LABOUR'S RULE

Ellesmere Guardian, Volume LVIII, Issue 70, 3 September 1937, Page 5

LABOUR'S RULE

ACTS AND ADMINISTRATION CRITICISED.

ADDRESS BY MR S. G.

HOLLAND, M.P,

NATIONALISTS AT DUNSANDEL

Before a good attendance of Dunsandel electors at the Town Hall last evening, the seating accommodation in the anteroom being fully occupied, Mr S: G. Holland, member of Parliament for Christchurch North, gave a political address, in the course of which he strongly criticised the Labour Government's administration of the country since its assumption of office. The address was listened to ' with great interest and the speaker was given a hearty reception on his first official visit to DunsandeL »Mr D. W. Westenra, I president of the Dunsandel branch of the Nationalist Partyr, presided. Referring briefly to the causes which had led up to the defeat of the Coalition Government at last elections, Mr Holland said that there '< had been a great desire among the electors for a change and they had got it. They had become tired of the old brigade and had suffered from the depression. Another reason was the desire for younger men, and he could assure his hearers that that demand' would be met by the National Party at the next elections. There had been a demand for a change in leadership, and this also had been achieved so far as the National Party was concerned. Mr Holland paid a tribute to the leaders of the old party, who had stood aside with all the good grace in the world. He (Mr Holland) was happy to serve under Mr Adam Hamilton, who pos- . sessed all the qualities of leadership. The National Party had in its ranks a number of younger men of outstanding abilities, who formed a team destined to play an everincreasing part in New Zealand politics. When the time arrived • ■there would be young men for the >.-remaining seats, including men who v.k were prepared to make sacrifices of self in the service of the country. Mr Holland spoke optimistically of the progress being made by the National Party throughout the Dominion and said that there was a strong feeling throughout the country against splitting the strength of those opposed to Labour by organising two or three different parties, and there was a determination to fight the next election on the issue of Labour versus the Rest. There was every prospect of a National victory, and the speaker mentioned that there were quite a number of members in Parliament for the first and last time. ,The guaranteed price was thought by Labour to be one which would bring great honour to the party, but one had only to visit some of the North Island dairying districts, as he had done, to discover that there never had been such a political "flop" as the guaranteed price, except the visit of the Minister of Finance to England, which had been the greatest political "flop" of the last 25 years. Mr Holland was sure that if the National Party's campaign were handled in the proper way, on a high ethical basis with good organisation, there were good prospects of its realising its objective. THREE GREAT QUESTIONS. There were three great questions which were concerning the electors .at present: (1) How long was the present campaign of spending going to last? (2) What will the Labour Party do if the prices of New Zealand exports fall? (3) What will the National Party do if it gets back into power with* regard to wages and industrial conditions? With regard to the last question, Mr Holland said that the National Party was not out for a wage-slashing policy. The value of .wages was assessed in their purchasing power, and the party would endeavour to maintain purchasing power at its present level. There would be no general cancellation of the present Government's industrial legislation, for a great deal of that had the support of the Nationalists, such as the Pensions Bill and the 40----hour week, which would be given a fair trial. There would be certain other laws which would come off the Statute Book, one being compulsory unionism. Mr Holland emphasised that the National Party was not •'"■ merely an anti-socialist party; it had ' a programme of its own which would be announced and explained at the proper time. It would suit the Labour Party if it were announced now, for it would provide subjects for discussion until election time

