PARLIAMENT

Manawatu Standard, Volume LV, Issue 238, 5 September 1935, Page 9

PARLIAMENT

NO-CONFIDENCE AMENDMENT

MOVED BY OPPOSITION LEADER

The Address-in-Reply debate was continued in the House of Representatives yesterday, when the Leader of the Opposition attacked the Government at length and moved an amendment of no-confidence in the A ministration. The reply in defence of the Government was made by Sir Alfred Hansom, who dealt with Labour’s plan and based liis vigorous counterattack upon it.

RELIEF PAY. SINGLE MEN WITH DEPENDANTS. CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Sept. 4. The Honse of Representatives met at 2.30 p.m. Mr A. S. Richards asked the Minister of Employment if he would issue instructions to the officers under the Unemployment Board to classify all persons having dependants as married men and to provide the maximum of work according to such classification. Hon. S. G. Smith, in reply., said the rules of the Unemployment Board already provided that single men should he granted relief on the scale of married men in cases where the board was satisfied it was warranted by the circumstances. LEAVE FOR MEMBERS. . Messrs H. G. Dickie, W. A. Bodkin and P. Fraser were each granted ten days’ leave of absence on account of urgent public business.

ADDRESSMN-REPLY. OPPOSITION VIEWS. AMENDMENT MOVED. The Address-in-Reply debate was resumed by Mr M. J. Savage, Leader of the Opposition, who said that, while the mover and seconder were speaking, he wondered what men like Ballance,, Seddon and McKenzie would have said had they been present. Those men faced difficult times, but they faced them with a common understanding of the problems to be solved. It was not so to-da.y; Royal Commissions and committees of various kinds were doing the thinking for the Government and doing it very badly. In many cases, if the great men who led the way during the nineties were present to-day, they would witness the destruction of the last foundation of the prosperity they laid so well. But how could it be otherwise when New Zealand had a combination of conflicting forces shaping the destinies of the country? The reason for the apparent unity between thoso forces was that they were facing a common danger to their political existence —the rising tide of Labour. . The reactionary forces which were destroying the foundations laid by the big men of the past had begun to j operate in 1912, when the Reform Party assumed office, and from that day to the present, with the exception of the short reign of Sir Joseph Wald from 1928 to 1930, the destroyer had been at work, Mr Savage proceeded, Between 1912 and 1928 over £166,000,000 had been added to the public debt. The people of New Zealand certainly had not got the benefit of that. Land and other speculators had received mom than their share of it and not a voice had been raised about inflation during that period, although they were spending more than ten millions a year in excess of the value of production. Be tween 1923 and 1933 £33,882 222 was added to the public debt. What was the Government’s policy? Was the country to have a debt in perpetuity, like a snowball, gathering as it went. Mr Savage dealt with the early actions of the United Party, hut said that with the death of Sir Joseph Ward the, lhst harrier of the combination o the reactionary elements was remov . UNEMPLOYMENT POLICY He referred to the passing of the Unemployment Act, and said that when the real story of the administration or that Act was written it would constitute one of the blackest pages in JNew Zealand’s industrial and social history. When tlie Unemployment Act was passed in October, 1960, there wei;o between 6000 and 7000 unemployed. A year later, immediately after the formation of the Coalition Government, there wcre’more than 61,000 registered unemployed, not including thousands of women workers, who, although compelled to pay taxes under tho Unemployment Act, were not eligible for employment. In July of'this year there were 55,000 men a charge on the unemployment fund. The full period of the life of the Coalition Government provided a story of. destitution and ragged clothing for thousands of men, women and. children, while alleged statesmen were discussing the restriction of production in order to make it fit with the shortage of buying power. He referred to tho number of railway construction works which had been stopped by the Coalition Government and also dealt with the reductions in wages and pensions. Mr Savage said that tho Agricultural (Emergency Powers) Act provided for a virtual dictatorship in the primary industries. The purpose of the Act appeared to he to squeeze the last ounce out of the industry concerned rather than to find means of paying for increasing production which was already an accomplished fact. The Mortgage Corporation had been substituted for the State lending departments, and to the extent that it co-ordinated those departments it would be justified ; but the introduction of private capital meant the end of the State lending institutions as long as the present Government existed. Coming to the Post Office Savings Bank deposits, Mr Savage said that Ministers were warning the people against the dangers of a Labour Government and the possible misuse of their deposits. At the end of the 1934 financial year the deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank amounted to £44,870,391, while the public securities standing in the' name of the Postmaster-General amounted to £45,676,403. It appeared from those figures that, if a run on the Post Office Savings Bank took place, the bank would be compelled to suspend payment. But that did not mean that tho country was bankrupt, for with an intelligent Government _ New Zealand would yet he turned into a comparative paradise. HIGH EXCHANGE OPPOSED.

