PARLIAMENT

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 7 August 1924, Page 5

PARLIAMENT

BUDGET DEBATE, THE LABOUR LEADER. (BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIAW^O WELLINGTON, Aug. 6. Parliament spent another day discussing the Budget, the debate occupying the afternoon and evening sittings to-day. Mr. H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labour Party) said the Labour Party had been accused of following the socialistic doctrines of Carl Marx. That was not strictly correct, because there were diffeienees of opinion in the Labour ranks on this subject. There were different schools of thought amongst Labour advocates, but he personally agreed with Marx, because he believed his theories were scientific. ?Continuing this line of thought, the speaker devoted considerable time to a defence of socialism tand some of its leaders in Britain, notably Mr. Kier Hardie and Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, and then passed on to criticise the business methods of several wellknown New Zealand mercantile firms who have business relations with; farmers, with a view to showing that these firms have the man who works the land in their grip. He quoted figures setting lout ithe nett profits made by these companies during the last eleven years, and then asked how, in the'face of such profits, could the farmers be doing well. Turning to secondary industries and the wages paid to workers, he quoted figures to show that there was no groitnd (for the jhllegfa/tion/ that the workers were not producing. It was not a question of production, biit what was wanted was a more equitable distribution of the fruits of labour. After quoting from Hansard a number of division lists in the House with a view to showing that time and time again the Liberals had saved the Government against the attacks of Labour, he claimed that they had a right to expect some degree of consistency on the part of the Liberals when they made attacks on the Labour Party.

Mr. Holland said that New Zealand should properly organise the produc-, tion of those commodities which this country could profitably produce. Coal was a case in point. We had coal enough in New Zealand to last for the next five hundred years if we were using coal then, yet we were importing heavy supplies of coal from overseas. We could grow an ‘abundance of wheat and oats, and yet one bad season left us dependent on outside supplies. This was due to the mxperfect organisation of production. There was 1 equal necessity for seientifio distribution. The country - was rich in natural resources, and all that was required was an equitable application ot labour to those resources together with iscientific distribution, m order to make the country rich and society happy. The Hon. G. J. Anderson (Minister tor Labour) said Mr. Holland’s reference to production and distribution was interesting but valueless, because it left out one important factor, namely, the human element. Not long ago he made an offer to the coal miners to work one of the State mines on a co-operative basis, but they would not look at it. They wanted their freedom; they wanted to work to-day and knock off to-morrow, and that was what they did. It was one thing to produce coal, but another thing to sell it. One of the first conditions to successful sale was regular supply, but- this was impossible under the present system. He instanced a mine which had a good sale for . its product, but the men struck, and it was now almost impossible to get a sale for that mine’s coal, because merchants could not depend upon a regular supply. So far as wheat was concerned, no Government could live if it endeavoured to compel farmers to grow wheat or oats. Mr. Holland: “I never suggested l compulsion.” Mr, Anderson replied that it could not be done except by compulsion, which only went to show of how little value the suggestion was. The Minister then defended his action proposing a, confiscatory clause in the Expeditionary Forces Bill, contending that it was aimed at certain disloyal people who were interfering with recruiting during the war. He regretted it had not been passed, because had jt become law it would have rid the country of many people who were a disgrace to it.

Mr. .Anderson did not claim to have a bnef for any rich companies, but he reminded the House that there were times when mercantile companies were not making money in New Zealand, but were losing it. The money which they had lost bad gone into land, and settlers to-daywere reaping the benefit from it Further, these companies were assisting many settlers, and deserved credit for the courage with Ti UC Af t !e f had - nsked their money the Minister said the debate revealed that the Liberal Party had no. policy at all, and the Labour Party had a policy which was pure socialisation of everything in the country. He did not know how this was to be done unless 'by confiscation.

~ € r Hon. D. Buddo (Kaiapoi) said the Minister for Education had. invited the Liberals to come over and help Reform but there was no likelihood of 'he Liberals and the Reformers ever agreeing on ,any general line of pol-

The debate was continued till 10.55 p.m., when the House rose till 2 p.m. to-morrow.