S. W. Smith Discusses Issues .For Election

Northern Advocate, 6 May 1949, Page 6

S. W. Smith Discusses Issues .For Election

HAMILTON, Fri. (P.A.). —The Government’s land policy, was steadily progressing towards it original avowed objective of state ownership of land, said Mr S. W. Smith, M.P. for Hobson, to a largely-attended meeting at Te Pahu last night.

He could never seen any difference between Socialism and Communism while both had for their objective the control of the country by a body of bureaucrats. Mr A. C. Baxter, Labour member for Raglan, had recently published a statement in the district that the Gpvernment’s land policy was the usehold, added Mr Smith. 'The whole trend of recent legislation was in the direction of putting an end to the

would assist this to be done would be to exempt farmers rearing pigs from taxation on capital expenditure. Cheaper manures were also necessary. The speaker said he regarded • the removal of the subsidies on fertilisers as a disaster. Mr Smith said there was only one man in the Parliamentary Labour Party who knew anything about farming, and while that was so farmers could expect little sympathy or assistance from the Government. The policy of the present Government meant socialisation, state control and officialdom, with bureaucrats in control, said Mr Smith. LEAN ON STATE It encouraged-people to lean on the state and to do less work for more pay, while it inspired hatred of all employers, and it regarded thrift as an evil. The Government preached the gospel that a man with his industry, his ability and his thrift had no legitimate claim to the rewards that these characteristics inevitably brought. It disregarded legal principles whenever they stood in the way of its policy. No Government had done more to weaken popular respect for the law. It had substituted tribunals, comprised of its own appointees, in place of law courts. It had used orders-in-council to an extent no other Government had dreamed of. - HOURS RATHER THAN WORK The Government believed in the philosophy of reward, for the number of hours put in at work rather than for work done. It believed in rewards of office for its own supporters. It imposed controls for controls’ sake. Mr Smith quoted Mr Ivor Thomas, who recently resigned from the Labour Government in Britain, as saying: “Hard work, thrift and honesty no longer pay. The paths of duty lead to the tax-gatherers’ office. The incentive of financial independence, which has been the mainspring of our economic life for centuries, has disappeared, and nothing else has taken its place.” Continuing, Mr Smith said the Government had flooded the country with paper money, decreasing the value of the pound by 50 per cent or more. It had penalised thrift, industry and initiative, and had placed an almost intolerable burden of taxation on the people. GREATEST GOOD OF ALL Mr Smith appealed to the electors to bring back a typ6 of Government that would best serve the interests of the country, and whose objective would be the greatest good of all the people and not of sectional interests alone. What was needed was a Government that believed in the freedom of the individual to choose his work, his home,, his leisure, and how he spent his money. One of the major principles of the National Party was _ work and individual effort, the lalv of supply and demand, rather than Government control, and,* above all, freedom from Socialist planners and dictaloi's.

SOLDIER SETTLEMENT \Mr Smith strongly attacked the operations of the Soldiers’ Settlement Act and the system under which land wee taken over at 1942 values. The restrictions imposed were responsible for the slowness in getting returned men settled, for farmers would not offer #heir land at a loss, while other owners of property and businesses received current values. Durir\g the three years following the 1914-18 war, 9041 ex-servicemen were settled on over 3,000,000 acres of land, while in the three years following the 1039-45 war 6500 ex-service-men were settled on 1,600,000 acres. He thought the money devoted to advertising* by the Food for Britain committee could be better spent on helping the. farmer to produce more. PIGS, FERTILISERS Pig production in New Zealand could be trejbled, and one way which