TWO PHILOSOPHIES

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 77, 28 September 1938, Page 21

TWO PHILOSOPHIES

LABOUR & NATIONAL

MR. M CKEEN'S COMPARISON

A contrast in political philosophies was discussed by Mr. R. McKeen, Labour candidate for Wellington South," when speaking to an enthusiastic meeting at <^hiro Bay last evening—the philosophy of the National Party, which he said was one of cutting and contraction, and the philosophy of the Labour Party, which he claimed was one of expansion and prosperity. Mr. H. Nathan presided.

The proponents of the National Party's philosophy, Mr. McKeen said, could not comprehend the policy"-of the Labour Party, which meant prosperity for the people, jobs for the worker, and security for the farmers. Before Labour's advent, New Zealand was a victim of the "financial junkers" who fixed commodity prices and who had in their hands the power to say who should have jobs, and what industries should succeed and what price levels should prevail.

When the Labour Party became the Government the unemployed in this country numbered close oi. 100,000, many of those in work were under paid, and New Zealand generally was suffering from the worst effects of a man-made slump. The present Government had been faced with the task of cleaning up the morass of confusion left by its predecessor and the result was the restoration of the Arbitration Court, higher salaries and wages, a shorter working week, the absorption of the unemployed into a progressive policy of public works, and economic security for the farmer, as well as social security for the masses of the people. •' . ' ,

Mr. McKeen refuted suggestions made by.National Party leaders that the Labour Government's policy of spending was raising a nation of loafers and mendicants. Such suggestions were an insult to many of tho people of the Dominion. It had been alleged by a number of National members and candidates that the 40-hour week was ruining our industries, but he declared that there had never been a period in our history when the volume of wealth produced was greater than it was at the present time, nor when industry was doing better than now.

It was a fallacy to believe that the social security proposals of the Labour Government would lead the country to bankruptcy. In comparing the Government's proposals with those advanced by the Nationalists, it would be found that the National Party's scheme was a rich .nan's plan and one which would fall heavily upon those who were least able to bear the burden. Labour's plan was for all; furthermore, the actual benefits of Labour's scheme were greater and covered a wider and more deserving field. He would warn his hearers, however, that the National Party's proposals, if carried into effect as outlined, would presage heavy cuts in pensions as compared with the *ates provided in Labour's scheme.

Mr. McKeen added that he wished to dispel the erroneous idea that civil servants who paid into the Public Service Superannuation Fund would not participate in the universal scheme. He assured them that they would benefit from both funds. .

Mr. McKeen was accorded a vote of thanks and confidence was expressed in his candidature. *