LABOUR GOVERNMENT

Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 13, 15 July 1939, Page 11

LABOUR GOVERNMENT

DEFENCE AND ATTACK

UNIVERSITY DEBATE

The statement that the Government' intended to increase the tax on higher incomes and to greatly increase death duties was made by Dr. D. G. McMillan, M.P., for Dunedin, during a public debate held last night under the auspices of the Victoria College Debating Society. The subject was: "That the Labour Government merits the continued confidence of the people of New Zealand." The affirmative was moved by Dr. McMillan and the negative by Mr. S. G. Holland, M.P. for Christchurch North. There was a very large attendance, including a number of members of Parliament and there were frequent interjections, mostly of a humorous nature. At the conclusion of the debate the motion was carried by tne audience on a show of hands and was also carried on a separate vote of the students alone, v .. Dr. McMillan also referred to conscription which he said was believed in by the Opposition in time of peace, but not by the Government, but if conscription became necessary then both wealth and manpower should be conscripted. If it were necessary to conscript men, wealth would also be conscripted to pay for their training. The speaker contended that the Government had encouraged the self-respect of the people—a self-respect that they did riot have under the previous Government. The farmers were previously dependent on the good will of the banks, stock and station agents, and lending/ institutions. Now after three and a half years of Labour rule they even had the courage to march up to Parliament House. The Government had developed an appreciation of the nobility and value of work and had turned its face against sustenance. It believed that if the average man was given a chance to work he would do his share. In the past there had been no encouragement to work. The old idea was that a man should work till he dropped into the grave. The Government's object was to give the people security in their old age. • "BROKEN PROMISES." Opening the case for the negative Mi*. Holland referred first to what he described as the Government's broken promises. It had promised to reduce the exchange rate, taxation, and the cost of living, not to borrow abroad, and to lower the interest rate, but it had not kept one of those promises. , The policy of the present Government tended to lower the standard of living, ; incubate industrial strife, and promote and encourage class hatred. In common with Communism, com- < pulsory unionism could not exist in a ' democracy without industrial strife. The Government was going to find that tinkering around with the monetary system and the Reserve Bank was no c substitute for hard work. Whether the Government liked it or not the coun- ( try's prosperity was bound up with its 1 overseas trade. In 1928 that totalled l £99,000,000 and the country had a l corresponding standard of living. In * .1931 it was £61,000,000, in 1935 : £82,000,000 and in 1937 £122,000,000. ] Prosperity came because of higher J prices for New Zealand exports in, the ° world markets and not through ■■ any " action of the Government. ; Tlie Government was now letting primary produc- E tion look after itself, and the farmers v were unable to obtain labour because the rates of pay on what amounted to relief works were higher than farm r rates. Was it any wonder that produc- 5 tion was on the decline? . . .

Mr. J. P.Lewin seconded the affirmative and Mr. R. W. Edgley the negative.