TOO ORTHODOX

Evening Post, Volume CXXX, Issue 4, 4 July 1940, Page 6

TOO ORTHODOX

MR. LEE'S CRITICISM

AMENDMENT MOVED

The orthodoxy of the Budget proposals was criticised by Mr. J. A. Lee (Democratic Labour, Grey Lynn). The Budget, he declared, was cast on more orthodox lines, although it was harsher to great wealth, than any Labour Budget yet introduced. Mr. Lee moved an amendment to the motion that the Speaker leave the Chair. His amendment was to the effect that the Budget proposals were not acceptable on the grounds: (1) That they made no provision for the use of public credit to increase New Zealand's internal production; (2) they increased the burden of internal debt which would constitute a crushing liability on the people after the war;. (3) the system of finance as presented was not calculated to enable the rehabilitation of the soldier after the war at the standard which was his right; and (4) they would reduce, without adding to the country's war effort, the consumption of food and other necessaries of life in thousands of New Zealand homes.

As he saw it, said Mr. Lee, the Budget proposed to borrow under orthodox methods, even to engage in housing. He contended that the alternative methods he had suggested for raising the funds required were quite legitimate in every way. The amendment would be seconded, and even if the mover and seconder failed to find any supporter they intended to divide the House, because they thought it wise to at least have on record the list of those voting for the orthodox financial system. SHACKLED BY ORTHODOXY. The Budget, he said, shackled New Zealand by financial orthodoxy, even granting that it contained some admirable features. He believed it used the war to win a triumph for orthodoxy. Financial orthodoxy was more responsible for our lack of preparedness in New Zealand than any other cause. "I believe that the Budget has been patterned by those who worship at the j shrine of Saint Orthodoxy, born in Stupidity Street, of stubbornness, and cradled in cruelty," declared Mr. Lee. "I believe that where the Budget demands the sacrifice of wealth and accumulation it is a good Budget, because j during, a war* when men take risks, i wealth and accumulation must take risks, too. The Budget imposes unnecessary hardships for the purpose of building itself on orthodox lines. I do not think there is. a great deal of leadership; I do not think it is planned to produce the maximum quantity of goods—it is planned to produce the maximum quantity of money." Mr. Lee said it was patterned by the Labour Party's failure to impose necessary checks over the last few years. He referred to the fact that there was £2,800,000 reposing in the Reserve Bank. Why was it not being used to help New Zealand's war effort? "If I call attention to nothing but that, I will have served some purpose this evening," he continued. "Is it there to allow some orthdox expert to pretend that it is going to help defend New Zealand democracy? It is not half as effective as a machine-gun."

He spoke of the failure to develop the iron and steel, tyre, sugar-beet, and paper industries, all of which, he said, had been blocked by Orthodoxy. "Orthodoxy is not going to help us win the war," he said. "It is certainly going to destroy the Labour Party." The Minister of Finance claimed thajb borrowing would cause inflation, Mr. Lee added, but he had imposed a sales tax that would inflate the workers' wages. He believed a large proportion of New Zealand's war costs could and should be met by the issue of Reserve Bank credits. The Democratic Labour Party believed that, and he also believed that many members of the Labour Party still believed that.

The debate was interrupted by the rising of the House at 10.30 p.m. until this afternoon.