ANOTHER WITHDRAWAL LABOUR POLICY

Evening Post, Volume CXX, Issue 116, 12 November 1935, Page 6

ANOTHER WITHDRAWAL

LABOUR POLICY

tßy Telegraph—Press Association.) TAUMARUNUI, November 11. Mr. J. Georgetti, Independent candidate for Waimarino, acting on medical advice, announces his withdrawal. This leaves the contest between Mr. F. Langstone (Labour) and Mr. K. A. Boles (Nationalist).

MR. WASH'S CAMPAIGN

MEETING AT EASTBOURNE

Between fifty and sixty electors were present at Day's Bay last evening, 'when Mr.W. Nash, Labour candidate for Hutt, outlined the policy of the Labour Party, dealing in particular with guaranteed prices. The candij date spoke for nearly two hours and 'received a most attentive hearing Ithroughout. At the outset he criticised the policy adopted by the Gov- ] ernment. during the; depression, and | said that the aim oil the Labour Party was to guarantee s. proper return to the primary producer and a statutory minimum wage to the working man. Alongside that a national superannuation and health service scheme was needed. The Labour Party would provide that if returned to power, but it could not do more than the people wanted. Mr. W. Dick presided, and introduced Mr. Nash, referring, in doing so to the attention the candidate had always shown to the needs of the constituency. • The candidate said the responsibility of a member of Parliament was first to the nation and secondly to his constituency. He had tried to do his best for both and had opposed the Government when he thought its legislation was not in the interests of the country. In looking after the Hutt electorate he had to thank the Government for co-operating with him to secure necessary improvements. There was a third duty a member had to perform—a duty to the individual, and he had done his best to attend to the interests of the 18,000 persons in Hutt. After referring briefly to the legislation passed during recent years and in particular to the Unemployment Act, Mr. Nash said that at one time he had considered the unemployed should work for sustenance, but time had proved that the useless work that had to be undertaken inevitably destroyed character. Men of character had been so disheartened that they had ■reached the stage where they considered nothing mattered. GOVERNMENT'S MISTAKE. : The fall in the national income brought about by the fall in the prices of primary products overseas had been met by the Government through reduced wages. That was a mistake; what should have been done was the development of secondary industries in New Zealand. That had been argued again and again, in the House of Representatives, and -he had personally gone into the question of having more motor-car assembling done in New Zealand, and had been told that if the duty were removed 116 men could be employed for 16 weeks at 2s 3d an hour by one firm. That would have meant £800 a week in wages, but nothing had been done until April of this year. As a result of the reduction of the duty then a large number of men were now employed assembling cars. The Government, by making cuts in all directions, had accentuated the difficulties facing the country, Mr. Nash said. As the cuts were imposed the number of unemployed increased, and after the first restoration the number decreased again. In his last Budget, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates had said that the restoration of wages and salaries would give a further impetus to recovery. That was correct, and conversely the reductions made previously had had an adverse effect. Instead of encouraging new industries when the slump commenced, the Government stopped works, put men out of employment, and left railway lines 'that were almost nnishedWlying idle, while the material ; already on the ground was allowed' to' waste. Mr. Nash said he had gone into the question of loss through the reductions made, and official estimates showed tl;at wages and salaries had beon reduced by £ 95,000,000 in four and a half years. That meant a tremendous loss in spending power, and industries such as buiiding, etc., had been held up until the actual loss in spending power was about £115,000,000. THE EXCHANGE RATE. Referring to the extension of the life of Parliament. Mr. Nash said the Government had set a dangerous precedent. He also referred to the rate of exchange aad i;aid that the high rate hnd increased the prices of all commodities used in New Zealand by 25 per cent; it helped the farmer least when he needed it most, and it put a barrier of 25 per cent, against everything imported from Great Britain. It had to be said for the Government that it was irr.pera've that something should be done for the farmers. In his opinion it bad been done in the wrong way, and all that could be said was that the increased exchange had enabled the poorer farmers to pay their interest to the banks. In spite of the exchange premium half the farmers in the Dominion were unable to meet their liabilities. Sir Alfred Ransom had said that guaranteed prices would cost the country £13,000,000 a year, and had claimed that the Government had helped the farmers to the extent of £ 14,500,000. Even if guaranteed prices did cost £13,000,000, and he could show that they, would not, that would be better than the exchange premium, which, on the evidence of the Dairy I Commission, had left half the farmers i bankrupt.

Commenting on the taking over of the State Advances by the Mortgage Corporation, Mr. Nash said that no organisation had done more to develop New Zealand than the State Advances Department. It had lost money through making high percentage advances, but the losses, spread over the years of its activities, were nothing when compared with the development it had brought about in New Zealand. Now the Mortgage Corporation had taken over the business of the State Advances. The State Advances advanced up to 75 per cent., and in some cases up to 90 and 95 per cent., but the Corporation would only advance up to 66 per cent., or up to 80 per cent, if the Government guaranteed the extra risk. The Corporation had taken over the State Advances liabilities, but the Government had guaranteed them against loss. They were guaranteed against any reasonable possibility of loss and there could be no comparison between the service that would be given and that which had been given by the State Advances.