Grey River Argus SATURDAY, June 13th, 1931. MEMBER FOR WESTLAND.

Grey River Argus, 13 June 1931, Page 4

Grey River Argus SATURDAY, June 13th, 1931. MEMBER FOR WESTLAND.

So little relish have our evening contemporaries here and at Hokitika for the very remarkable contrast between the falling wages and the rising interest paid by New Zealand that they pretend, in their editorial comments upon the pre-sessional addresses of the Member for the District, to be quite unable to see the point which he has so clearly and convincingly made in that respect. They would profess to see no necessary or inevitable connection between these two divergent tendencies —the most outstanding features of our economic situation at the present time. There arc, of course, none so blind as those who will not see The only reply, however, that suggests itself to the “Star” is a bald assertion that few ideas in Mr O’Brien’s speech have any life in them. Surely that -remark presumes a very bad memory indeed on the part of its own readers when it has for months past been every day displaying before their , eyes the Australian press cables on the subject of the rates of inI t erest! Upon even the next page ' to that in which the remark appeared there was a cable recording the unanimous decision of Commonwealth statesmen to bring down the rates of interest on the jvast internal debt. To say, therefore, that the idea of comparing our rates of interest, not only with wages, but with the interest rates other countries, including those of Europe are paying—we might say, indeed, the decidedly lower, and falling rates —is an ' idea with no life in it is to carry the pretence at blindness beyond a joke. The “Star” asks what has the rate of interest Britain pays to do with the rate we pay We would like, therefore, to ask it a simple question, namely, by what standard, if any, does it judge of the equity and wisdom of our rates of interest, and of our ability to pay them? If it rules out a comparison with every other country, as well also as a compari.

son with the rates New Zealand . has formerly paid, we would be very greatly interested indeed to learn whether it has any standard at all, or whether it simply reckons that the money-lenders should be allowed to bleed the country white, without let or hindrance—without any Finance Bill ordering for them a ten per ( cent, cut, or any Court to carry I out an order to inflict such a cut. Does it consider it a prerogative | of the bond-holder to dictate from j abroad that the reward of labour I shall be lessened so that the interest upon loans shall not ? No, the ' idea of comparing interest with the rewards of labour and com-, i merce and industry is to-day un- ■ doubtedly far livelier than any I I other in the whole economic sphere. Whoever imagines otherI wise ought to pinch himself and make sure he is alive. The Hoki- i tika Guardian is at pains mainly to put up a defence for Mr Forbes, and to excuse his admitted breach of every pledge made by his Party upon coming into office. It says that as a life-long Liberal and follower of Sir Joseph, we may be sure that Mr Forbes and his colleagues were bent on pursuing the policy of Sir Joseph, and discharging the obligations he had taken up, but, says our contemporary, “a world slump rolled round the globe.” Now this is only another instance of underestimating the memory of the public, who well recollect that it was precisely the slump which the United Party set out to cure by their magnificent promises. The slump did not suddenly come : upon us just whilst Mr Forbes was away consulting the moneylenders oversea, but according even to the Government’s own repeated publications, it was in exI istence before they came into ofj flee. Our contemporary admits : Mr Forbes got his idea of wage- ; cutting in London, and it cannot deny that so far as he has shown the country since his return, that is precisely the only idea that he did bring back with him. The wages reductions are what the : “Guardian” calls “pulling the .' country through with a minimum | of discomfort for the country as j a whole. ’ ’ Presumably the classes I who have not been mulcted in the j toll taken to balance the Budget | represent “the country as a whole.” Those whose incomes have been cut down two shillings in the pound do not count 1 Mr Forbes, we are told .has not yet , revealed all his policy, and Mr ! O ’Brien has not given him credit for his taxation proposals, inelud- . ing an increase in income tax, but. has our contemporary the presumption to demand credit for the ‘ Government merely on account of 1 what it may expect from the Gov- . eminent? Is it a mark of states- - manship to put the cart before the l horse, and balance the Budget out of the pockets of the poor, leaving ? the rieh out until it can be found 5 how much they can be let off? s ■ Hell is said to be paved with good ■ I intentions, but the only thing yet ■ to the Government’s credit is the ; wages reduction and an increasing army of unemployed. When an administration is given credit for something it should have done but postponed doing, such credit Jit not worth much to it. Cheap money, according to the “Guardian,” whom the farmers at least, may be apt to doubt, tends to create boom times! What a terrible lot of harm, then, some : cheap money would occasion this country at the present! A boom ■ would simply be the last straw! At that rate the promise of seventy cheap millions was scarcely the sort of policy which Mr Forbes and his Party should have adopted at last election, and it is perhaps the nearest hint our contemporary gives as to why the 1 Prime Minister turned his somersault while he was away from the country where the money-lenders would doubtless put him wise to 1 the dreadful evil of cheap money. They must have found Sir Joseph a perfect bugbear, and this may explain our visit from Sir Otto 1 Niemeyer. Well, according to indications Sil - Otto must have himself learned a thing or two in Australia, where his directions to ■ balance the budgets are being • now followed, and the outstand--1 ing feature of the plan in ques--1 tion is the general interest reductions. It will be interesting to see 1 if that measure will have any influence upon the unrevealed part ! of Mr Forbes’s programme. It ■ certainly cannot fail to have an - eventual effect upon the policy of - this country. It has been suggest- : ed indeed that pur loan in Lon- > don failed because lenders may be ■ apprehensive that present interest ' rates are not calculated to endure. Perhaps so!