The Debate Goes On

Northern Advocate, 8 July 1938, Page 3

The Debate Goes On

I Per Press Association.—•Copyright.] WELLINGTON, This Day,

Continuing the Address-in-Reply debate yesterday afternoon, Mr D. W. Coleman <Government—Gisborne) said the previous Government was concerned over the plight of farmers, 50 per cent, of whom were unable to meet their commitments, but the best that the Government could do was to put the farmer on a budget and give him 25/- a week to keep his wife and family. Farmers throughout Now Zealand, he believed, were very well satisfied with the treatment received from the present Government. The guaranteed price scheme had. given them security and stability. Freeholding Help.

Mr T. H. McCombs (Government— Lyttelton) criticised statements made by, the Leader of the Opposition throughout New Zealand during the last month or two. The Labour Government, through the State Advances Office, had assisted people to purchase the freehold of their own homes. Many people who rented houses did not wish to own homes because they were continually being shifted from one part of the Dominion to another, and they found the owning of houses In such circumstances a distinct disadvantage. Different Points of View.

Mr C. H. Petrie (Government —Haurakl) suggested that Opposition speakers appeared to regard prices quoted for New Zealand stocks on the London market as a test of good Government. but Labour applied the test of happiness and prosperity of the people. They should have security and not be agitated by a poverty scare which the Opposition were fond of presenting. He contended that the Governmentendeavoured to apply Christian principles to economic problems, ancLbring social justice to the people of New Zealand, because economic poverty was contrary to the principles of Christianity. The Leader of the Opposition might not understand that philosophy, but he had no right to impute unworthy motives to the Government. Having been brought up in the austere atmosphere of the Middle Ages. Mr Hamilton seemed to be annoyed at the idea of human happiness. Mr W. J. Poison: That is a Christian thought. Mr Petrie declared that Labour had thought out its policy, and refused to be tied to orthodox methods. It had the courage to challenge the old order of things to improve the people’s lives.

Social Justice. Mr E. D. Meachen (Government— Wairau) said the Labour Government was bringing to the people of New Zealand social justice in a practical form for the first time In the country’s history. The Opposition had criticised the Labour Government’s policy in building railways, yet the Leader of the Opposition was pledged to complete the South Island main trunk railway if his party were returned to tiie Treasury benches at the next election. The Opposition had strenuously opposed tile, completion of this line when Labour proposed 10 do so.

Mr Meachen also staled that ample opportunity was provided by the Government for everyone who wished to do so to own their own houses. He considered the Gcvcrninent was doing the correct thing in erecting State rental houses, and congratulated (he Under-Socvetpry of Housing on the work he was doing. Mr Lee's work had proved a triumph of organisation. State Interference. Mr D. Barnes (Government—Wailaki) said justification for State interference was because private enterprise had failed to provide organisation for cheap and essential services. The Government only interfered when it was to the advantage of the people to do so. Members of the Opposition accused the Government of State interference. but previous Governments bad taken more control of the economic life than the present. Government had taken up to the present. No Alternative Policy.

Mr W. T. Andertcn (Government— Eden) stated that when previous leaders of the Opposition moved noconfidence motions in the House they always submitted some alternative policy, but the present. Leader of the Opposition had failed to do sc. Mr Anderton added that he believed the present Opposition had no alternative policy to present. He refuted the Opposition's allegations that Labour had been responsible for increased tax-

ation. slating that in 1935 taxation on actual income in New Zealand was 24.(5 pec cent., in 193(5 it was 21.3 per cent, and he estimated that in 1937 it would be something like 22.1 per cent, it could be seen from this that Labour had not increased taxation at all. I Referring to defence, lie said the defences of this country were in a boiler stale today in relation to the needs of the present time than they had ever been rn the history cl the country He also considered that defence mat I terr. should be outside party politics, i “Private Grab,” • Mr D, McDougall (Independent 1 Mat a ura> said they had heard a lot j about private enterprise. What war. : private enterprise he asked, but pni vale grab'? No one entered a company 1 for the good of the company, but fra his own good It was really private 1 grab, but private enterprise was only

; a fancy name which Hie Tories applied to it. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 5.30. Continuing when the House resumed at 7.30. Mr. McDougall said flK‘ Leader of the Opposition ai a meeting at Hamilton, had been asked 10 explain the compensated price scheme for dairy produce, and he had replied, “you would not understand it if I totd you.” Did the Leader of the Opposition, or any member of his party, understand it? asked Mr. McDougall. It seemed to be a mystery. National Superannuation. Mr. J. O’Brien (Government-West-land) said that in 1935 Mr. Forbes and other members of the National Party had issued a manifesto in which 11 was stated that a scheme of national superannuation would be investigated and introduced when finances permitted it. but now, when the scheme had been put forward by the Government. Mr. Forbes had said it could not be done. Mr. O'Brien was sure there was not a fartner who would give up the guaranteed price scheme advocated by the Opposition. Mr. Semple Refutes Criticism.

