. Johnston, chairman of the Leeston Town Board.

Mr Carr, prior to commencing his address, paid a tribute to the life and work for the electorate given by the late Mr J. Connolly, M.P. He said that whatever differences of opinion on political grounds there might have been before the election, these were all forgotten afterwards, and there was no doubt that Mr Connolly gave the very best possible efforts for the electorate and spared neither himself, his time nor his money for the interests of Mid-Canterbury and the Dominion. Mr Carr had no doubt that the strenuous nature of the services rendered by Mr Connolly had hastened his end.

The candidate opened his address by referring to his work on local bodies and also that he had served for two years on the Meat Board and had also been a member of two Wheat Boards.

It was unfair to say that the Government lacked statesmanship, the candidate declared, for it followed the lead of Great Britain, which was now the most influential State in Europe, and could that country be said to lack statesmanship? The Government could have raised a loan at a high rate of interest to help tide the country over its difficulties and let the present and future generations pay for it; but it endeavoured to live within its income, which was the right and proper course to take.

The Government was being blamed for spoon-feeding the farmer, who, it was declared, was disinclined to work, but ran about the country attending sales and race meetings. Primary production had increased by 25 per cent, during the past few years, and that was definite proof that the farmer was neither inefficient nor not working as he should.

When discussing unemployment relief, the candidate expressed the opinion that the work done on the farms, except under contract on the No. 4 scheme, was of little value, nor did he think they received much assistance under the No. 5 scheme.

A voice: You are wrong there!

The candidate reiterated his opinion but was met with a demand for facts and figures.

After a little discussion with the interjector on this point, the candidate proceeded to comply with the request for figures and quoted a series showing the improvements in value of produce exported during the last few years.

The voter: Who has been responsible for that?

Another: Not the Government,

Mr Carr went on to say that the improvement in financial conditions which had taken place had enabled the Government to balance the budget.

This was the signal for another interruption from the chief interjector, who declared that the Government had not balanced its budget for several years.

The candidate quietly replied that he believed it had been balanced last year. The interjector: You only believe that's so.

Continuing his catalogue of indications of improving conditions, the candidate referred to the deposits in Post Office Savings Banks, which he declared were £3,000,000 more than in 1931.

A front-bench interjector: That's because of the higher rate of interest.

Mr Carr replied that he did not think that had anything to do with it.

The interjector suggested that the accounts were removed from other banks to the Post Office to obtain the better rate.

Mr Carr: That cannot be so, for other banks show similar increases. * * * *

The next incident developed a few minutes later when the candidate began to discuss the work of the control boards.

The objector immediately registered dissatisfaction with boards and commissions, demanding their abolition and declaring: "Why, you can't even sell a pound of butter except through a board!"

In attempting to show the useful-

ness of boards, the candidate mentioned the competition from other countries with low price production such as Argentina.

The inter jector: Don't talk to me about Argentina—l've been there and know all about it.

Mr Carr continued amid a rapid fire of interjection, to say that the return to the Argentine farmer was between 5s and 10s per head for lamb, and he made some mention of the operations of the "Big Five."

The interjector: There is no need to go to Argentina for the "Big Five."

As an instance of the condition of an industry without the protection of a board, Mr Carr quoted the case of the Australian wheatgrowers. In the report of a recent commission of inquiry it was stated that the average indebtedness to the country storekeeper of the wheatgrower in New South Wales was £125 lis; in Victoria £54 8s 2d; in South Australia £47 10s 7d; in West Australia £40; the total for the Commonwealth £2,340,000.

An inter jector: They are in the same box here.

Mr Carr: I don't think any country storekeeper in New Zealand would allow a farmer to run up a debt of £125. He added that the figures he quoted did not include other debts. The candidate went on to quote figures showing that the cost of production ranged from 2s 9d or less per bushel to 4s 9d and over. Any system of guaranteed prices under those conditions would be a tax on efficiency, he declared.

Replying to a question regarding control boards, the candidate declared that it would be like going back to the Dark Ages to allow the farmer to sell his produce individually. All the merchants were oanded together and the farmer had to accept the price given to him. It was time the farmer ceased going, cap in hand, to sell his produce.

"Why not have fixed prices?" asked a questioner.

"Woolworths!" shouted another.

Mr Carr, in reply to another question, said that he favoured a farm labourers' union and it would be better to deal with an organisation than with individuals.

He thought that the levy and the fixed rate of wage tax were bearing heavily on the lower paid men. He would not, however, risk the defeat of the Government by voting with Labour in an effort to alter it, for he thought that the Government was just as aware of the position as the others and would remedy it as soon as it could be done.

"There are one and a-half millions in the Unemployment Fund. What is the Government going to do with it —double it or spend it?" asked a questioner.

Mr Carr replied that it was intended to use the money for unemployment relief. The Government was considering ways and means of creating more employment. He defended the building subsidy as having had very useful results, and mentioned a southern case where the increase in tax received through more employment was almost as large as the subsidy given. As a further instance he quoted a loan of £11,000 given to establish a new flax industry in the Manawatu. The factory was now employing several hundred hands, making woolpacks, with a wages bill of £600 per week. The loan was being gradually repaid and he considered it was a worth-while investment.

The candidate also approved of the extension of the life of Parliament. The Government was thereby given a chance of showing the results of their economies and during the last year the position had improved.

With regard to the restoration of the powers of the Arbitration Court, the candidate said that the council had had restored to it partially the power to fix wages. Personally, he did not favour it very much, for the fixed rates had the tendency to keep the good men down to the level of the poor workers.

A voice: Wrong again! You can't keep a good man down.

The meeting closed with the candidate being given a vote of thanks on the motion of Mr J. C. Free. A vote of thanks was also passed to the chairman.