REPLY TO CRITICS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18899, 27 June 1923, Page 8

REPLY TO CRITICS.

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE MR MASSEY’S SPEECH. VIGOROUS DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT. (From Ouh Own Correspondent.} WELLINGTON, June 26, There was a full House and full galleries ■this evening to hear the Prime Minister’s speech in reply to the criticisms made by the Opposition in the Address-in-Reply debate. On rising to speak Mr Massey was greeted with a very hearty round of applause. He said that the Government might have been charged with more sing of omission than commission, but he would not reply to that. Ho would like to say, however, that no Government had had the same tfimculties of finance as the present Government, and none had done better than it had done, and the Budget would prove it. From the point of view of interest the attack on the Government this session had been the dreariest that Parliament had ever seen. Four months ago the Government had been put in with a small majority, and yet to-day there were no less than four motions of want-of-contidence in it before the House. He had never seen anything like it. If the desire of the Opposition was to waste the time and money of the House that was the way to do it. Labour Members: You ought to know something about wasting money. Mr Massey: Yes. Talking of speeches, I hoard speeches to-day that I heard four years ago. In the last short session wo had two motions of no-confidencc; now we have four. Before I come to the speech of the Leader of the Opposition I want to reply to the remarks of some of the speakers about aggregation. Some of them do not understand the meaning of the word. If a man gets a few more acres to support his family that is called aggregation. Opposition Member: That’s not the case in Oroua. Mr Massey: I will tell you something about Oroua that you will not forget. I honestly believe that members on the other side or the House believe that if a man owns more than 20 acres of land he is a criminal and ought to go to gaol. The Member for Patea: Like Saul among the prophets. What happened at Oroua? A Labour Member: Yes. What happened ? Mr Massey: Here is a man who never did a dishonourable thing in his life lying on his sick bed between life and death, and his fellow-members find fault with what lie did. Is that an honourable thing to do ? I say it is a miserable and contemptible thing to do. The members for Stratford and Taranaki went through his electorate when he was ill to the point of collapse. I will tell you the true story of Oroua. A few settlers some years ago wont ro Oroua on small sections—too small to support them—and they failed, as farmers who take up less land than will keep them always will fail, and so that land went into the hands of others. That is the folly of putting settlers on small blocks of land. In the first instance that was aggregation. When settlers fail that is aggregation. Mr Massey referred to Labour’s criticism cf the appointment of members to the Legislative Council. When ho came to the House first the Council was the most unpopular institution in New Zealand. Labour Alember; It is not very far from that now. How many good Labour men are there in it now? Mr Massey; There are quite a number of good Labour men in it. There are

■ Alessrs J. Barr, Al‘lntyre, Earnshaw, and ~ another honoured by his Alajesty the King, but a working carpenter in the first place—quite as good a man as any in this House. A Labour Member: That is open to doubt. Air Massey: I will tell you this. I will not send any “Red Feds” to the Legislative Council.—(Laughter.) I was once m favour of having members appointed by /’proportional representation, but on looking ‘ into it I did not do so, but it would do 1 less harm in the Legislative Council than hero. Could anyone take exception to four : xnen, none of them with less than 20 years’ experience, and always useful? Air Fraser: Always useful to your party. Mr Massey: The hon. member thinks of nothing else but party, especially on Sunday night. I have promised that taxation will be reduced by an important amount this session. The exact amount seems to bo open to doubt, but putting the present tax ■ at 7s 4d—though we believe it came to less than that last year—l think I can reduce it to Ss and knock out the income ’ ‘ tax on land. Of course, that was a war ' “tax, but it was, notwithstanding, a class tax. Because we are able to reduce the income tax to ss, is it to be said that wo will reduce the 5s to companies and keep it up or increase it to private people? I will not stand for that sort of thing. What is the Bank of New Zealand but a company? Yet, according to the proposals made they will be the ones that will have reduced taxation. There were 400 com- ■ pauies formed last year with an income of over £15,030,000. There are plenty of men struggling hard to meet their taxation. The bonks are the biggest companies, and the insurance companies next. Are they to have taxation reduced and not the private people? Now, what about the groat brewery company? An Opposition member: They all pass it on.

