CAMPAIGN NOTES

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXI, 27 October 1928, Page 15

CAMPAIGN NOTES

WITH THE CANDIDATES ■ NOTES AND SPEECHES “Are you in favour of reducing the salaries of members of Parliament?” Mr F. N. Bartram, the Labour candidate for Grey Lynn, was asked at one meeting. The questioner went so far as to suggest that the salary should he reduced from £460 to £l5O in view of the fact that a member of Parliament spent only 80 days in the House each year. “I aril going to be quite honest,” replied Afr Bartram. “So far from accepting the proposition of my friend, I am in favour of increasing tho honorarium. I believe the average man drawing a basic wage of £4 8s per week is a long way better off than a member of Parliament. Supposing I go out this election? 1 will tell you candidly that, if defeated, 50 per eent. of the members of Parliament are faced with bankruptcy.”

“A section of the community seems to think that legislation is a kind of magic wand,” said the Hon. R. A. Wright at Karori. When there was a full in the price for the Dominion’s primary produce the Government was blamed. Some people seemed to think that the Government could wave a wand and make money.

Mr Martin F. Luckie, Reform candidate for the seat, had told him, stated Air John Burns (United Party candidate for Wellington South) at Island Bay, “By coming forward, you are spoiling whatever chance I had.” “To that,” said Air Burns, “I replied —‘No, Alartin, I am not spoiling your chance. You never had any chance.’ And I said that because I believe that for Wellington South Reform is an impossibility. (Applause.) It is true that under first-past-the-post you do not always get the member you want; but Sir Joseph Ward has promised —if returned, as I believe he will he —to introduce the preferential vote. The Reform Party was pledged to electoral reform; and the only excuse, and a very poor one, that the Prime Minister could give for not keeping that pledge was: ‘lf people Want a change, they will get it, whether or no.’ That is so; and that is what is going to happen this time.” (Applause.) * * * *

Mr Dunbar Sloane (Reform candidate for Wellington Central) said that one of the most vital planks of his platform was provision for a universal State superannuation system. He had gone thoroughly into the whole scheme, and had satisfied himself that it was financially sound. He outlined a contributory scheme under which 2J per cent, .would he given by the' worker, 2J per ceVit. by the employer,' and 2j) per cent, hv the State. In six years time, when the scheme would lie operative, there would be established a nucleus fund of 42 bullions sterling. The interest and comphund interest, together with the contributions, would- enable every person in the Dominion,, rich and poor, to receive a) superannuation grant of £2 a week—that was £IOO a year for every man and woman over 00 years of* age. So that a husband and wife, at the age stated, would have as a matter of right £2OO a year from the State. Of course, there were many details that would have to be gone into, Put the actuaries would assist in workin«*them out. Most of the machinery necessary for the carrying out of the scheme was in existence to-day. Sucii a scheme must appeal to the intelligence and sympathy of all, for by this means the nightmare of want in old age, invalidity, and unemployment would disappear; and thus, also, much of om labour trouble would become non-ex-istent. A number ofcountries in Europe had already instituted such a system. * * * * A game of political musical chairs is contemplated by the United Party (savs the “New Zealand Herald ). All John S. Fletcher says that his party will vote with Labour to put out the Reform Government and with Reform to put out a Labour Government, and “the constitutional position will then he that the United Party will be called upon to he the Government.” Then, of course, everything will be quite all rio-lit. It is* to be hoped that the Unitcds, thus holding a balance of power will he in sufficient strength to fill all the portfolios. Half a dozen men could piny the political fool m this manner, and if Air Fletcher s idea is right about the “constitutional position,” they would have to become the Government. It is conceivable that one man might hold the balance of power and according to Air Fletcher’s reasoning lie would have to be called on to be” the Government. Thus we literally might have a one-man Government. But there is always the possibility of Labour voting with Reform to put Uniteds out and the whole function of Parliament becoming a “round the mulberry hush” sort of joke. It remains io be seen whether the country cares to contemplate this kind of a joke, even for the sake of discovering what will happen to the Ward millions that are promised to make a new South Sea bubble.

“The policy of the Labour Party is to remove the country from the toils of the financial octopus which is squeezing it and hindering its development,” Mr Bartram (Labour) said at Grey Lynn. Labour aimed at the establishment of a State hank as a first step in its march against the forces of capitalism. The extension of the State Advances and Public Trust Departments, and the entrance of the Slate into all phases of insurance business, was also .contemplated. That was why the financial interests were so definitely opposed to the Labour platform.