Mr Savage then proceeded to deal with the rate of exchange. He said the raising of the exchange rate was the equivalent of an indirect tax on the whole of the people of New Zealand, the burden being greatest on large families. It was raised to assist exporters and it helped the exporter when he needed it least. A guaranteed price on the other hand would help the farmer when he needed it most and would not necessarily cost.

the whole of the people any more than the high rate of exchange. The high rate of exchange acted as a brake on Great Britain’s sales to New Zealand, which in turn must curtail New Zealand’s sales to Great Britain. A guaranteed price would have no such effect. Other points made by Mr Savage were the wage reductions made in 1922 and again in 1932 which had, he said, injuriously affected tlie Dominion’s trade, both internal and external, and ho urged that a policy of restoration should begin at the earliest possible moment, The reductions made in pensions should be restored immediately and a national system of superannuation covering the full standard of life should be made available to all citizens on reaching 60 years of age or invalidity. The financial transaction dealing with the surplus of sterling (£23,000,000) during and since August, 1934, was distinct inflation of currency, as it enabled tho amount referred to be used in Great Britain and New Zealand at the same time.

Mr Savage then moved an amendment to the effect that the Government “does not possess the confidence of the House.” This was seconded by Mr W. Nash. MINISTER’S REPLY. Sir Alfred Ransom, who replied to Mr Savage, said that ho welcomed an opportunity of exposing the fallacious policy as declared by the Leader of the Opposition. He said that what the House was anxious to hear that afternoon was, if the. country had no confidence in the present Government, wliat the Government that was to succeed it was going to do, and the Leader of the Opposition had not put forward any policy whatever. Mr Savage had stated that the national debt between 1928 and .1933 had increased by £33,000,000, but he (Sir Alfred) knew that if the Labour Party were in power and gave effect to their own proposals they would increase the national debt by more than £30,000,000 in one year. Sir Alfred Ransom regarded the passing of the Unemployment Act as one of the noblest things ever done. The sacrifice tlie people of Mew Zealand had been prepared to make under that Act to his mind was wonderful in the extreme, when they had regard to the fact that those in employment had contributed not less than £14,000,000 to meet the needs of their fellows who were unemployed. Referring to the fact that in 1931 the country gave the Government a blank cheque in regard to its administration, he thought ho could prove that the cheque had never been dishonoured and that the people of New Zealand were better off for having given the Government that blank cheque. The administration of the Governifient had been of such a character that none of the Dominions of the Empire could show a better record at the present time. Sir Alfred also proceeded to deal with the points made by members of the Labour Party in various parts of the country during the recess. Mr Savage had said that the prosperity of the country depended on the buyings power of tho people of New Zealand, but it should be well-known to Mr Savage that it depended almost entirely upon the buying power of the people of the United Kingdom, and tho buying power of the people there was ever on the increase. Under the present Administration, too, the buying power of the people of New Zealand was increasing. Labour’s policy, if put into operation, would more than double the taxation per head of population and not a single penny of it would come from overseas. The member for Lyttelton was frank when he said that the money would come from those who had it. CONTROL OF CREDIT.

Mr Savage had further said that the raising of tho exchange rate.had not lessened the British market for Dominion products, hut his own statement showed that the export of dairy produce had been doubled in ten years. New Zealand’s problem was one of price, not demand. Labour advocated guaranteed prices, but if this were to be done by 9. levy on imports it would mean raising the. rate of exchange from 125 to 150 if based on the average prices for tlie past six or eight years, Sir Alfred Ransom said. The exchange, however, was now a matter for the Reserve Bank to determine. Mr Savage had contended that credit should be controlled in the interests of the people by a national credit authority. It was controlled now by the Reserve Bank. Sir Alfred _ Ransom denied that recent legislation had established a virtual dictatorship in the primary industries and said, in effect, it did the exact opposite by removing their operations from political control to an elective corporation. Increased production, Sir Alfred claimed, was not a matter for regret. There had been a huge increase of supplies to the British market, hut it was a factor over which New Zealand had no control. Mr Savage had said that the adjustment of overseas debt should be attended to immediately, hut that was already being done as loans fell due. He claimed that this Government’s legislation and administration had kept the country’s credit good and that it was necessary to maintain a stable Government whose credit overseas stood high. Sir Alfred Ransom dealt at length with guaranteed orices and said that dairymen at a conference had rejected the Labour proposals and that was the opinion of men well versed in every aspect of the dairying industry. They endorsed the view that the scheme of guaranteed prices was economically unsound. He defended the formation of the National Government, which was done to deal with the problems of the depression. It had reduced rates of interest and. rent, which had benefited town and country alike. IMPROVED CONDITIONS.