instead of the administration and work of the Government, and criticism was one of the prerogatives of the Opposition. The Nationalists were going to maintain the purchasing power of the people's savings. If the Government continued with its present policy of financing the people's savings would cease to have any purchasing power. The National Party would lower taxation, and it was confident it could run the country more efficiently on lower taxation. It was, for instance, costing £166,000 more now to run the Labour Department, and the people were getting £166,000 worth of pin-prick-ing—an army of inspectors was employed prying into all manner of affairs. The cost of government was two millions more, and there was no greater efficiency for the expenditure of that money. NATIONALISTS AND THE FARMER. The National Party would hand back to the farmer the control of his own produce and he would be able to sell it where he wanted to and to receive an income comparable I with any other branch of industry. It would see that adequate supplies of labour would be available for the farmers. The farmers' labour problems would never be solved while higher wages and shorter hours were being offered on public works. Then there were 20,000 men receiving money for doing nothing. The Nationalists would encourage private enterprise as opposed to socialism, would encourage thrift and initiative, and all those fine qualities which formed the foundation to settlement and business affairs in New Zealand. In the Labour Party's philosophy there was no place for thrift. Labour favoured equality of income, and Mr. Holland quoted from recent high appointments in the Government service, comparing the salaries paid with those received by the permanent heads of other responsible departments, showing that in every case the new appointments received higher salaries. He also referred to the salary-sharing scheme in operation in the Parliamentary party, through which the Ministers in charge of important departments and entrusted with great responsibilities, received very little more salary than the rank and file. The speaker contended from these examples that the Government was incapable of measuring the value of men or the services they were rendering to the State. LABOUR'S OBJECTIVE. The objective of the Labour Party was socialism, and the speaker quoted a definition of the term given by Bernard Shaw. It was: Socialism, reduced to its simplest expression, is the discarding of the institution of private property, and converting it into public property, and the dividing of the resultant income amongst the entire population. This, said Mr Holland, was the policy which the Government was trying to put into operation to-day. It was being done in the case of transport. The Government had given notice to 54 different services, operating 196 trucks, to the effect that they would not be allowed on the road. These services produced a revenue of £300,000 per! annum, of which £40,000 went to the Government in taxation. The motor services of this country had done an immense amount of good in opening up the back country and furnishing the amenities of cities and large j towns to the farmers. It would be a ■oorry day for this' country when the Government decided to administer the transport system under single j ownership. Yet it was coming, and the speaker quoted the opinion given by a district traffic manager of the Railway Department in the North Island, to the effect that a great deal of the transport business between the large towns and cities would, within 12 months, be under the single ownership system. The farmer might think that he would be able to cart his own produce to store or market, but the speaker pointed out that the Government had power to declare any service subject to license and any such service could not continue without a license. New Zealand had developed its industries on the private ownership and competitive system, but the Labour Government did not believe in this. Mr Holland also criticised the Labour Government over its attitude to the B class radio stations, and declared that it had not kept to its pre-election promises of giving them all the assistance they required. The speaker also referred to Labour's criticism of the Ministerial delegations sent to the United Kingdom by j the previous Government, but he contrasted the visit of Mr Coates, who had saved three-quarters of a million on the meat contract, with that of Mr Nash, who had been away 101 months and had accomplished nothing. The guaranteed price for dairy produce had resulted in s, loss