Mr Massey: They oan pass it on if they like. What about the hardware and softgoods companies? I cannot think of them all. I propose to reduce taxation on land. What about the debenture tax? It is 3s at present. There is nothing seriously wrong with it. The Prime Minister said he would like to have an Electoral Bill, but ho could not promise one in view of tire importance of the business to be transacted this session. The Leader of the Opposition: Proportional representation? The Prime Minister; The hon. member has that wretched fad for proportional representation —(Laughter.) Mr Wilford: Will you give us an opportunity of saying what the House thinks of it?

The Prime Minister: It is not what they think at the time of the division. It is what they will think when the electors find out what has happen 3d. If proportional representation is agreed to it is going to place the partially settled districts under the heel of Labour. In my opinion, the people are quite satisfied with what they have. Proportional representation is one vote one value. You can’t get that if you •want to maintain the country quota. Mr Massey then turned to the moratorium. He was as anxious, he said, as anyone else about it, and had been watching it very closely. He believed they would get rid of the moratorium very much more easily than they thought three months ago. Any financier in the country would tell them that money was now more plentiful. He was not proposing to ask for more time, hut he thought it very desirable to make every preparation for the termination of the moratorium. “I am now going to give the House some idea of the business that is going through the Advances to Settlers Department,” continued the Prime Minister. “I received from the Superintendent of the Department yesterday a return showing the business handled during the past four weeks. The total amount of advances for that period was £597,135. That is with the limit of advances at £2ooo—not at £3500, as we propose in the new Bill.” The Leader of the Opposition: How long will you keep it up Mr Massey : I oan keep it up for another 12 months provided that I, that is. the Department, I mean, can get the security of 60 or 75 per cent, as the case may be. I ■will find the money. An Hon. Member: How much of that money was advanced to repay mortgages? The Prime Minister: I am glad you reminded mo of that. Of the moneys authorised at the meeting of the board yesterday the sum'of £112,000 was for the repayment of mortgages. The actual cash paid to borrowers last month was £282,000, at the rate of £3,500,000 a year. I can meet it easily.—(Loud appkmsA) Mr Massey then quoted l his latest returns of advances for housing. For the year ended March 31, he said, there were advances for 3252 bouses. The amount authorised was £1,745,730, and the amount taken UD was £1,709,136. Never in the history of this country had so much been done in providing houses and paying for houses for ' the people and for providing' money for ' settlers who wanted money. Continuing, ■ho gave some details of the policy of the (Railway Department in providing houses for their servants. The mill at which their timber was being worked could turn out one house per day. He was astonished at .the magnitude of the work and possibilities of the machinery there. They calculated on turning out a good class standard house of five rooms with the necessary outhouses for £7OO, and the rent would not be more than ft day’s pay. The mil) would, bo p. great

asset to the country.—(Labour “Hear, hears.”) Turning’ to the amendment to the Ad-dress-in-Reply, which he read to the House, the Prime Minister said there was 12 months’ legislative work in the programme involved in the amendment. “I am afraid,” ho said, devoting himself to the reference in the amendment to the Imperial Conference, “that some members think that every decision of the conference binds immediately the dominions. It does nothing of the sort. Every proposal that is made and agreed to by the conference makes it necessary for the Parliament of the country to say whether they agree to it. It must bo ratified by Parliament.” Mr Sullivan: Don’t you think Parliament should have power to initiate a discussion? The Prime Minister; Parliament has certainly the power to initiate. I can recall three or four proposals that have been agreed to on my motion. The agenda, paper of the conference is never fully prepared until every member arrives and notifies the chairman.

The Leader of the Opposition: Would it not bo fair to submit, here what you intend to bring up? The Prime Minister: I am quite prepared to give every information in my power. I am not hankering after the job, but I am prepared to do my duty on this or the other side of the world. I believe the conference is going to be the most important ever held in the history of Imperial conferences. The fate of the Empire may depend on it, Mr Wilford: Canada has given instructions that she will initiate discussions. _ The Prime Minister: No, not instructions. I am not going to the other side of the world as a delegate. I must be allowed to use my own discretion. The conference does not commit the Parliament. I have been there four times, and each time I have come back and given a full report in a speech, running sometimes to two hours, of the work that has been done. I have never been found fault witt yet. Beyond committing the House to the purchase of our share in Nauru Island, I have done nothing on my own without Parliament. If we had not taken Nauru Australia would have gladly taken it over. I have nothing to hide.—(“Hear, hear.”) Air Wilford: Would you not hear what the members thought of it? The Prime Alinister: I think it would have been better to have given consideration in their speeches to subjects like the Imperial Conference than to the piffle that, I have heard hero in this debate. I am quite prepared, if Parliament gives me the time, to deal with every subject that is likely to come up and to let the House know exactly where I stand.— (Cheers.) My sympathy went out to the Leader of the Opposition. When he was making Ids speech there was something wrong with him. Air Wilford: It was my birthday.— (Laughter.) / Mr Massey; Ho was evidently thinking how fast life goes. Air Wilford: When I look at you I do.

