CHALMERS ELECTORATE

Evening Star, Issue 18137, 29 November 1922, Page 2

CHALMERS ELECTORATE

MR DICKSON’S ADDRESS. REFORM ADMINISTRATION DEFENDED. Mr J. M. Dickson, tho Reform candidate for-the, Chalmers seat, which ho has represented in Parliament for tho past eight ye are, addressed a well-attended meeting of electors in the Port Chalmers Town Hall last night. Mr Dickson spoke for slightly over an hour, and throughout was accorded a very orderly Mr J. Watson (Mayor of Port& Chalmers) presided. The Chairman briefly introduced the speaker, stating that Mr Dickson had had a, strenuous time, theift being sixty polling booths in the Ohalmera electorate, ajid in consequence Mr Dickson had not been able to speak in Pori Chalmers before. THE EXTREMISTS' POLICY. Mr Dickson said that he had even" reason to believe that lie would be returned to Parliament again next week. He claimed to be representing the Reform, Liberal, and Moderate Labor Parties. He was being opposed by a representative of tho extreme Labor parly, Mr Stephens, an extreme Socialist. Mr Munro had complained that the reference to the Labor Party as extremists and Bolsheviks was mud slinging. However, Mr Dickson said he would show that these remarks were justified. Mr Stephens had' stated Crab the Labor Party platform was purely constructive, but he would show that the platform was destructive. He had heard tho Socialist members in the House, and could fully substantiate his statement by extracts from speeches delivered by extremists. For instance, Mi' Holland, the leader of tho Labor Party, speaking in the House, asked; “What man, I ask, ie worth while if lie is not an extremist?” Mr Bartram, another Labor extremist, had mad© it plain that ho stood for the socialisation of the means 0! production, distribution, and exchange. Mr Bartram had further said: “ You can call mo an extremist if yon like. There is no virtue in any other term.” Tho ‘Brisbane Standard,’ an extreme Labor paper, stated that the_.object of Labor was to send business men out of existence and supplant the present system by on© that would make everyone work without profit. This meant destruction, not construction, Mr Dickson added, because it meant the destruction of the present Oonstitiiiibn. Healing with the Labor Party’s land policy, the speaker said that it provided that on the death of the owner the land would go back to the State. Mr F. R. Cook, who was president last year of the “ Labor-Sbcialist-extiemist-oum-Commumstio ” party, recently stated that he'was no mere pacifist, but, if necessary, would rally round the red flag. IMMIGRATION AND COAL. His opponent had criticised the Government’s immigration policy, and bad stated that the immigrant© had taken the place of Now Zealand workers, who were in destitution and want. During the past three years, Sir Hickson said, 21,829 immigrants had come into tho country, but of this number onlv 2,436 wej-e workers. Mr Stephens also blamed tho Government for importing coal into the country in 1919; but tho reason for this was that there waa a go-slow policy in operation on tho West Coast. Air Holland suggested that the wages were insufficient, but it must be remembered that tho Government did not fix the wages. The Arbitration Court did that. (Ironical laughter.) Tho object of the go-slow policy was that the miners wanted to deplete the country of coal so that they could go on strike. Tho Government had been quite justified in importing the coal when it did, because tbo General Manager of Railways had frequently warmed tho Government that the coal stocks were dangerously low, and that in the case of a strike the railways could not he carried on. Tho Labor Party made a great deal of tho importation of coal, but had said nothing about the strike which was the cause of the trouble. CAPITAL AND LABOR.

A matter of vital importance, said tho speaker, was the relation between Capital and Labor. Unfortunately for a very long period throughout the world tho relations had not been at all friendly. In his opinion—and ho thought tho bulk of poopfo would agree with him—the relations between Capital and Labor should bo harmonious, for without harmony we could not have production, and' without production wo would have poverty and want. To create antagonism between these two was the height of folly, and that was what the Socialists were continually doing. A Voice: “Why, Massey is doing it every day.”

Mr Holland and his party, continued Mr Dickson, never lost an of abusing those they called the capitalists. They said that only by the extinction of the capitalistic system could working-class emancipation] bo achieved. The farmer — especially the one who owned freehold—was the pet aversion;, and the Labor Party proposed to confiscate bis land. Socialists cultivated a spirit of hatred amongst their supporters and. followers. They were, in Ids opinion, a menace to the State, and ehonld be deported. Voices; "Oh !” and laughter. Tli© proposals of the Labor Party made no provision for taxation, for the raising of revenue. Everybody was going to obtain something from them without any cost to the State whatever. Surely no one would argue that under the Labor platform production would be increased. They asked for a flve-dgy week of forty_ hours. No man could produce as much in that time as in a forty-four or a forty-eight-hour week, and the dairy farmers worked in a saveu-day week of about fourteen hours a day. "Under the Labor proposals wo would 'have State farms to provide food for the people. We were not told what reward the people who worked on the State farms were to receive. Presumably they would be paid’ the standard rate of wages. If, however, those people were to work for only forty hours on five days of the week, we would find that the cost of production would go up enormously. It was only because the farmers worked on seven days of the week that we were able to get produce at the price we did. A noted writer had said that rt a nation that produce© little enjotij Jittle.” _ During the go-slow policy of the coni _ miners he had known poor people in Wellington and Christchurch, not to have coal to keep themselves warm or cook their food.

FINANCE. Dealing with financial matters, Mr Dickeon pointed out that, we were carrying a heavy burden in the National Debt. That) burden had been felt by the taxpayer, because of the large increase which had taken place in taxation since the beginning of the war. In 1914 the debt amounted to £99,730,427, and in 1922 it had amounted to £219,540,386. Included in the latter amount was the war debt of £81,621,673, which was raised (err the purpose of enabling us to carry our share in the war. There was a credit to Sinking Fund of £10,655,394, which reduced the National Debt to £208,508,991. The interest on the gross debt was £9,604,393. Ih addition there were other permanent changes which could not be reduced and which were pn the increase. There had been increases in the subsidies to hospital hoards, increase in pensions, and increase in subsidies to local bodies, the total increase'being £8,638,072. In 1914 the increase was £4,256,089.' which made the total increase in permanent charges £12,748,161. Particulars of the increases in pensions from 1914 to 1922 were as fol-low;-Old age, £394,558 to £745,749; widows' pensions, £27,075 to £186,509; Foldiers’ pensions (last year), £1,726,174: miners’ pensions (last year), £51.212. There was also the statutory annual increase to public servants of approximately £200,000. Since 1914 there were 7,5 W additional children attending our schools, this necessitating the employment of an extra 230 teachers at an annual cost of £74,000. By these figures they would see that (he cost of carrying on the business of the country had increased enormously during., the pest seven years. Besides,, there was the large amount spent in the repatriation of onr soldierp. TAXATION. In 1914 the taxation of the country was £5 10s per head, mid in IS2O-21 it had gone up to £lB 9a par head. The Govern-

ment olaimedi to have done something to ■reduce taxation, because in 1922 tho figure* wore £ls 5s 5d per head, a reduction on tho previous year of over £6 per head. Last year there was £600,000 of income tax and £300,000 of land tax which ■was not collected, tho taxpayers not being in a position to pay. In regard ,to the graduated land tax, the large landowners mud people with large incomes certainly paid their due share of the taxes of the country. The small people did not feel the tax anythingi like those with largo incomes. business men had been hampered in their enterprises by the very heavy sums which they ha.d to pay in income taxes. Tho graduation of the income tax was fairly steep. In order to reduce tho burden of taxation, retrenchments and economies must bo the aim and object of tho new Parliament. This was imperative whatever Government was returned to power. Personally, he felt there would be no change of Government. Last rear tho Government had effected a reduction in public two and ahalf millions. While it had done this, the Government had been obstructed and criticised by tho extreme Labor Party, who, with the object of catching tho votes of public servants, advocated an increase of the graduated land and income tax. He thought ho had shown that it was impossible to increase this tax. The Labor (Party would have don© go rather than make a cut in the cost-of-living bonus.es to public servants. Tho ‘ Maoriland Worker had advocated the repudiation of the interest on our war loans rather than making a cut in the bonus. That would bo most unjust. He pointed out that a large number with patriotic motives put them little savings in war loan certificates eo ae to assist dn carrying on tho war. Ho did not know why the Socialists should repudiate the war debt, unless it was that the Labor Party was opposed to the war, and it certainly did little to win it.

