LABOUR MEETING

Hokitika Guardian, 10 March 1933, Page 2

LABOUR MEETING

AD DR ESS BY R EV. J. K. ARCHER. PARTY’S AIM AT REFORM. - . *.% \\ j- <‘. s ; V/ The: aims and objects iof the Labour Party, ' and a denunciation of : the Coalition' Government, {and- the- condemn latte??* the main futures'of an. ; ,addresft given by the'' Rev, J, K. Arijl'ies, DeputyMayor of X'hrbtdlmi’di, ’ in the Town Hall last evening, under \the auspices of the Hokitika branch of: the Labour ■ Party. There was'' a'good? attendance, I and ,tl».’speaker kept, his, listeners in j good humour throughout. The chair was occupied by'Mr D. . Greaney, who introduced the speaker to; the audience.' j / . • ■' ' ■ s ■ ‘‘lllslihmg,, that has>impressed me least during my visit to; the Coast,” commended Mr ' Archer,' “is the wiriount of prospecting of gold •ftiat,' is ( 1 being carried on. 1 do not want to . he misinterpreted. This .prospecting ; for gold is proving' useful, healthy : work, and providing a ..little money for the men which is, of course, better than the dole. At the.;same-time'.this money problem is one of thq greatest questions of'the day, but I do not want to see .too much stress laid on gold so;: much -.on'' pr >viding :tjhe 'necessities : (rf life for the people.” To-Wyj 1 gold was ; useful as a machine, • standard - of ■ exchange, but he hoped that the revival in mining was not going to divert their attention from the main problems of the present day. These problems,were only likely to (he solved by. the. Labour Party. The reason ■ for . the present slump and its' consequences,, had come about because the principles' advocated by other parties had'been practised, ana that further consequences would result unless they got'rid of the present Government. • . ■ j - . ■ . ■ ‘‘To say that we have a Coalition Government to-day ■ is false; it is. really Reform, and the real leader is Mr Coates, not 'Mr. Forbes. At the present time we, have new. parties who are gong to seek allegiance at the next election, but these new , parties are re:..Ty old ones .under new\names, and new names cannot a Iter the principles of a party. The crowd in power now stand for only a minority, while the majority is represented by Labour, and the essential, difference between the; two is the difference as between j gold and manhood.” i Labour, he said, was not vitally interested in money, it was recognised that they must have; money as an econoniic machine, but Labour wa s more interested in humanity, with everyth : ng else subordinate to it. ‘‘Labour is sometimes charged- with being revolutionary, and mentioned j to frighten people,” continued Mr Archer. ‘‘Of course, - we ©re revnhto ticnaries, but Labour does not .stand for (revolution as it is generally under- j stood. We stand for social and'*eco-; norriic changes by constitutional' methods, by education, by legislation, bv administration, not by force.” The speakei - outlined the cause of the French revolution, which, he' said, resulted through the rulers refusing : reform until the people were goaded j into desperation. When the reyolu- •

tion in : Russia was first voiced, it was opposed by the people who were devoted 'to the Czar and-to the Church. -If the.' Russian government, supported by the 1 Cliurch, had given reasonable reform by constitutional means, there would never have been a- revolution. The veal authors of . 'this revolution were those, who were opposed to reform: Similarly, Spain had rid herself of her king who had become impossible. ,

if * “IT fever dofheto ftfrolu* ■ tion in New Zealand—.and I hope ! there never will—the blame will not i. 1)0! at the door of. the Labour Ityrty, j but at the door' of the reactionists in power. The real promoters of revolu--1 tions are the of reform. It .would be a wise thing if.this blundering Government would give some ato ' tention to this fact. The people of •New Zealand are not going to he proevoked to anger for ever. My advice to the Government is—drop provocation and adopt reform.”

Continuing, Mr Archer said that, Labour was against individualism and stood tor socialisation. Individualism was the acting solely in one’s own interests; with no regard tor anybody, and irrespective .of any consequences. Never had anything been misrepresented - so much as socialisation, sometimes by ignorance, and other times by prejudice. Socialism was the brotherhood of man, not talked about only, hut put into practice. Labour stood for the abolition of party politics, which system did not arise until the common people were given a vote. Labour stood for humanity, and represented the interests of) not a portion of the people, but the whole. Every man in New Zealand should have a reasonable standard of living before any man has more than a reasonable standard. As long as they had millionaires they had paupers. Labour stood for the abolition of both. Each man should get a, good day’s wags, but he must do a good day’s work. To date New Zealand had only produced a competene for everybody, and not an extravagance tor any. What was the real problem of the

present day. It was .not over or under production, but distribution. They wanted more production, but also an adequate distribution. There could be no over-production in New Zealand until each man was housed, well-fed, clothed, and enjoyed the comforts of humanity, which was the real wealth. In this country they had inadequate feeding among abundant production. Machinery was instrumental in reducing the drudgery of life to ,a minimum, and was not an enemy provided it did 'nothing to reduce income.

“There is no other cure for the remedies of this world to-day than socialisation,” concluded Mr Archer. On the motion of Air N. AAtorren, Air Archer was accorded a hearty vote of thanks. :