of £650,000. The question now to answer was where the money was to come from. The speaker replied that it would be pure, undiluted inflation. The money mill machine would be put to work and New Zealand had enough knowledge of what happened in other countries where such a process had been operated to know what was likely to happen* to New Zealand. Socialism also envisaged the regimentation of the people in the employment of the State. In an article which appeared in the Labour newspaper, "The Standard," some time ago, one of the answers given to the question, How could the Government make the best use of the resources of the country ? was by the Government becoming the only employer, as it would of an army. Mr Holland said that every dairy farmer was virtually an employee of the State, for he received a fixed price for his produce and had no say in its disposal. The transport service was in the process of being converted and the doctors would be next under the National Health Scheme. Another answer to the question was that the places of amusement were to be as at present, but the operatives would be State employees and admission would be free. Every family was to possess a motor car and there would be a free supply of petrol in reasonable quantities. Mr Holland said that at present every third person was a dependant of ,the State and the cost of providing for 213,000 employees or dependants was £27,750,000. LABOUR'S GOOD FORTUNE. Labour had had extremely good fortune in assuming office at the time it did, said Mr Holland. The country was then emerging from the depression, the budget had been balanced and there was a credit balance in all departments, and unemployment was being satisfactorily dealt with. Prices were beginning to rise and in Labour's first year of office the values of exports reached the record figure of £64,000,000. The value in the last year of office of the Coalition Government was £35,000,000. Imports, whence came Customs revenue, had increased to! £50,000,000, as compared with £24,000,000 for the Coalition's last year. Yet the Labour Government claimed to be the contributing factor in the increase in prices. PROMISES NOT KEPT. Mr Holland declared that the Labour Government had not honoured all its election promises. Certainly it could be given full marks for keeping some of its promises, especially those with regard to wages and shorter hours and other industrial matters. Those which had not been kept were those concerning the removal of the sales tax. It had not altered the exchange rate, nor was there any evidence of its intention to do so. It had admitted that it was a difficult matter to handle, and more easily imposed than reduced. The Government had promised to "so improve the conditions for farmers that there would be no need for their wives and children to work in the cow-bails, but far from that, what with increased costs and shortage of labour, they were going back to the cow-yards faster than ever. UNEMPLOYMENT. Then, too, the Government promised to re-establish all able-bodied men in work in industry, the public works and other services. The speaker said that on account of the methods of tabulating unemployment statistics it was difficult to arrive at a fair comparison, but notwithstanding that, it was possible to make some comparisons. Thousands of men! had been transferred from unemployment to public works jobs, but these were none the less relief works and were no solution to the problem. In December, 1935, there were 35,000 unemployed and 13,000 on public works, a total of 49,000. In June of this year there were 30,000 on unI employment relief and 19,000 on public works, a total of 50,000. This | comparison showed that the position had become worse and there was something wrong in a country which was enjoying a greater measure of ! prosperity than ever before, that there should be 50,000 men who could j not get jobs. The speaker quoted J from an interview given by the High j Commissioner, Mr Jordan, with regard to unemployment, wherein he stated that so few had become the unemployed that already they were! discussing the time when the country would resume immigration. Mr Savage when in England declared that there would be no immigration while there were thousands of unemployed. Mr Semple, too, when in Australia, had been saying things about unemployment. He was reported to have said at a meeting of Labour supporters in Melbourne that

there were 75,000 unemployed when the Government took office, but this number had been reduced to 15,000, many of whom were unemployable, and that many of those previously unemployed were now earning £1 a day. Mr Holland declared that if the country could get the unemployed down to 15,000 it would have broken the problem. He added that responsible Ministers had no right making statements like that in other parts of the world. He would very much like to see the unemployed down to 15,000, but he could not see it being done under present conditions. j COST OF LIVING. Mr Holland quoted from another Labour election publication a promise to reduce the cost of living. He showed a statement giving selected items of domestic goods, the then retail price, and what the Government proposed, showing altogether a reduction of 5s from 21s to 15s lljd. He added that he had submitted the list to a Christchurch grocer, who said that the goods could not now be purchased for less than 235, 40 j per cent, more than the cost the Labour Party promised. Labour had also promised to reduce taxation, but instead of that, had increased it: Customs £2,000,000, motors £500,000, land £900,000, sales tax £900,000, films £28,000, beer £70,000. Mr Holland said that there was a go-slow policy in force in New Zealand and that the Government admitted it. He quoted figures to show that it took longer to load overseas vessels now than it did two years ago, and the Government had not done anything to face up to the problem. In conclusion, Mr Holland said that a new session of Parliament would commence next week, and he urged all electors to take a greater interest in politics. The business of running the country was a serious one and should be given careful attention. The issue was a clear-cut one: Whether they were going to have socialism or not. He referred to the rumours of an early election and urged supporters of the National : Party to complete their organisation !so as to be ready for it should it come sooner than expected. I On the motion of Mr J. H. SkinI ncr, seconded by Mr N. J. Brown, jMr Holland was accorded a hearty vote of thanks for his interesting address. A vote of thanks was also passed to the chairman.