Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 28th., 1932. DEBT AND POSTERITY.

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 October 1932, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 28th., 1932. DEBT AND POSTERITY.

'J’IIE story is familiar of the in- * ebriated man who having lost a. coin in one street, was seen look- 1 ing for it in another, defending his choice by declaring there was !

more light in the latter street. Such reasoning i s typical of that utilised by many, including Parliamentarians, when discussing the present financial crisis, remedies for losses too often evading the real cause of the trouble, namely, past extravagance. Recovery is sought under pleasant circumstances, the fact of where and how the money was lost being ignored if it runs counter to desire, or means hardship. That is why so many speeches, brilliant, perhaps, in themselves, have tailed to improve the national. lot. Search for scapegoats is made rather than search for the real causes of the trouble, and if such scapegoats, whether individuals, or classes, live abroad, so much the more popular target they make. 1 The overseas lender is coming in ' lor hard knocks, these days, being I.

pictured as out-Sliyloeking Shylock.) Forgotten are the many statements by Dominion Ministers of how high New Zealand credit stands, as was proved by the flotation of loans at loav rates of interest. Mr. Downie Stewart’s visit to London may result in some concession in interest payments, but as Mr. Forbes has pointed out, there is little margin for reduction in most of New Zealand’s national loans. It was the reluctance of overseas capitalists to advance more money to this country that helped to bring about the slump. New Zealand loan issues in the future will not be rushed by outside investors, if a low rate of interest is coupled with possibility of semi-repudiation. Borrowers cannot have it both ways. The orgy of loans made smooth the national path for many years. Rougher country has to be encountered. New Zealanders of to-day must face their difficulties with similar courage as did the pioneers their special troubles and handicaps. There need be no fear of the result, and meanwhile squealing should be discouraged.

“Posterity” has been prominent, in speeches in the House, this week, one Member (Mr. Hargest) being over-anxious about the unborn. He is reported to have said that the legislators of the past had bequeathed nothing but debts to the children of the future. That is a foolish assertion. Against the loan liabilities, there 1 are enormous assets. There is no injustice in passing on some of the burden, as well as the benefits, to future generations. That has happened since the Waitangi Treaty. Moreover, in these days of sinking-fund provisions, posterity is assured of a fair deal. The only safeguard the unborn are entitled to is that extravagance, to-day, should be avoided.

Posterity not yet having votes, Labour Members are not greatly interested in what happens. Mr. Parry in the House, last evening, indulged in heroics, declaring, “To starve the childhood of New Zealand, and practically ruin their constitutions, because the financing of assistance would create interest burdens for the future, is not only reactionary, but positively cruel.” Who disputes this, and, who proposes to starve to-day’s young New Zealanders? On the contrary, the nation has cause for gratification at the manner in which it has accepted responsibility for the welfare of those hit by the economic slump. “Starvation” talk is an insult to all. Let Labour produce their “starving” children. They have been challenged to time and again. A few individual cases have been discovered and their wants quickly relieved, but these were exceptional instances, and certainly do not warrant the efforts of Labour to besmirch the good name of their own country. Labourites should do a little less protesting, and give more practical help to assisting the distressed.