Federal Elections: Disclosures By Mr Lang Could Unseat Labour

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27259, 9 December 1949, Page 7

Federal Elections: Disclosures By Mr Lang Could Unseat Labour

From C. R. Mentiplay, NZPA Special Correspondent Rec. 8 p.m. SYDNEY, Dec. 8. Though political observers all now detect a swing away from Labour in the closing stages of the Australian election campaign, very few are prepared to say it will be strong enough to unseat the Labour Government. All are agreed, however, that the result will be so close that the, result of the New Zealand elections and the revelations by Mr J. T. Lang (Lang Labour Party leader) concerning the money lent by the Prime Minister, Mr Chifley, could have a vital effect. New South Wales In New South Wales, which, with nearly 2.000,000 voters, is the key State in the poll, Labour is believed to have lost valuable ground. Of 47 New South Wales seats in the enlarged House of Representatives the Opposition considers it has 15 safe seats. A high proportion of Labour seats, however, are commanded by very slender margins. With any appreciable drift against the Government the majority of these seats will change hands. Labour has a hard core of 23 seats which will not be lost unless a landslide develops. With at least nine swinging seats, New South Wales will be watched closely on Saturday nigh't for the first signs of election trends. Victoria In Victoria the parties appear delicately balanced. The Opposition is hopeful of winning 20 of the State’s 33 seats, but Labour claims that disunity in the State Government between the Liberal and Country Parties will give it 19 seats. A balanced independent estimation is that the Opposition will take 18 to Labour’s 15. Four seats are considered on the border line. In the last House of Representatives the Opposition held 11, Labour 8, and Independent Labour 1. of the 20 Victorian seats. Queensland

In Queensland, Labour, on the 1946 figures, is weaker than in any other State, having only one electorate in which the 1946 majority exceeded 6000. Observers believe that the Liberal and Country Parties will take seven seats to Labour’s five, with six considered doubtful. In the last Parliament honours were even, with five seats to Labour and five to the Opposition, but a swing developed which resulted in the defeat of the Minister of the Army, Mr F. Forde. If this movement is continued Labour may claim only one of the six doubtful seats. Other States

Six of South Australia’s 10 seats are regarded as already filled —three for Labour, three for the Liberals. Two of the others should also be divided evenly, and the remaining two had narrow Labour majorities on the 1946 figures. Labour is extremely strong in West Australia, and the probabilities are that Labour will take four seats, the Opposition parties two, and that two will be doubtful. In the last Parliament West Australia’s five seats were four to one in favour of Labour. Tasmania’s five seats in the new Parliament may be divided evenly, with the odd seat going either way, but redistribution has made any forecast more than usually hazardous.

Enrolments for the Federal elections on Saturday total 4,910,789, according to the chief Commonwealth electoral officer. This includes 11,815 voters in the Australian capital territory, which will elect a member for the first time. The figure for the 1946 election was 4,744,017. Mr Lang’s Disclosures

Liberal Party officials in Bathu'rst believe that Mr Lang’s disclosures of money lending by Mr Chifley may cause the Prime Minister’s defeat in the Macquarrie electorate. Mr Lang’s statement was front-page news in the Bathurst Western Times, but the other morning daily the Advocate, did not publish a line, Mr Chifley is a director of the Advocate and a lifelong friend of its editor.

Press correspondents say that Mr Chifley’s friends were aware that he had lent money in Bathurst, 'but are astonished at the size of the operations and the amount of interest. They said Mr Chifley made no secret of his determination years ago to make himself independent of politics. He had helped many of them to augument their small incomes by shrewd investments. Canberra observers say that months ago Mr Lang told close associates that he had a bomb ready to throw at Mr Chifley during the election campaign. His charges were one more development in the feud between Mr Chifley and Mr Lang, which began in 1930 when Mr Lang became Premier of New South Wales. ‘ Mr Chifley Replies Mr Chifley, speaking in Auburn, Mr Lang’s electorate, replied to Mr Lang’s charges of usury. He said that, except for £BOO, which was his own personal money, the other moneys lent were trust funds or his wife’s money. Mr Chifley said in the case of the trust funds the interest charged was according to the law of New South Wales, which stipulated that the rate must not be below the ruling rate. “ One would have thought there was enough decency in this country to leave an inoffensive woman out of political discussion. Much as I regret it. Mr Lang made statements about my being a money lender and extorting money from members of the public and citizens of Bathurst and excessive sums of money in interest. For nearly 25 years I have been a citizen of Bathurst. Practically anyone could come to my house, and there was always an open door. Anything I could do for them in any way I was always prepared to do. But I want to make it clear that in Bathurst, where a nonLabour council recently conferred on me the freedom of the city, in all those years I have never received one penny for any personal service from any member of the community.” "A Sob Story” Replying to Mr Chifley’s denial that he had charged high rates for loans during the depression, Mr Lang said today: “Mr Chifley has admitted everything. He did not refute a single fact. His reply consisted of a sob story and abuse. Neither helped him. Only cold, hard facts matter. Mr Chifley admitted that he was engaged in money lending, that he was a party to charging 9 per cent, interest to borrowers during the depression, and that he lent £BOO of his own money. He put himselfl forward as a man bitterly opposed to high interest rates. He must stand or fall on that. If he did not practice what he preached he has no right to remain the leader of the Labour Party.” Mr Lang added that he would return to the attack tomorrow, which is the day before polling day.