The New Zealand Times. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1919. THE BUTTER BRIBE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLV, Issue 10431, 8 November 1919, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1919. THE BUTTER BRIBE

It would be impossible to find a parallel in the political history of this country for the scandalous bribe of £340,000 that is being paid by the Government to the butter producers and manufacturers to influence their n-otes on the eve of the general election. If the people of New Zealand, whose money is being so shamelessly misapplied, are .prepared to submit to this indefensible proceeding without protest they will submit to anything. And this, forsooth t is being done by the party that in the days of Seddon toro passion to tatters in their fierce denunciation of doles for public works to bribe the electors when an election was pending. It cannot be said that this £340,000 is to be given for public works. It cannot be argued that the money is being spent for any useful national purpose. It is being taken from the public purse and applied to the profit of a class of people who have been making money freely during the war. If the butter producers and manufacturers had been losing on their produce during the last five years, they would have had -very little occasion for complaint, because some measure <A sacrifice was expected from every loyal and patriotic inhabitant of this country. But who would venture to assert that the butter producers and manufacturers have made a sacrifice? The worst that has happened to them is that their margin of profit was not so great as if the prices had not been fixed by the Government control. Is that any reason why £340,000 should be taken from the pockets of thepeople and handed to them for their greater profit? They have been well, realising for their butter prices that would never have been reached except for the war,'and now they are to bo compensated for a loss they have never suffered by a heavy tribute from the public funds. Tho whole proceeding is scandalous. If the Government is in a spendthrift mood, and has immense sums of money to squander in the way of bonuses to privileged classes of tho community, why should its liberality be displayed towards a section of thu producers and manufacturers who have financially benefited from tho war and the prevailing high prices?' "What about that other and larger sec-

tion of the community who have been oppressed by the steadily-advancing cost of the necessaries of life, and who have protested again and again concerning the excessive price that they were compelled to pay for their butter? There is no proposal, it is interesting to observo, to pay a bonus to tho people who have been buying butter afc exceptionally high prices. On tho contrary, the masses of the people are to bo compelled to pay the bonus of £310,000 to the butter producers and manufacturers who admittedly have been doing exceedingly well out of the war. If the Government is prepared to refund so much per pound! on tho butter that has been sold during tho last two years, that refund should be made to tho heads of families who have been struggling against tho harassing conditions imposed by the excessive cost of living, instead of being bestowed upon manufacturers and * producers who have gained materially' from the war and tho conditions that it has created. However, the episode is illuminating and; instructive. It proves conclusively, if any proof were necessary, that the sympathies of the Government are with the profiteers and not with the people who have been systematically exploited. And now that this system of bonus distribution lias commenced it would bo interesting to know where it is likely to end. The millers have received something like £300,000, although the people have not got their bread one halfpenny cheaper. The butter producers and manufacturers are lining up with eager faces and outstretched hands for their subsidy of £340,000, notwithstanding that the price of butter is exceptionally high. Surely our pre-election bounty is not going to end there. What about our wool kings who would have received several pence per pound more for their produce if there had been no commandeer? If wo are prepared to confirm the precedents that have already been established, we must be equally prepared to consider the unfortunate circumstances of the poor squatters, and distribute a bonus of a- million or so amongst them also. Tho public purse is available, and votes must be bought, and that is all there is to it. By.all means let us tax tho whole of the people to supplement the fat wool cheques of the squatters who might hare accumulated even greater profits if there had been no wool commandeer. Did somebody suggest bribery and corruption? Perish the thought! This is not bribery and corruption. It, is "Reform" administration pure and unadulterated. It is the sort of thing that is gradually evolving itself from the political indifference that has allowed the government of this country to drift into the hands of the classes representing monopoly and wealth and privilege as opposed to the rights of the people as a whole. It is a state of things that extreme Labour materially assisted to bring about, by shrieking for the-overthrow of Liberalism, but it is certainly not in the best interests of the democracy of New Zealand.