SOCIAL SECURITY

Grey River Argus, 23 May 1942, Page 7

SOCIAL SECURITY

Equal Sacrifice

AND WAR EFFORT. Replying to an interjection by Mr Holland, Mr J. O’Brien (Westland) continued his speech on the. Finance Bill, briefly alluding to the Social Security legislation, and equal sacrifice in the war effort. “I have a lively recollection,” 1 he said, “of the hon. gentleman’s contribution while he was on. the Social Security Committee. It was he who precipitated the trouble on it. Every time an attack could be made on soc al security funds, it was made. I have heard attack after attack from the Opposition benches. Oui' late very-much-revered Prime Minister, was not exempt from attack, and the hon. gentlemen have heard this in their clubs—Mr Holland: What clubs does the hon. member mean. Mr O’Brien: The Nationalists’ Club.

Mr Holland: I do not belong io any club. Mr O’Brien: There they have a new name for Bastion Point (where Mr Savage is buried) "Social Security Bluff.” They have no use for social security; and then they try to raid the funds. They say “no more rates,” —that the money in the care of the hospitals be taken from Social Security funds. I have even heard it suggested that money for defence should be taken from Social Security funds. Yet the hon. gentlemen nok that out of the social security funds, we are not paying out a very great amount. We do not want any advice from the Leader of the Opposition as to wheij it is possible to increase the Social Security benefits. When it is possible to increase them, this Government will increase them more than he would ever be able to. Mr Broadfoot: Look at these three lemons which I have in my hand. They were bought here a week ago. Mr O’Brien: Then put them in the oven to dry up—where you put the last one. One of the pet things that the Leader of the Opposition got rid of here was that he had asked the workers to work half a .lay for the State as a war effort. I think that, on behalf of the workers, I can back that up now with Ihe question to the Leader of the Opposition and his friends: Will, every other person in New Zealand give half a day’s pay for the War effort ? Mr Holland: I will if the hon. member will.

Mr O’Brien: I want every one to give it, and if they will, I am sure the workers will do the half a day’s work. The worker can do all the sacrificing and fighting, but the others will tell them how to do it ! The han. member for Waitaki spoke of men in camp who would not come out and help the farmer for £3 10s a week. How does that statement square with the Tory statement that the soldier is getting 7s a day, while the other man is getting a pound a day ? A little while ago I was talking to workers in my electorate, and they asked me about the 7s a day that men got for fighting for this country. I told them what a man would draw with a wife and one child, or with two children, which works out at over £6 per week. I do not think the soldier is getting too much. No money would pay lor his sacrifice. Though it is not fair to say he is getting Is a day and no more, and broadcast that through the country. Then they wonder why we do not want a National Government !

The hon. member for Mid-Canter-bury made a fine contribution to the debate. Perhaps we can take a ’eaf out of her book. I think the hon. lady won the admiration of the House for the excellent way in .which she delivered hei’ speech, and tne tolerant attitude she adopted. It was a very fine effort, but—Mr Holland: There is a "but.”

Mr O'Brien: I am not going to be harsh. I consider that the hon. lady delivered a wonderful speech, and everyone in this House thinks likewise. She said that a Labour Conference had decided against a National Government, and, she rather wondered why. I am sorry the horn lady is not in her seat, because 1 could give her some of the reasons. The suffering of the working people when the previous Government was on the Treasury benches is too recent for them to be forgotten. From some of the statements that have emanated from the Opposition benches we can see that there would not be unity if a National Government were formed. If half of this Party walked across the floor of the House, that would not make tor unity. When all is said and done, has there been any lack of war effort ? Has there been anything this Government could do that it has not done Everyone outside agrees that our war effort has been a worthy one. After agreeing unanimously to the postponement of an election, the Opposition Party is now advocating one, without pointing outone failure the Government has made. If the hon. member for MidCanterbury could remember the actions of the last Government, sne would not wonder why we do not view favourably the prospect of a National Government. If any good could come from the other side, or if any additional intelligence could be obtained from hon. gentlemen opposite, there would be some reason for a combination, but I do not think there is any need for it. The hon. member for Egmont said that, if a man had an income of £3,700, he- ! would only have £350 left after ah ' taxes were paid. In some directions, 1 that might be right, but it is not the whole story. It was not fair to , broadcast a statement like that, beI cause it dealt with excess-profit tax. Here are the true facts: If a man received £750 a year, after paying the increased taxation, he will have £543 left. If a single man receives £l,OOO a year, he will have £695 left. There is still room for contributions, particularly when working men earning £4 10s a week are expected to contribute. A man with a Wife and child, earning £750, would have £556 left, and if he received £l,OOO he would still have £709 left. A man with a wife and two children receiving £750, would have £579 Us 8d left; and if he received £l,OOO, he would still have £736 13s 4d left. I submit there is plenty of room mr more taxation there. Because some men pay 18s in the £l, that doea not mean that they are over-taxed. When we are taxing working men to their last sixpence, surely it is fair to tax the other men a little more. We cannot say that they are taxed out of existence. ' There are quite a number of matters I wanted to deal with but 1 shall have to shorten my talk somewhat. There is not a man m the Opposition that does not know what this country has done in connect on with the war effort. Even if one goes to the pictures, one can see New Zealand tanks passing one another, and one can see numbers of New Zealand bombers. Every hon. gentleman here knows exactly what has been done. It has surprised and astonished every one of us. We ha - obtained a greater sense of security in the last few months than was ever thought possible. ? We know that if Japan tried to invade Nev Zealand, we could put up a because we have a tradition to keep up. There will be no case of 70,000 men surrendering if New Zealand is

attacked I So, when we talk about war and the war effort, i.et us ye lair ! L.et us go oac-K to our electors and ten them the story, as we can teil it to our committees and others. We can tell that story without any breacn of confluence. We can go as tar as possible in mat respect. My own people, when 1 have told them, have oeen astonished at the war effort that we nave made right here in New Zealand. In regard to military training, 1 Know that our military men ciaim that it takes twelve months to train a man to face modern machinery. It taxes more than mat if he has not .equally good machinery to meet it. But it does not take that long to teach a New Zealander effectively to defend fns country. While we have, in our essential industries, quite a number of men who are not trained for wartare, we have also a number of men in camp who could go back to their essential industries for a period. , We have tested out their training tor one month. Nearly 20 per cent, of the men in the timber industry on the West Coast are in camp. They could be brought back, and another 20 per cent, could go mto camp for a month or more, so that they might be trained to carry a rifle and to shoot. The same applies to the mining industry, although the men in that industry have been keeping '.<p their production. What I would suggest in regard to men in the timber industry lould also be applied to the men in the mining industry, and to every one of our essential industries, until we had sufficient men trained to do the job that we might have to do.