Mr Massey: You will have to wait a long time before you get into my shoes.— (Roars of laughter.) Mr Wilford : They are too big. Mr Massey: I got a new pair recently renewed by the magnificent receptions I got in the country during the two weeks before Parliament assembled. My boots have a sole, bat I am afraid the Leader of the Opposition has not one. —(Laughter.) I must descend to the language of pugilists to say what I think of him. I think he has “lost his punch.”—(Laughter.) In regard to soldier settlement in the South Island, he believed that very few of the soldiers there would not bo successful. It was different in the north, for there would bo some failures in Wellington and also in the Auckland district. He admitted that it was going to* cost a good deal of money to see this matter through, but he was going to face it. They would have to provide perhaps £1,000,000 or perhaps more, but it had to be done, and it would be done this session. As to advances to settlors he had found for them £2,000,000, and when that was exhausted he would find £2,000,000 more. In addition the Bank of New Zealand was raising additional capital, part of which the Government had to find, and they had it on official authority that it would be used in connection with assisting settlors over the difficulty of the moratorium The Government was doing everything possible in this connection, and he was not going to stop at trifles so far as the moratorium was concerned. And what they were lending now was small in comparison with what they would bo able to do when the £5500 advances became law and the margin was increased from 60 per cent, to 76 per cent. As to the borrowings that were to oome duo the proposition in New Zealand and outside was about fiflv-fifty. If the members of the Opposition thought be was going to apologise for the part lie had taken in the by-election they never made a greater mistake in their lives. At Tauranga he had no objection to Sir Joseph Ward being a candidate. The only thing he did want was that he should not rob him (Mr Massey) of a seat. He felt that it was a challenge to him, and he accepted it. Mr Massey gave an emphatic denial to the statements of the Opposition that public money was used for* the hire of motor cars and halls in that election. Mr Atmore: Didn’t the Ministers receive salaries ? —(Opposition laughter.) Air Alassoy: I have no doubt they did. I received mine, but I was doing my work. The Prime Alinister went on to say that he was very sorry that in this debate members on the other side bad raised the sectarian question. There was nothing he hated more.

Mr Holland: Do you approve of the speech made this afternoon? Mr Massey: That is another story. A member has a right to reply to a speech that has been made. He can make any speech he likes, but what I wish to say is that there was no sectarian issue at Tauranga—absolutely none. Personally I do not trouble about any man’s religion. So long as he is a docent man and loyal to his King and country and Empire I am willing to extend to him the right hand of fellowship. I had lots of friends in '.tauranga who were strict Korean Catholics, and I am glad to say that they voted for us. It was different at Oamaru. There attempts were made—and successfully mode—to introduce the sectarian issue. One heard of it all round the constituency, but I got no help from it. Mr Macpherson: You got more than I did.

Mr Massey: I have no doubt the honest Roman Catholics voted for me every time. At a later stage Mr Massey referred to another phase of the Oamaru election, and he then went on to criticise ,Mr Veitch’s speech in reference to the Bank of New Zealand and showed from the records that the Bill of 1913 was not driven through the House, as Mr Yeitch had stated. As a matter of fact, it bad passed its second reading and also its third reading without a division. Where, then, was the driving? Mr Veitch: The power behind the throne. Mr Massey: That is a mean little suggestion—the sort of thing that Uriah Heap would say.—(Laughter.) Mr Massey went on to say that he had known for some months past, that the bank wanted more capital and that the right thing had been done in increasing its capital. The capital of the bank was now four and a-half millions, of which the State owned a million and a-half, or nearly one-third. The bank was doing well for the State, and the arrangement was a very satisfactory one. Mir Corrigan: Make it a State bank. Mr Massey: And what would you do with the shareholders? •Mr Corrigan: Buy them out.

Mr Massey: That would cost yon two and a-half millions, and no State could manage a bank as well as the Bank of New Zealand is managed.—(‘‘Plear, hear.”) It is a magnificent property. There is no question about it, and the idea that there is any political influence used is quite without foundation.