KEEPING PROMISES

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 5, 6 July 1938, Page 6

KEEPING PROMISES

"DESTRUCTIVE CRITICISM"

Replying to the contention that Government speakers had not explained why certain promises had not been kept, Mr. R. McKeen .(Govern-

ment, Wellington South) said that it was the duty of every member of the Opposition to offer some constructive criticism of what the Government had done and proposed to do. So far,! however, the Opposition had contented j itself with destructive criticism and personalities.

In his address to the.youth of Wellington on Monday night, Mr. Holland had implied that the margin of exports over imports would result in a deficit at the end of this year, said Mr. McKeen. The position was that for the past five months the excess of exports over imports was about £8,000,000, and if a margin of only £11,000,000 was required to create the; position where the Dominion could1 meet its overseas commitments, surely j Mr. Holland's statement was greatly exaggerated. Mr. H. G. Dickie (National, Patea): You are taking the wrong period. The member for Oroua (the Hon. S. G. Cobbe) had said that the struggle today was between freedom and State control, said Mr. McKeen, and that the overwhelming majority of the people were in favour of freedom. Was there a semblance of truth in that assertion? Was any organisation or individual being prevented from carrying on its ordinary activities? The Hon. Sir E. A. Ransom (National, Pahiatua): Yes. In Auckland a chemist was refused the opportunity of carrying on business when there was not another chemist nearby. Mr. McKeen said that such state-; ments were merely platitudes, simply | attempts to cover up the improved | conditions that the Government had brought about. It was obvious that if the Opposition were returned to the; Treasury benches it would pursue the i same policy as it had pursued when it was (in office. He would say that by the time the election arrived the Government would not have any Opposition. "A SERIOUS SUBJECT." Mr. Poison: Don't joke. This is a serious subject. The test was what was disclosed by the Government Statistician's record.; Every section of the community had: benefited under Labour's regime, said Mr. McKeen. Mr. Poison: Has not the British consumer had anything to do with that? There was more prosperity and eco- j nomic freedom than ever before, Mr. I McKeen contended. The Government1 had been accused of lacking members '■ experienced in finance and farming, knowledge, but their record showed i that they were fully capable of doing the job entrusted to them. It was hardly possible for another Government to have such a record of borrowing as the past , Government. The i present Government had reduced the' National Debt- during its . term of office. . I "MOANING CRITICISM." Mr. H. G. Denham (Government, Invercargill) attacked the Opposition for its "moaning criticism about the big bad wolf of Socialism," and said that, he did not see what useful purpose it served. He had never heard the Opposition offer any remedy for the faults it found in the Government's legislation. The members of the Opposition were trying to hide their political hearts, but everyone knew that they were the "old gang," and if they got back again they would [ run the country on the rocks of destitution, destruction, and misery. He challenged the Opposition to name what the farmer would receive at present for his butterfat under the' compensated price. The National Party had said. that it would reduce taxation. He believed. that it would keep that promise. But it said also that.it would also maintain the social services inaugurated by the present Government. How could it do that? It was only because the Labour Government increased taxation in . certain ■ quarters that it was able to give the old age pensioners a little bit more. If the National Party got back and reduced taxation it would, as sure as night followed day, reduce pensions.