Full Employment—And Nationalists’ Policy

Grey River Argus, 15 November 1949, Page 6

Full Employment— And Nationalists’ Policy

The Nationalist Party has stated its opposition to Labour’s fundamental policy which assures full employment. The management of currency and credit by the Government as part of national policy is fundamental to the maintenance of purchasing power. The Nationalists propose to place this function outside the realm of Government. Import control is vital if New Zealand is not to overspend its export income and. to create an economic crisis. Import control also promotes the development of manufacturing industries and of employment for New Zealanders. The National Party hais consistently opposed import control and has at various times expressed its intention of abolishing it. One of the greatest measures of security brought by the Labour Government to New Zealand is the principle of bulk sale of primary produce. Cooperation between the New Zealand Labour Government and the Labour Government of the U.K. has resulted in the U.K. entering into tong-term contracts for the purchase I of New Zealand's dairy produce and meat. This gives stable prices for New Zealand farmers. Mr. Doidge condemns the principle of bulk buying. In an address at a National Party function in Wellington on Octobei’ 12, 1949, he said:— “One of the chief reasons for this state of affairs (Britain’s insolvency) was that Britain’s welfare state had been established without any sense of realism Social Security there had become a nightmare Another reason was the system of bulk buying.” The National Party’s antagonism to the principle of bulk purchase would cause great injury to the interests of primary producers and to the economy of New Zealand as a whole. Opposition to bulk buying is inspired only by the Big Business interests in Great Britain and in New Zealand. Full employment in New r Zealand is also promoted by conditions of financial economic stability. For this reason the New Zealand Government subscribed to the Geneva Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, but ' the Opposition opposed it, and Mr. ; Doidge in recent statements has continued to -condemn association with Geneva on a baseless argument that it injured trade within the Empire. DEVALUATION Mr. Doidge has condemned deval- ; nation in Britain, yet the only alter- < native to devaluation was severe deflation, with great hardship and , unemployment. . The alternative was the methods of > the past, which have been described . by Sir Stafford Cripps—“ln the old days this reduction in , price' would haVe been forced by J creating unemployment and bankruptcy. The unempolyed would not have needed any imported raw mat- 1 erials for they had no work, nor I would they have been able to buy J much food, for they had no wages. That would have reduced overseas ] expenditure. When enough people < were unemployed, fear and misery j would have made it impossible to t cut. down the general wage level, \ and bankruptcy would have forced a cutting down of other industrial costs.” ) (Broadcast Statement by Sir Stafford t Cripps, 19 September. 1949.) ; And MR. BEVIN

“Probablj 7 it is not understood that when the balance of exchange payments went wrong, the old system had one very simple method by which to deal with it. They restricted the purchases abroad, they called in credit and they produced unemployment; and I well remember on the Macmillan Committee in 1928 and 1929, or 1929 and 1930, saying to the then Governor of the Bank of England: ‘Why do you say that in these ditli- ’ culties it is better to keep people on j the dole than to employ them?’ and > his answer was: “You see, if you em- ■ ploy them, they have a standard of i consumption higher than we can i afford, and therefore it is better to j keep the people at the standard of ■ living that the dole represents than ] to employ them.’ ’’ < “The reduction of the standard of life, therefore, was the method ( which -was a free trade method, a cap- < italist method, for adjusting the diff- ] erence in the balance of payments i and the distribution of the equilibrim ; that followed.” j (Mr. Bevin at T.U.C. 3 September 1 1947.) I Deflation Advocated by Nationalists i and their Supporters. 1 Mr. Bowden, M.P. in broadcast 1 address, 29 October, 1949: 1 “It is not just so simple to reduce t the volume of money and credit but 1 it can be done, and will be done when the National Party becomes the j Government The quantity will be J reduced by a -wiser management of I the banking system of the country.” < “Unpleasant though it may sound, < a measure of unemployment, with in- J tensified competition for jobs and profits would have a salutary effect, and £ would do more than social welfare ' programmes to spur all classes of the 1 community to greater productive ' efforts.’ [ Leader—“N.Z. Observer/’ 28.9.49. 1