The Minister said that the graduated land tax was intended to enforce originally the breaking up of large estates, but it was not now effective. It was a heavy charge on primary industry, irrespective of income, and was abolished by the Government to the benefit of town and country alike. The flat rate of one penny in the pound was applied and it meant a saving to Dominion industries generally of £1,000,000. There was indisputable evidence, Sir Alfred concluded, that the improvement in the country’s prosperity was both apparent and real, and he contrasted the position to-day with that of 1931-32. He said the trading position had improved, imports had in-

COUNCIL. TWO MEMBERS RE-SWORN

MEMBERS WARNED. PERSISTENT INTERJECTIONS

creased, wool and butter were up in price, the meat position was good, finances were buoyant, tlie bank returns showed an increase in business, the unemployment figures were down and the wages bill had increased by. £3,600,000. GUARANTEE OF PRICES. Sir Alfred Ransom was followed by Mr W. Nash, who defended the guaranteed price proposal. Referring to Sir Alfred’s statement regarding tho sacrifice by those in work, lie said he did not think any w’age earner who received anything over a living wage objected in the slightest to paying money out of that wmge to help his unfortunate brother, hut the tax was not fairly and equitably levied. He asserted that the British manufacturer was not satisfied with the exchange position, which raised a 25 per cent, barrier against British goods. He criticised the Government for endeavouring to pay back loans and "not borrowing when people throughout the last four years were starving. The Labour Party w r as concerned with seeing a farmer received a fair return for his labour; he wanted cash, and that was w’hat the Labour Party would endeavour to give him. Mr Nash was surprised that the Minister had referred to the Post Office Savings Bank, as he thought that sort of. propaganda had disappeared long ago. It w’as unjust and unfair, and the Minister knew that those with whom he was associated would not do anything to the people’s savings that he would not do himself.

Tlie member for Hutt criticised the Mortgage Corporation—practically a public body—for increasing the rents of houses which had fallen hack into its hands, which was done simply because there was an acute shortage of houses. He thought that legislation should be passed to prevent the corporation from raising rents to an uneconomic figure. Mr Nash twitted the Government with the things it was proposed to do in this election year, such as an improvement in soldiers’ pensions, invalidity pensions, national insurance, and standard rates of pay for the unemployed. Mr C. H. Clinkard said that it was humbug to suggest that the people of New Zealand could consume all that she produced and that she had to export her surplus in order to secure goods of which she ivas short. He would have liked the Labour Party to have given the House an estimate of the cost of putting their schemes into operation. Throughout the depression the Government had carried a pension burden of more than £3,000,000, yet not one word of commendation came from the Opposition benches for doing that. Tho debate was adourned and the House rose at 10.30.

The Legislative Council met at 2.30 p.m. , „ , Hon. W. 11. Mclntvre (Buller) and Hon. W. W. Snodgrass (Nelson) wtiose terms expired this week, were sworn in again as members of the Council. The Administration Amendment Act was introduced and read tho first time. Members of the Council paid tributes to the memory of the late Hon. James Craigie, and a motion of condolence was’ passed with his relatives. The Council adourned at 3.5.

WELLINGTON, Sept. 5. Comment made by the Lord Chief Justice of England on the subject of tree speech was recalled by the Speaker (Sir Charles Statham) m the House of Representatives last night when issuing a warning to Labour members who persisted in interjecting during the speech of the Minister of Lands, Hon. Sir Alfred Ransom. Mr Speaker said that the Lord Chief Justice had stated: “Liberty lias become a strange and fanciful thing if it means we are only prepared to listen to thoso who agree with us. . . . .” He asked members who felt that they could not agree with speakers to refrain from interrupting and reserve what they had to say until their time came to spefik. ‘T have listened very closely to members, and I think I ought to give this warning in the early stages of the debate,” Mr Speaker added.