NATIONAL’S LEADERSHIP

Gisborne Times, Volume LXIII, Issue 10140, 28 October 1925, Page 5

NATIONAL’S LEADERSHIP

MR FORBES AT GORE. NO TIME TO TOUR NORTH ISLAND-

Mr G. W. Forbes, leader of the Nationalist paity, addressed a moderate attendance at the Theatre Royal tins evening. The- Mayor of Gore (Mr D. L. Poppellwell) presided Tho address was mainly on the lines of the Ricesrton speech. Mr Forbes presented the policy of his party. He said he would have liked to have made a more extendd tour but. owing to the unprecedentedly short time till Election Day, he would have to confine his attentions to the South Island. Men were required for Parliament whose advice and service would be of use to the Dominion and in this respect lie euloigsed the services of the local nat onal candidate. In connection with fusion he detailed the events leading up to the abortive conference. The Liberals, he said, wanted an entirely new party with a new policy to go to the country. Through the Reform leader’s promises to his supporters in the electorates and Mr Coates’ desire to fulfil Mr Massey’s programme, the fusion issue fell through. He challenged the Reformers’ sincerity 'n the matter, which was only skin deep, as was evident by Mr Coates making party capital at the expense of the Liberals at Palmerston North immediately after the conference. During the negotiations the Liberals party suspended all political activity while the Reformers were particularly active. He would sooner go out of politics than join the Reform party. (Applause). He was very disappointed in Mr Coates through the negotiations and after tho fusion failure the Liberals decided to test the matter at the election and go to the country as a Nationalist par-ty and make a wider appeal than that of the older Liberal party. They did not, liowver, give up the principles ofold Liberalism which they had always stood for.

Dealing with the financial position, the speaker held that the mortgage on the cuntry in 1914 totalled 90 millions and to-day it was 234 millions. He admitted that the great bulk of the money, apart from the war expenditure, was being used for useful re-productive works. But it was necessary to-day to increase production to pay interest, which was nine millions to-day compared with £3.000.000 in 1914. Dealing with Mr Coates as Public Works Minister the speaker said that in 1920 it was considered unwise to go to over two millions in expenditure. Mr. Coates, iu his first year, lifted the expenditure to over three millions. The-Increase was not due to higher wages and cost of material but was due simply to the incrase in the amounts spent which had risen to £6,000,000 for 192-5. “Give any man those millions” he said, “and he will get work done as advertised of Mr Coates.” Th speaker prdicted that no Pub--lic Works Minister in—cne fufur4 \voltld gflT thetitfe of “the Man who gets Things done” as there would be no money to get things done with. He dealt with the soldier settlement quoting from reports of the Land Boards which said the money had net been well spent. The land was extremelv uninviting, and ot poor quality. The Government had the power to take lands com-pulsor ly and could have prevented the boom occurring by putting into action tne compulsory clauses of the land tor settlement legislation. As far as land settlement was concerned, thej could not expect it from the present Goverwmifc. in 1919 Mr. McLeod (now Minister for Lands) referred to the misuse of land and need tor alteration in the sphere under which large areas of land were mtw hands for settlement. When Mr McLeod got into office he found another party in power—the large land owner. Ihe present Government had failed in regard to reform of the Legislative Council, which was still a refuge for P °Mi- CS Forbes referred briefly re the planks in the policy of the Nationalists, the need for cheaper phosphates from Nauru, the alteration of the electoral system as advocated by the Nationalists, the need to protect the public from the exploitation tV The propaganda “that if an elector voted for the Nationalists he voted for the Reds”* was characterised ns a slander by Mr lor lies. U liethei tin Nationalists were in a majority or not after tire election they would take into consideration the formation of < National Party and a national government which the were fifhting tooth and nail. A good man vested interests mere sheltung behind Reform. The Nationalists stood for the whole of the people, not foi “ r of A ’thank?'and confidence was carried by acclamation.—l .A.