Mr X. J. Lewis, Reform candidate for the Wanganui seat, fired the first shot in his campaign at the Opera House this week. There was a large attendance, and the candidate received an attentive hearing, and was acclaimed at the end of his speech. The meeting was presided over by Mr John Coull, an exReform candidate, who emphatically denied the suggestion made in some quarters that Mr Lewis had been sent to Wanganui by the Prime Minister. It was the Reform Executive in Wanganui who had invited the candidate to contest the seat, and, after his address had been heard the meeting would realise that the selection had been a wise one. “Mr Lewis is a New Zealander, and a clean, straight-thinking, capubic young man,” declared Mr Coull. “He was born in Napier, and for some years resided in Wellington, but what does that matter? Don’t we like to have people come to Wanganui, speak well of onr town, stay here and help us to pay our rates.” (Laughter and applause.) * * *

“is it a. fact that you stood for the Wellington Suburbs scat,in Rllfi as a Liberal?” was a question put to Mr Dunbar Sloanc, Deform candidate for Wellington Central. “I stood against the present Minister of Education in ]!)]!) as a Liberal,” replied Mr Sloanc. “I was a Liberal then, and I ant a Liberal still, and let me tell you that the Reform Government is Ilf far tho most; Liberal jiarty in New- Zealand' today 1 ." (Loud applause,) Sped king at Kilbirnie, Mr It. Semple, Labour candidate for Wellington East, said the “so-called” United Party had long since divorced itself from the ideals and principles expounded by the late Mr Ballance and Mr Seddon. Indeed, in many eases it had “out-toried the Tories.” There were really only two parties in the Held—Reform and Labour —and the people’s choice must be between these two parties. • « * • “The warning is clear and the electors of this country should realise that by giving a vote to the so-called United Party they give a vote to Labour 01 Socialism.' The party that stands in the way and makes its polities personal, that can offer nothing, should be swept into the rubbish dump, where it beloims. The light is between Reform and Socialism, and politically the sane members of our country should watch carefully lest they let Labour in and have in this country the trouble, industrial and social, the taxation and the financial muddle that Australia has.’ Mr X. J. Lewis, the Reform candidate for Wanganui. * * * *

Li somewhat fervent tones Mr A. J. Stallworthy, the United candidate for Eden, dealt with the formation of his party and the democratic manner in which its platform had been evolved. Sixty earnest men had gone to Wellington, and so earnest had they been that not one even went to the races. “For two days and nights we kept to our job,” lie'said. “For two days and two nights we buried our heads”—here the candidate stuck for a word and made a pause that was not without its humour—“and got down to this great task.” * * * « It was the aim of the United Party to banish party politics from New Zealand, said Mr Kells Mason, United Party candidate for Manuk.au. It aimed at a state of affairs in which candidates would come before electors under no political banner in particular, formulate their views and be returned to Parliament on their individual merits. The individual members would elect their own leader in the House of Representatives, and they would work in the House along individual lines. At the present time the United Party represented all sections of the community, which after ail was not comprised of various social classes. “Here is the worst thing of the lot,” the candidate said after criticising various phases of tiie present administration. “The farmers of this country do not pay any income tax. One man last year with' an income of £120,000 from wool alone , did not pay. a. penny in income tax. The man in the city has to bear the burden for he had to pay land tax as well as income tax. This is a disgraceful state of affairs. The Wealthy squatters of this country pay nothing except possibly contributions toward partv funds.” 1 * » * *

According to Mr Bartram (Labour, Gray'Lynn)', the real fight in the coming* election was between the Reform Party and tho Labour Party. There was no difference between the political ideals and aspirations of the Reform and United Parties. He wished the electors to remember that both were anti-Labour, and that a vote for one was ns bad as a. vote for the other. “If there is a better one of the two, then it certainly is the Reform Party, for it is at least honest,” the candidate said. “The United Party is the biggest piece of political humbug ever perpetrated in polities.” (Laughter and applause.) * # * * Answering a question as to the United Party’s attitude with regard to a vote of no-confidence in the Reform Partv, Mr Munns (United, Roskill), said ’it would vote with Labour to put Reform out. If tlie United Party was the official Opposition, it would have the pleasure of moving the vote. (Applause.) A Voice: Mr Veiteh did not say so. “I cannot help that,” replied the candidate. “It is the policy of the United Party to put Reform out.” * * * # Mr A. <T. Stallworthy, United candidate, for Eden, said he had not given a pledge to anybody. As to party, he said he believed in being loyal to the captain of the team, but made it clear he would be no blind follower and that when leadership was not to his liking it would be his task to make his party and his leader follow him. Mr Stallworthy denounced the proposal of the Reform candidate to legalise Tattersall’s sweeps and to use the profits for building schools. “Imagine schools built of gamblers’ money,” he said, and added he might complete what the member had said with “And all go merrily along tlie road to liell.” A voice: “Doesn’t the Government get thousands from tlie ‘tote?’ ” Tlie candidate did not answer, but when this was put as a question, he said he could not speak for the party on the question of continuing the totalisator, but declared his abhorrence of gambling. * * * *

Referring to the policy of (he United Party, as outlined by Sir Joseph Ward, Mr Wilford said that newspapers might, criticise the policy, which was a fair attitude for them to take up, but they could not say the United Party had not a policy. The Labour-Socialist policy, said Mr Wilford, was: 1 Let us smash the Reform policy to bits. The United policy was: “Let us build and help our country.” 1 * * * *

Quoting the Prime Minister’s 'slogan at tho last General Election, “More Business in Government and Bess Government in Business, the Beader of tho Eabotir Partv (Mr H. E. Holland) declared at the Wellington Town Hall this week that that platitude did not get very far because in the conduct of the Government’s affairs there was no semblance of business method. /it times there was just a bare quorum in the House, including ten or a dozen members who were asleep. “There is no business man in this city,” he said, “who would dare to attempt to run his business on the unscientific and disorderly lines that the business of Parliament, is conducted upon so far as meeting and working hours are concerned.’