The Minister of Public Works, the Hon. R. Semple, said the member for Clutha had made a statement in the. House that the Public Works Department was spending £200,000 on one mile of road in the Clutha constituency. The actual amount spent to date, said Mr. Semple, was £5,400. and the total cost, would bo £9.200. He was amazed that anyone could make such a statement. Main highways were being improved throughout New Zealand, which was the. second highest motorised country in the world. The Government was attempting to reduce the number of fatal accidents. New Zealand was the only country in the world that showed 30 per cent, increase in motor traffic, and no increase in fatal accidents. They had a responsibility to build, a reading system that would measure up to any in the world.

Mr K. J. Holyoake (Opposition— Motueka) said the road in Clutha to which Mr Semple had referred was a glaring example of waste of public money. It was an example of where the money could have been diverted to roads giving access to farmers in backblocks. Government’s Objective. The objective of the Government appeared to be the socialisation of everything, said Mr Holyoake, who referred to the Government’s control of transport services and iron and steel. Mr Holyoake advocated putting more people on the land, and increasing the production of fruits, tobacco and other products that could be consumed in New Zealand. Communists And Labour. The Minister of Labour, the Hon. H. T. Armstrong, denied that the Communist parly in New Zealand supported the Labour Party, and contended that the Communists must bo financed by the Nationalists because he knew they could not be financed by the Labour Party (Opposition laughter.) Labour stood lor sane Socialism. He wondered what sort of hotch-potch capitalism the Nationalists stood for. The Minister stated that the Leader of the Opposition and members of his party wqto not so outspoken in this House as they were at garden parties. In Mr Hamilton’s first broadcast he had accused the Government of “rigging" unemployment figures, but these figures were being presented in exactly the same manner as that adopted by the previous Government.

Lack of Publicity

He stated that he had been giving details of unemployment figures for the past month or two. but the papers, except perhaps for a few back country journals, had not published' them. Yet the editors of papers were calling, cut for figures they would not publish.

The Minister said his speeches were not sent out by the Press Association like those of the Leader ot the Opposition. Mr Armstrong said there were Ifi.GOO more people working' in shops than previously. 25.000 in factories, and 20,000 in other avenues of private employment, making a total of 61,000 more in private employment. There were also 18.000 more employed by the State, making 79.000 more people in employment on March 31 this year than when the Opposition was in power. This Government, by offering a job to everyone who was not employed in July, had created a record for any Government since 1890. Mr J. Robertson 1 Master!on > said ho had been struck by the absence of any constructive proposals for better Government of the country in the Opposition’s criticism of Labour’s; policy. They had listened to nothing but criticism, and the Opposition had put before the House an amendment which was a complete proof of poliI ieal bankruptcy The debait? was adjourned at 10.20 and the House rose. “No Provision For Human Machinery.”

j The Address-in-Reply debate was, | continued today by Mr C. A. Barrel) j i Hand lion') who criticised the Oppoi ration's election tactics and its method iot disseminaiim; propaganda. He j staled that, in lhe overhead expenses ! w industry ample provision was made i for tin? care and maintenance of j machinery and its depreciation bur i no provirion war. being made for the \ human machine A man could give ■ \ears c;( service, then break. and no j provision be made for him He could 'be forgotten. Prut inn bind of thing war go mg’ lo end under me social • ecurity measures which the Governi moot proposed to introduce

! Referring t.o the four colonels who ■ had recently 'peem retired, he stated i that these men knew the regulations and they had deliberately' broken oaths they took when they received their commL.sions. Mr Barrel! added that he had no sympathy with them at all. What of Russia? Mr A. Campbell (Govt.. Chalmers t I declared he had received the impression from the speeches of the members of the Opposition that an attempt was being made to stampede the Minister of Defence and his colleagues. Labour Ministers fully realised the importance of taking adequate' measures for the defence of the Dominion. When the present Minister of Defence look over the portfolio, he found the equipment out-of-date and an ammunition shortage. "1 think the Minister of Defence was right in putting down the four colonels,” continued Mr Campbell. ‘Tn my opinion Tic made one mistake. He should have stripped them of their peacock feathers and put them In civilian clothes. We hear a lot of talk about Russia in this House, but I am of the opinion that if the four colonels had been in Russia they would have been given 12 hours to prepare for that long journey from which nom* return.”

Referring to work on the waterfront he contended that the trouble there was created largely by friction caused by Ihc employer, and the quicker the shipowners tried to get into co-opera-tion with the watersiders, the quicker they would get the work done.

Mr J. F. B. Gotten!! (Govt., Wanganui) said the Opposition members had done a lot of talking up and down the country, but had nothing of a constructive nature to offer. The country was very interested to know what the Nationalist policy really was. He contended that civil servants under this Government had full political freedom, which they had not experienced before. Mr J. Hargest (Oppsn., Awarua): What about the four colonels? Mr Cotlerill: As a military man, the Hon. Gentleman should know the implications of some safeguards which must be applied, notwithstanding that, the civil service today has full freedom of political expression. Mr Barclay Speaks. Mr J. G. Barclay (Govt,, Marsden) asked the Leader of the Opposition to state if he would discontinue the broadcast of proceedings in the House if the Opposition were returned to power at the election. . Referring to the dairying industry, he said if there were one thing which the Hon. W. Nash had done it was to eliminate the influence over the dairy industry of different mercantile houses. He also contended that as the Government’s marketing policy was being developed it was having the effect of improving the quality of our dairy produce. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 1 p.m.