LABOUR'S POLICY

Northern Advocate, 20 September 1921, Page 7

LABOUR'S POLICY

(To the Editor)

Sir.—As a member of the audience that heard Mr Holland's address on the 15th inst I should like to state my opinion, and the very inadequate way; in which he is reported in the columns of your paper, also to the biassed crilicism which you tender in your leaders. As a unit, I went to the meeting very nyich prejudiced against the speaker, partly due to his position as leader of the party and without doubt due to the way his speeches have been reported and abused by the Press. My prejudice was also influenced by the address given' in the Britannia Theatre on a previous occasion by a Labour representative in the House. But the address given by Mr Holland on the 15th thoroughly captivated me: it was so clear and concise in conception. At the outset Mr Holland clearly proved that" we are the losers by vhe war, by the seizure of enemy goods and material and also her natural products, land that matters are not improved by | the Government selling these seizure-J jat a nominal cost to the merchants l and industrial concerns of the Allied | nations. He proved that the reverse | is the case; that whereas these p3ople should be straining their utmost to overtake the ravages war has made, they are in effect living by the products and materials Germany is handing over, and making destitute those who in times past depended upon them for a pittance that they too might live. C»ming to the question of finance, 1 think if your columns had faithfully reported his address, it would liavo shown that Mr Holland was building upon the solids that are left from the crumbling legislation of the past. Mr Holland is a defender of Labour and its ideals. His desire was to show how past legislators had made it possible in times of financial stringency for the big financiers and their concerns to tide over the season of distress and eventually rise supreme, when trade recovered. He also proved in his remarks on the subject, that the legislators of that date, as the people's representatives, were untrue to their trust, because they bolstered the huge concern to the detriment of the small concern; that the business of the big concern, their financial supporters, was secured against loss by national credit, but the small business financed by the man of limited means was allowed to go to the wall. As a labourer, I ask, why should the man with plenty, be guaranteed by the State, while the man with little (and that little the result of his thrift, in saving from the piftarse.es , and crumbs thrown to him from his more favoured brother), why should his thrift be allowed to sink in the maelstrom of adversity? In your leader you sneer at Mr Holland's idea of a State bank, owned and supported by the .State. Surely if the State's resources are sufficient to support it in times of financial Tuin, they should be able to do so in seasons of progressl and prosperity. Your reference would j presume that paper was a principal ne-' cessity, and that with a little printing press would do all the work essentia). Are the country's resources so few and so limited that we have nothing to tiade with—-our gold, and coal and other minerals? Then there arc the products from the farm, while we are not without industries, and cannot the ' returns from these industries and other sources be diverted into the custody of the State, and with the State's guarantee behind it, in preference to the coffers of the private bank and its individual guarantors? Then your reference to the high cost of living. You make no mention as to it:; chief causes. You quite Mr Holland as saying: "If the men in the trenches fought for anything material, thoy fought to maintain the property interests," and again, "When it was found

necessary to raise money to protect the property of the wealthy, the money was found, and now the people had to shoulder the burden of interest." In these words, Mr Holland describes the causes which have led to the high cost oi' living, and in between these two statements he referred to the apathy and unpartiotic character of the men who were chief beneficiaries by war While the' country paid £1,880,000 to the soldier and his dependants, it was paying nearly £5,000,000 in interest alone to the men who merely lent tiwir money, and it is here, Mr Editor, where you rally to the support of the eier, whom you place under the pseudo' of producer. You quote Mr Holland as being astute in his argument and with it winning tribute from people who do not think for themselves. Mr Holland's intentions, I feel confident, were pure. His contention was to show that if the financiers had money to lend

and were sincere in their desire to tielp the nation, they could have given of their wealth without making it

charge upon public credit. As JalMi-.jr-ing men we are constrained to ask why our young manhood was taken from our hearths and homes to be a target for the enemy. These young men who hail nothing to give but their service and life, which was the fullest title and value that could be given, we ask why should they give it when the wealthy were withholding their plenty until they could be guaranteed their fill of the spoil that would be exacted when the war was over?

I also think Mr Holland gave us a very able exposition of the way in which the people should b? {fixed. You in your leader refer to the importunity of the present Government of New Zealand. My own impression is that if the Government was more sincere in its demands, that those people from whom you 6ay the money cannot be collected would soon pay up. We cannot fail to realise that these men are defying the Government to deal with them. It' it,

were men in poor circumstances, who eculd not afford the means of defence, the Government would have no compunction in sending them to goa]— "Remember Poplar"—and I quite agree with Mr Holland that taxation and its graduating principle should start with men who top the list with their proportion. Men with*£lo,ooo income could well afford to pay 50 and even GO per cent, as tax in preference to the man with him £400 paying 6 per cent., and it certainly should be those who ought to be made pay for tlie j ravages war has made and in its turn reduce the national debt. Then again, Mr Editor, you accuse Mr Holland and his party of disloyalty. It is to be regretted that they may have acted indiscreetly by trying to frustrate the efforts of the recruiting staff, but did the Government serve any real good and useful purpose by coercing men against their convictions. Your reflections in my mind arc more like :t boy who has been beaten in friendly combat, who, when his adversary's back is turned, picks up the stones over which his adversary has trodden and hurls them after him. Trusting for your clemency by inserting this in a further issue of your paper, —I am, etc. LABOURER. BOROUGH RATES (To the Editor) Sir. —Along with other ratepayers I am in receipt this morning of my rato demand from the Town Clerk and attached thereto is a slip with the following:—"Your are respectfully requested by His Worship the Mayor to pay your rates at the earliest possible date, as the bank overdraft, now amounting to £18,000, represents a direct loss to each ratepayer of 2s in the pound in interest charges alone until reduced. You will therefore sec that it is ia your personal interest to reduce this overdraft." I have had pleasure in rei spondiug to this appeal by sending on my cheque, and trust that the majority ,of the ratepayers in the Borough will do likewise, but I fail to see where the 2.-' in the pound interest comes in. Calculating the interest at 7 per cent per annum on the period to 31st March, say, -six months, means 8-Jd in the pound. Can you enlighten me, Mr Editor? Thanking you in anticipation—J am, etc. PUZZLED. (Interest, at 7 per cent, on the overdraft of £18,000 amounts to £1260 for the year. The rates amount to £12,000, and if the whole of this amount were not paid .till March 31 next the interest on the overdraft would amount to about 10 per cent, of the total sum paid in rates, so that 2s in the pound would go in payment of interest. This is the way the Town Clerk look-, at it. his only anxiety, of course, being to save the borough money. It is to be hoped that any ratepayer who feois inclined to take his pen in hand and make a calculation will use fhe back of his cheque-book for the purpose, so that when he has> finished his pleasant exercise he will not forget to write a cheque for his rates. —Ed. "N.A.";