The Grey River Argus THURSDAY, May 7, 1942. OPPOSITION AND RETRENCHMENT.

Grey River Argus, 7 May 1942, Page 4

The Grey River Argus THURSDAY, May 7, 1942. OPPOSITION AND RETRENCHMENT.

_ Many might 'credit the Opposition Leader’s remark last evening that a few years ago it would have seemed ridiculous to thiuk of New Zealand now spending a hundred and eighty-six millions in a year. But equally ridiculous would then have seemed a prediction of the present expenditure of Britain or America. Mr. Holland at least considers that nobody to-day could question the need of the money—but all the same he is out for retrenchment! The sacrifice so generally of the forty-hour-week has not satisfied his Party, who want the public servants to work longer hours, not to save, but to release more men for other purposes. His demand to curtail public enterprise is not logically supported by the contention that recent wage increases ought to have been substituted by pension increases to the same extent. In that event the State expenditure would have been yet greater, whereas the workers give surplus value for the increase. This is not tp say, of course, that many pensioners could not do with an increase, even if they may need to wait a long time before the Opposition definitely propose it. (Mr. Holland is more concerned ' about the incomes of elderly people who live on savings than of people without savings. The. former may have been hit, but the Social Security Scheme is there for any of them whose incomes may have been reduced below the benefit level. No doubt the public servants will have their own reply for the Opposition, whose philosophy is well exemplified in the Leader’s assertion that at the start of the war “costs should have been frozen.” It is rather late for this suggestion. Since the Government has by subsidy “frozen” consumer prices for more essential goods,-it is doubtless wages only which the Opposition Leader would place in the refrigerator. His plea for farmers may have its merits, but it is ambiguous to call them “rural workers,” as nobody ever heard the National Party urging higher pay for any farm employee. Mr. Holland drags in import regulation to explain the present economic position, but had it not been in vogue, the country would have to-day far less taxation resources. In view of the surplus in the Fund, it is difficult to see

ivliat Mr. Holland means when he complains of the Social Security Scheme. If he can, however, show how greater economy in the war effort and otherwise is compatible with efficiency mid security, the public may consider his proposal for committees to ! study the accounts. The expenditure is certainly enormous, but so is the need —and the risk. New Zealand is facing up to the risk efficiently, and that is the main thing to-day.