THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19141, 6 October 1925, Page 11

THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN.

THE MEMBER FOR ROTORITA FAITH IN NEW LEADER. LABOUR PART 1 / DENOUNCED. A MENACE TO THE COMMUNITY. [BY TELEGRAPH. OWN CORRESPONDENT.] ItOTOR.UA, Monday. The member for Rotorua, Mr. F. F. Hoekly, addressed the electors in that town on Saturday evening, when a representative gathering gave him a cordial welcome and an attentive hearing. He said he looked forward to a contest free of all personalities and rancour. There was not sufficient time between Parliamentary contests, he said. The smoke of one had hardly disappeared before they were running home the charges for another. Members had hardly time to show theft capabilities, and then there was the great expense the country was put to. Mr. Hoekly c'eplored the death of Mr. Massey, but they had in their new Prime Minister, Mr. Coates, the youngest man to attain that position in New Zealand, a man who had made a suecess of every path in life he bad undertaken —stockman, farmer, local and general politics and soldier. From the start he had made a mark in the House by his outstanding personality. Mr. ' Massey had picked him out from the beginning of his Parliamentary career, and when the time came he asked Mr. Coates to join his Ministry. Mr. Coates had shown energy, enthusiasm and undoubted ability. He had reorganised and revivified the departments with which he had been entrusted. He was a man with ability, energy, enthusiasm and shrewd common sense. A man armed with these qualities was bound to be a success. Mr. Hockey said he believed the people were going to give Mr. Coates a chance to make good. They could do that by sending the speaker back to support him. (Laughter.) Ms\ Coates' policy was justlike the man—clear,outspoken and practical. They would, no doubt, like the speaker, all have been struck by the last in the list: "More business in Government, and less Government in business." Workers' Genuine Welfare. The candidate said he was definitely opposed to the Parliamentary Labour Party led by Messrs. Holland, McCombs and Fraser. He was out of sympathy with them, but his sympathies were warm and deep for the. labouring man. He had worked with his hands for 42 years, on stations, farms and contracts, and should make as gsod a representative of labouring men as any ether man. He sympathised with the worker in his legitimate efforts to improve himself, but he was opposed to the Socialistic policy of the Labour Party, He was of opinion that these men were the worst friends of the Labour Party. He would never agree to any coalition that would put the present Labour Party in office. He was not in favour of a fusion of the two main political parties— Reform and Liberal—but he was so confident of the great disaster a Labour Government would be that he would favour it to keep them out, if found necessary. They must prevent Mr. Holland and his followers from occupying the Ministerial benches. 'He maintained that if there were only two parties, the time would eorne when the inevitable swing of the pendulum would result in the people returning a Labour Government. No matter how good a Government was, people got tired of it eventually. He was not enamoured of the three-party system, but recognised there was greater danger in the Labour Party coming into power. The Liberal Party was having a bad run at.present, not only in New Zealand, but in England and America. Though down now there was no reason why they should not come to the fore in years to come, and this would give an alternative to a Labour Government. Referring to the attempt at fusion, Mr. Hoekly said the breakdown of negotiations was inevitable. They found they could not give pledges on behalf of their supporters. The proper time for fusion was after an election and not before. Sound Financial Position. Financial stability, said Mr. Hocklv, ! was the best index of good government. J If the country was prosperous and progressive there was little wrong with it. j This country's credit to-day was as high I as ever, as high as that of the Mother I Country, and higher than that of Australia, as proved by interest paid for j loans. New Zealand paid £4 15s 3d per j cent., the same as the County of London, and New South Wales £5 Is 6d. Their public debt was huge, namely, £227.814.000, owed by one and a-quarter million of people. This was some indication of a wonderful country and a wonderful people. The war indebtedness was £76.000.000; £21,500,000 was invested in advances to settlers, £10,000,000 to disabled soldiers, leaving the ordinary debt £120,000.000, not much more than before the war. It must be remembered, too, that of this 227 millions, 104 were held in New Zealand, three in Australia and 121 in London. There was no question that the country could carry the load comfortably, and it had to be remembered | that each loan was supplied with a sink- I ing fund, which was steadily decreasing j it. The buoyant products provided the [ reason for the soundness of the country's • finances and its ability to carry the debt. Advances to Farmers. After dealing with the Government's reduction of taxation, Mr. Hoekly said it was keenly alive to the fact that farmers must have money on reasonable terms. The Government had recognised that cheap money for farmers was a sound policy, and since 1923 had steadily increased its advances. Mr. Clinkard had stated that only the wealthy could secure, advances. .No more mischievous or untruthful statement had ever been uttered on a public platform. The advances were made strictly in the order of application. The use of the word corruption was an insult to the Department for Advances to Settlers, and he resented and repudiated the suggestion. (Applause.) He gave it an emphatic denial. The Government proposed to raise in- j ternally a £5,000,000 loan for the department. The farmers' party candidate, Mr. Colbeck, had advocated an agricultural bank. In that very direction the Govern ment had sent abroad Messrs. Poison, Cox and Esson, all experts, to invest! gate the best system. Mr. Colbeck had said it was a waste of money, but Mr. Poison was chairman of Mr. Col beck's own organisation. It was stated that the land banks in Denmark had been extremely successful and lent money at 4 per cent. That was misleading. The Government advanced on joint and several bonds. Those bonds had to be negotiated and the net result was £770 for every £IOOO, but the £IOCO had to be repaid. The candidate dealt with the Government's policy in regard to housing advances for workers and then went on to speak of its land policy. It stood for freehold, and would extend it to every Crown tenant. t After ridiculing the term " usehold adopted by the Labour Party Mr. Hockley trenchantly attacked its land policy and other'aims. He defended the Legislative. Council as a valuable chec«» on hastv legislation and concluded by saying he stood to defend the Government s policy. He laid his cards upon the table and the public could judge. A vote of thanks and confidence was carried by acclamation.