“VEILED THREATS”

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 October 1933, Page 7

“VEILED THREATS”

RESERVE BANK PROPAGANDA

MR. FORBES’ DEFIANCE

[PEE press association.]

WELLINGTON, October 27.

The House of Representatives mel at 2.30 p.m. when the second read ing debate on the Reserve Bank Bill was continued.

Mr. Harris said the Central Bank would make artificial manipulation of the exchange rate impossible. He was sure the Dominion would not have had to endure the present high rate if a central bank had been in existence last January. Mr. Stallworthy asked if New Zealand was to submit to world financial domination. He said that the bill was a highly technical measure, and the spectacle was presented of Government members not understanding it, though they would vote for it. There was grave reason for suspicion that one reason for the bill was to extricate the Government from the serious financial position due to high pegged exchange. He could not support the measure which would throw so much power into the hands of international financiers.

Mr. Schramm characterised the shareholders’ capital provision as a retrograde step. Mr. Forbes said he knew outside organisations had been attempting to influence the voting of Coalition Members on the Reserve Bank issue. He knew all about the resolutions which had been sent to Members, directing them to carry out the will of some organisation, which had arranged a public meeting at which a resolution was passed, after a speaker had advanced one side of the argument.

“It is a sort of veiled threat that they must carry out the directions of some self-appointed body,” he said, “but if Members were to have their conduct dictated in this way they would be spineless creatures, and it would be a poor look-out for Parliament and New Zealand. Members come here w’ith the desire and intention to do their duty to their constituents, without taking heed of threats. I have received a number of telegrams of a similar character, but Members of Parliament, and Members of the Government are in a much better position to judge these issue than the people who attend public meetings and pass resolutions. A Government which merely complied with resolutions could hardly be regarded as progressive because it would have to be driven.” Mr. Forbes said that if the Bill were not passed, New Zealand would be seriously handicapped and deprived of full benefits of the financial policy that could be carried out through a central institution in co-operation with other countries. “When Sir O. Niemeyer presented his report about two years ago, I had my doubts and I admit I did not thoroughly understand the value of the recommendations. Since then there has been full OPPO*' tunity for study and examination. We have had

EXCEPTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES for gathering information both at Ottawa and at London.” The Prime Minister said it had been unanimously the opinion at Ottawa Conference that a central bank would be of great assistance towards co-op-eration within the Empire. Mr. Downie Stewart had then visited London, and as a result of his conversations there, had cabled to the Government urging it to introduce central banking legislation immediately. All the experts represented at the World Conference had emphasised the importance of central banks in all countries, with the object of achieving financial co-opera-tion. The Conference had passed verydefinite recommendations on the subject. The very thing that the Government was aiming at was co-operation in trade and finance, but because it spoke of seeking co-operation with other countries it was accused, of being prepared to accept domination from other nations. Co-operation did not mean that one country would dominate another. One of the main bene-1 fits of the central bank would be that New Zealand would be supplied with information relating to world movements. If there had been a central bank in 1931, New Zealaria would have been in a much better position to meet the conditions which arose. It was absurd to suggest the Government did not control the Dominion’s monetary policy. As a matter of fact, it would have greater control than ever it had had previously. Mr. Richards said the banker-banks would eventually secure a monopoly of public credit and resources, and all undertakings would be controlled by banking institutions. Prosperity could only be achieved by increasing the consuming power of people, and there vas no provision for that in the Bill. Mr. Hargest said he believed the passage of the Bill would provide a institution of tremendous importance to the country and it was the duty of every Member of the House to see it was built on sound foundations. He urged the Government to retain the right to appoint the Governor and De-puty-Governor of the Bank, and he suggested that the rate of five per cent, on the shares was too high and should be reduced to four per cent. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr| Murdoch, and the House • rose at 5.30 till 2.30 on Tuesday. Mr. Forbes intimated that it was intended to proceed with the Bank .Bill on Tuesday.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

The Legislative Council met at 2.30. The Imprest Supply Bill and Rent Restriction Bill were put through all stages, without amendment, and passed. The Council rose at 2.45 until Thursday next.