TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 102, 26 October 1929, Page 8

TOPICS OF THE DAY

By his unqualified withdrawal .of the'"loan mystery" statement the Prime Minister has done tardy justice to the ex-Minister of Finance and to himself. Sir Joseph Ward's second statement, as we commented at the time, exonerated Mr. Stewart from any blame for the awkward position in which the Prime Minister found himself on his accession- to office. It was clear' from that statement that the proposal to borrow earlier than usual was not made by Mr. Stewart, and that he took no action which would prejudice his successor. But the correction was not so explicit as it might have been. The statement now made removes any possible source of misunderstanding. We are glad that this has been done, for the- Minister of Finance and the ex-Minister are both men of high repute, with a reputation, moreover, for fairness and responsibility in their criticism of each other's policy. Neither would wittingly leave a legacy of trouble for the other, and both recognise fully that the Dominion's credit should not be damaged for party purposes. Sir Joseph Ward has had great difficulties to face. In part those difficulties proceeded from the excessive optimism of his own election programme, and in part from the unfortunate circumstances which produced a doficit. But he has also been embarrassed by having to arrange a big conversion on an adverse London market. In handling this problem—the difficulty which neither he nor his predecessor could have foreseen—he showed better judgment than in framing his election programme. The solution he was compelled to accept involved restriction of his power to borrow for other purposes and apparently diversion of loan funds intended for works. Allowance should be made for this in comparing the measure of promise and performance. * * * ' New Zealand credit in London was good when the Reform Parly left office, and it is good still; but it would not be good long if London financiers were to read and accept as accurate some of the statements made in the course of the taxation stonewall. In their desire to outHerod Herod in condemnation of the supertax, some critics conveyed the impression that insolvency for many producers would follow the imposition of the new taxation. There was talk of- "retrospective" legislation (as if the annual taxing bills were not always retrospective) and comparisons with the action of the Queensland Government in its interference with pastoral leases. Altogether, a credulous listener or reader might have obtained a pretty picture of bad faith, impending red ruin, and black disaster. Perhaps members did not make their assertions seriously. Perhaps they were driven to extremes to find something to say in condemnation of the Bill which would be neither un-Parlia-mentary nor "tedious repetition." But whatever their excuse they failed to show a full sense of their responsibility; Wc are glad to observe that those who have had the responsibility of office were not similarly guilty of risking New Zealand's credit in a party dispute. We do not wish to see discussion of financial issues hampered. In the past we have often complained of the lack of criticism; but such criticism should at all times be balanced. Fortunately little harm has been done, for the exaggerated statements are unlikely to be read in London, or credited by well-informed financiers if they are read. If a choice selection of them were to be transmitted, the compiler of such news would be' condemned as seriously as if he had grossly exaggerated an earthquake disaster; but would he be open to condemnation for broadcasting tho statements of "responsible" members

of Parliament? If the members who have laid themselves open to this criticism will reflect, they will see that this necessary and wholly prudent rejection of their statements is in itself a condemnation. It classifies them as men whose judgment is unsound, and whose criticism is unacceptable at face value. » » * As we anticipated, the removal of the destructor from Clyde quay is not a matter to be easily arranged. Even if a new site for the purpose were found on less valuable land, and involving no additional charges for haulage, there would" be a heavy capital cost for replacement of buildings and plant. This does not mean, however, that no improvement is possible. The difficulties attending the removal of the destructor do not apply equally to all other Corporation works centralised on the Clyde quay block. It should be possible to release part of the land for more profitable use. The city will gain immensely from any improvement that can be made in the appearance of the area. The financial gain will depend upon the terms of the Harbour Board lease; but there should be no great difficulty in arranging this matter. The Harbour Board, we may be sure, would not put obstacles in the way of increasing the usefulness of its own land. The subject is well worthy of further investigation, especially in view of the fact (to which the Mayor himself recently drew the attention of the Railway Department) that Wellington needs all the central area that can be made available for commercial expansion. * . * •» An assurance that the Public Works and Lands Departments will operate conjointly in roading areas suitable for settlement is given by the Minister of Public Works in his Statement. Such co-operation cannot fail to be beneficial. It will lessen the risk of expenditure on roading to open lands which are not worth the cost when they are opened. A second point of the Government's plan is, as far as possible, to employ on the'development of unsettled and unproductive lands under the provisions df the Land Laws Amendment Bill many of the experienced Public Works employees who by their long and faithful service have shown that they, possess many of the necessary qualities that go to make successful settlers. This plan offers a means of coping with the labour difficulty in State land development. The prospect of keeping development cost within bounds will be brighter if labour power already organised is used than if a new organisation has to be created. ' But much will depend upon the wisdom shown-in the selection of the men. As experience in soldier-settlement has shown there are many men possessing admirable qualities who yet lack the particular qualities essential for farming success. They may be good ' Public Works men and not good farmers. But there is less likelihood of mistakes when dealing with men who have been tried in Public Works pioneering. Such men at least have some knowledge of the conditions to be faced: