ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

Greymouth Evening Star, 1 November 1918, Page 2

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

; ——— Mil MICHEL'S SPEECH. AN EXCELLENT DEBUT. I By EBctrio Telegraph—Special to "Star.”, WELLINGTON, This Day. Mr Michel made his maiden speech in the,Legislative Council yesterday afternoon, in the course of it he said that he felt sure that if the post-war problems were so very important it would be desirable to bring about a coalition of the best men in all parties as a three-cornered fight would result in great difficulty in solving some of these problems. He expressed regret at the absence in tbe Governor-General’s speech of any reference to encouragement of gold production, as be believed steps, should be taken in. this direction to assist in placing the Dominion in a sound financial position. He 1 considered that the Mines Department wasted too much time in the investigation of old world ngs and exhausted mines instead of going in for a more speculative and enterprising policy by searching for new fields. Mr Michel applauded tbe work done by tbe Minister of Defence, declaring that its value bad been proved by < the Defence Commission.

Heferring to the cost of living he laid emphasis on ihe heavy difficulties confronting any attempt to effect a reduction, particularly respecting imported goods.

After a defence of tlie Government on the cost of livin'?, Mr Michel indulged in some criticism. Where the Government was at fault, he said, is in not issuing a proclamation or statement lo the people at regular intervals, showing why things have been done or have not been done. For instance, the conscription of wealth is only a catch-cry, hut it has sunk deeply Into the minds of many people. To conscript wealth would he disastrous when wealth is locked up in enterprises, hook debts, etc. What is possible, and rightly so, is the conscription of income, and that is being done by taxation. If the Government had pointed this out kindly it would have made a difference.

Another case was the Regulations regarding the non-publica-tion of maTI-closing times and sailings. They made one very annoyed at times. How were we to know that the presence of a raider made this necessary, hut even at the time we could have had some explanation without particulars being given. Seventy-five per cent, of the criticism of the National Government ip directly traceable to their faTure to keen the neonle informed.

COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENCE

A LABOUR INTERJECTION

When the debate was resumed last night, Mr Wilkinson took up the cudgels on behalf of the .National Government, which he vigorously defended against the attacks of previous speakers- Referring to the censure motion, he remarked that among the twelve Ayes wore four Liberal members, but not a single Reform member, which, lie declared, showed that the National Government still had the support of these. He also asserted that in fifty years ’time the people of New Zealand would pass an unhesitating verdict in favour of the National Government’s prosecution of New Zealand’s share in the war.

The member proceeded to condemn the butter tax as unfair to farmers and, while upholding the rising price of butter, was subjected to a running fire of interjection from a number of Liberal and Labour members. Turning In the member for Taranaki. Mr Wilkinson expressed doubt whether he would find it wise to agree with his lender, meaning Mr Hindmarsh, on the subject of butter prices.

Mr Smith : You leave the member for Taranaki alone. He will pick his own leader (laughter and interjections). Mr Wilkinson : There seems to be a split in the Labour camp already.

This attempt to draw fell short, however, as the Labour corner sat tight and silent beyond joining the House in the laughter which went round the benches, Mr Buddo, who followed the member for "figment, made a strong point in bis speech a special plea for the remodelling of our education system which, he contended, was cumbersome and expensive.

DEBATE CONTINUES. Mil. ANSTEY’S SPEECH. t>? SniH’DO Xf • ft? WELLINGTON. This Day. The debate was carried on last night by Messrs Anstey and Rhodes. The former speaker, in criticising the National Government, explain-, ed his vote on the censure motion earlier in the progress of the debate by saying that it was not because he had confidence in the Government, but because he had none in its Labour critics that he voted against the censure, as he had been able to detect nothing in the shape of constructive criticism in their arguments, which had been wholly of the pulling down order. He urged speedy elections, and declared that he was personally r n favour of a reversion to a party Government, as likely to prove more genuinely beneficial for the country. A statesman was now needed. He maintained that he would advance a strong progressive policy calculated to repair the damages made in the country’s resources by the war. The House adjourned at 11.30.