POLITICAL FUSION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21199, 3 December 1930, Page 5

POLITICAL FUSION.

TO THE EDITOB. Sm,—There i s only one thing about the letter ot your correspondent “ Queer Fellow in your issue of the 2nd that carries any sort of conviction at all. This is. his choice of a nom-de-plume. To my mmd he has chosen wisely. He states that we do not want the Reform Party back, and alludes to certain pie-crust promises. “Once bitten, twice shy," quotes he. If this is the public opinion, then_ certainly the United Party will not survive the test of another general election. What did it promise us and what have we got? The main bait—£7o,ooo.ooo, etc. -was swallowed. So did the whale swallow Jonah, but in neither case did any benefit result. I have been interested enough to turn up a manifesto of the United Party of 1923, and find, among others, one or two promises which do not seem to hava been quite fulfilled. (1) “The present system of taxation will be immediately revised.” - “Revision of the income tax scale, reducing the maximum amount.” And in 1930 we got a 10 per cent, increase! (2) “Tariff will be amended to reduce the cost of living.” Last year the United Government, aided by Labour, doubled the primage duty. This year it took it off, but instead placed a surtax on imports. (3) “The territorial system will be maintained.” Instead of maintaining, the United Party abolished it. (4) “ As a permanent solution of the unemployment problem a progressive land settlement policy' and railway construction policy will be pursued. . . . All unemployment will be absorbed, as far as practicable, on the authorised railways.” We have a, permanent solution all right, for do we not now bid fair to have permanent unemployment? _ By its action in raising the pay of .relief workers to standard wages the United Party has doubled the number of unemployed, has created a standing army of them, and has called down maledictions on its head from all over the Dominion. (5) We were promised a preferential voting system. Nothing done

yet. (6) ' Secondary industries would be fostered by subsidy rather than high protective tariff.” Nothing done! Much more space could be taken up in a similar manner, but I fancy the foregoing should convince “ Queer Fellow" that, the United Party may easily be saddled with a few pie-crust promises. Your correspondent charges Mr Coates and Mr Downie Stewart with having left behind them a Treasury with a deficit. General statements are easily made, but not so easily proved. As a matter of cold, hard fact the Reform Party left no deficit at all. Your correspondent also refers to estates cut up by the United Party, which he states should have been cut up by the Reform Party, and’ claims that a few hundred families are making a living instead of being unemployed. Experience teaches, and profiting by experience the Reform Party practically dropped the expensive method of land settlement which is entailed by the buying up and subdividing of improved estates. In its stead it introduced the “ group settlement” scheme, which is infinitely superior to the United Government’s practice of first buying the land and then advertising for settlers. Much more could be said on this land question, but considerations for space prevail. I am afraid that the tenor of this letter is hardly in accord with the heading, but then “ Queer Fellow " wandered from his subject, and I have only tried to follow him and correct bis faltering footsteps.—l am, etc.. Reformer. Dunedin, December 2.