THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 1924. THE ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19218, 8 July 1924, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES TUESDAY, JULY 8, 1924. THE ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

The debate on the Ad<lress-in-Iteply frill bo resumed in the House of Representatives this afternoon. This debate must, in accordance with precedent, be roncludorl before the House proceeds to the transaction of its legislative business, and it follows, therefore, that the answer to the question as to when the Government's programme for the session will como under consideration depends upon the duration of the discussion on the Address. So far there have been ten speeches in the debate, —five from the Liberal Opposition and five from the Ministerial benches, three of the latter in fact having been delivered by Ministers. The Labour party, it will be seen, has not so far contributed to the debate. Its leader lias apparently been

holding his forces in reserve. Tho purpose behind his strategy has probably been well considered, but it may he suspected that the Labour members will all be required by him to participate in tho debate. Moreover, it seems likely that, adopting a course similar to that pursued by their party last year, a number of amendments will bo proposed by them that will hayo the effect of prolonging the discussion throughout the present week. It cannot bo said that the debate on the two nights of last week which, wore devoted to it presented any features of striking interest. Tho explanation is partly, no doubt, to be found in the Fact that the House, as a whole, is deficient in debating power. There are hardly more than half u dozen members who are capable of holding tho attention of the House for half an hour on any topic. Tho decline of parliamentary oratory is, of course, not peculiar to New Zealand. It has manifested itself in most Parliaments in the Empire and it is impossible to except tho Mother of Parliaments itself from this criticism.

In the particular instance of the debate on the Address-in-Reply the standard which Was set by tho Leader of tho Opposition was not particularly high, though decidedly higher than that attained by Mr Masters, one of his most prominent supporters, whose polemical effectiveness is weakened by his tendency to indulge in personalities, and the discussion seems generally to have been conducted on a level of mediocrity. The brightest spot in it has been the bantering reply of Mr Downio Stewart to Mr Wilford but wo gather from our Liberal contemporaries that they regard the levity of tone that was exhibited by the Minister of Customs as ill-timed. “Mr Wilford had,” the Lyttelton Times says, “ jur-t been voicing the complaints and grievances of farmers and traders who ore experiencing the most difficult times of a generation. Life for them is no jest. Some have been ruined, some arc facing ruin, and some are struggling along in tho hope that the Government will find them a way out of their troubles. Mp Stewart’s only word for them is a joke.” Wc do not know quite where it is that this distressing condition of affairs exists over which the heart of the Lyttelton Times is bleeding. It Was asserted a few days ago in tho North that there were 200 unoccupied farms in Southland and that farmers were walking off thoir farms there witli nothing in their pockets. This, however, was merely a malicious calumny, the absurdity of which must have been immediately patent to anyone who is acquainted with tho business conditions that prevail in both Otago and Southland, It is doubtless true that there are farmers in tho North Island who, having purchased properties, in defiance of all sound advice, at seriously inflated values, are facing ruin, if they have not already been ruined. Neither Mr TVilford, however, nor our contemporary has indicated how any Government can find a way for these farmers out of their troubles. They have been sheltered for nearly ten years by a moratorium, which Parliament at tho instance of tho Government provided for their protection, but wo confess that wo are unable to see in what manner the State can bo reasonably expected to preserve them from the ultimate effects of their grave errors of judgment. The traders whom the Lyttelton Times describes as “ experiencing the most difficult times of a generation ” are a more shadowy creation. Wc suggest seriously that our contemporary has drawn a picture which is much too highly coloured and is not justified by the state of trade in the dominion. Even if there were some slight foundation for tho doleful tale Which the Lyttelton Times has broadcasted, it is rather fantastic, surely, to imagine that it is necessarily to the Government that recourse must be had for relief. When the case for Liberalism rests upon a fee,hie, and vague claim that the State must do something of an unspecified nature to rescue people from the disastrous consequences of their own indiscretions, we cannot be surprised that the Southland News laments the “pitiful plight ” of the cause of which it is the exponent in its district and the inability of its party to produce any definite policy of reconstruction.