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION. Dealing with Proportional Representation, the speaker said that he was opposed to it, and quoted a leading authority to ehow that it was cumbersome and unscientific. He was further opposed to it because it abolished the country quota ae far as New Zealand was concerned. Although tho Liberal Party included this on its platform, JlO did not think that it met with tho approval of all tho small •body of Liberals uv the House. In New South Wales in 1920_a Labor Party had been returned on a minority vote. In this connection Mr Dickson said that the Labor Party was always fond of stating that the Government was a, minority one; but this was absurd, as tbo Reformers did not. contest fifteen seats at tho last election. OPPOSED TO STATE BANK. Mr Wilford had also placed on his platform a proposal for a State bank. The Commonwealth State bank bad always ■been held up as an example of the value of such an institution; but the bank had really done very little to assist tiho agricultural and pastoral interests, and did not in any way compare favorably with the Bank of New Zealand. Air Massey had recently stated that the Government intended securing further shaves in tho Rank of Now Zealand. He did not know what his object was, as tho State already controlled the bank. THE RAILWAYS. Dealing with the railways. Air Dickson said that it had often been stated that the ways of tho Railway Department were past finding out. The loss mad© by the railways was because of tho interest paid on tho original construction of the lines; whilst the General Manager had also emphasised the fact that a great deal of the extra expense was duo to tho adoption of the forty-femr-hour week, and in some cases this had resulted in doubling the expenditure. Unless something could be done to increase the revenue, Air Dickson said that spme of the lines would have to ho scrapped. LIFE OF PARLIAMENT.

Mr Dickson said that ho was in favor of extending the life of Parliament from three years to five years. (Laughter.) Mr Dickson: .1 am not thinking of my seat. I can look after that at any time.

Continuing, the speaker said that during the past thirty-two years over a million pounds had been expended on elections. Ho did not think that the throe-year period justified such an expenditure. One effect of the change would be that there would be less “canvassing” than at present, and it would also result in a number of business men coming forward. He thanked those present for the attentive hearing. Ho had always said that the people of Port Chalmers, even those opposed to him, were good "sports” and always gave a candidate a good hearing. (Applause.) QUESTIONS.

A lady asked if the candidate would agree to children under five years being carried free on the railways, and Mr Dickson said he was pleased to bo able to answer in the affirmative. He luwl supported it all through and would continue to support it. Tteplying to Mr A. Cable, who asked if money was taken from tho Consolidated Fund for Die Civil Service Suncrann.uation Funds, Mr Dickson, said there was not one such fund that seemed to bo on right linos, and all of them had to bo supported at times. Mr .T. Tail asked if the speaker was in favor of old ago pensions. Mr Dickson said he certainly: was, and added that ho believed that they should bo universal, and that everyone should be required to contribute towards them up to a certain age. To another questioner Mr Dickson _ answered that ho was in favor of pensions for tho blind. The candidate said, in answer to a further question, that he was in favor of a landing-stage for fishepnen at Port Chalmers. Ho had worked for it, and it was not his fault, or the Hallway Department’s. that it had not been erected three years before. The position now was that they could go on with tho cool stores and the* stage would bo erected to suit them. If not, they should nsk for a new stage where the present one was, and he would do his best to get it for them. VOTE OF THANKS. On the motion ■of Mr A. Cable, seconded by the Eev. Mr Bishop, a vote of thanks was accorded Mr Dickson for his address.