THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN.

Shannon News, 3 November 1925, Page 3

THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN.

Mil HOLLINGS A/1] -SHANNON. Last evening the National-Liberal candidate for Manawatu, Mr P. L. Hollings, gave his second address in Shannon, in the presence of about 30 electors. Air T. C. Thwaites occupied the chair and the canuldale received a very good .hearing. Mr Hollings said New Zealand was between the/extreme danger of the Kelorm Party that for thirteen years had legislated for the Knights of Rel'orin, the Welfare League, the wealtny merchants, and wool kings who held the purse that kept Reform going, and on the other hand it Avas threatened by a party calling itself the Labour Party—a party with noble ideals, many humane proposals funned to help the people, but led by men who did not care what happened and were ready to smash everything to satisfy their own ambitions and gain their own ends. Mr Holland was on record in Hansard as saying: "I am prepared to- carry the brand of a Revolutionary Socialist. - * That was from a man Avho asked the people of the Dominion to put him into the position 'oif Prime Minister. The National Party represented the Liberal policy framed by those two great men—Ballance and Seddon. Its idea was to secure a non-party government and it Avould then be possible to legislate for the good of all. The best talent from all three parties could thus be gathered together in a National Government for the good of the whole Dominion. He would, not .besmirch the cause he had been sent to represent by descending to vulgarities nor when question time came would he shield himself as Mr Holland did behind his chairman. He had nothing to hidethere Avas nothing in his public or private life that he had to be ashamed of. The speaker .severely criticised Mr Holland's refusal to answer ques- ,

tions. The versions of Labour's land policy given by'Messrs Holland, Roberts and Semple were totally different. He had listened to 3 expositions and all were at variance with each other. H-e had been endeavouring to understand it without much success. They could not deny, however, that their idea was that all land should be nationalised. No privately owned land should be transferred or sold except "to' ''the State and at the State's own price. Take a small farmer who in the early days took up a farm in its virgin state, cleared the land, sowed the seed, fenced it, made himself a home to be proud or, and he hoped to hand it down to his son. The Labour Party prevented that because it would not allow the land to be sold. The Labour Party was aiming at something the Englishman had held dear, that he had • possessed since the days of tha feudal system—the right of' inheritance. Take the

case of a working man who liad erected a home peihaps in" the days . when building and land was cheap. He cultivated the grounds and put work into the house that was of no value to anybody but himself. How would one feel if the Labour Party came along and said: "We want your property and yon have got to sell it to us." That struck at the right of 'a man to have his own home. They did not expect to pay for it except in-bonds., What would be the, value of the bondsif a revolutionary patty got intui office and began to smash things. labour bad nu defence policy and a country withojtit defence was in a poor .plight. New Zealand's only hope of defence was the British fleet and there must be some provision to maintain- that fleet. Mr Holland carefully , avoided all reference to the recent strike and perhaps that was one of the reasons why he refused to answer questions. If when there. was danger of the farmers' produce being held up, the Labour Party had come out and tried to settle the strike, it might have gained the confidence of the people.. Mr ■Holland failed to give any remedy for 'industrial trouble. The National Party proposed to have a conciliation board that, immediately there was a strike threatened, would act by getting into toucii with the parties and endeavouring to ascertain the difficulty. There should be a way of settling industrial disputes without reverting to strikes which brought suffering on - innocent people.' It was not the capitalist or worker who suffered most in a strike, but the wives and children of thy strikers. He would punish not the strikes but those who led iheiri. Mr Roberts showed almost an entire lack of local knowledge. He said that, if elected, lie would come and live in this district, tiie inference being that if not elected he would stay where he was. That was the extent of his interest. "Heads I win; tails vou lose."

" Personally be and Mr Linklater were perfectly good friends but they disagreed in" politics. Mr Linklater said the Government could be compared with the directors of a public company—an unfortunate statement because the directors of a public company were compelled by law to be impartial and the Reform directors had not been impartial. The people of the country were the shareholders and there was an inexorable law that all shareholders should be treated impartially according to their interest. During-'l3 vears the Reform directors had looked after the wealthy shareholders and left the poor struggling shareholders to themselves. Using Mr Linklater's own metaphor, he said it was time the" shareholders voted out the unjust directors and put impartial ones in their place. Mr Linklater was not able to show

where the Government nad helped to finance the small farmer When the moratorium was coining due. under the State Advances to Settlers the government was empowered to lend to me farmers at a loav rate of % per cent Hovv many of them had received that help from the Government. He knew of one case where a small farmer needed a small loan. The application was made five years ago. .After a year his application was acknowledged. Sox months later he was advised that the matter had been reierred to the Valuer. He Avaited another six months and then the Valuer airived. It took another six months lot him to make his report, and after a further lapse of time the fanner was advised that the application was declined. Proceeding Mr Hollings criticised the Reform Government's remission of taxation as benefiting the wealthy only and their failure to take good iuiiu tor the soldiers under the authorisation of the Land lor Settlement Act. He wondered where the great housing benefit was to be found that Mr Linklater, claimed the the Reform Government had conferred. The reason why the Reform Party; was against a State Bank was because its friends and members were shareholders in the Bank of New. Zealand which was making huge profits. If, as Mr Linklater said, the railways were being run in a Avay that got the best economic value out of ; them, why was not the Levin-Marton . deviation put in hand. It would have j saved twenty miles of railway and an , annual expenditure of £50,000 a year. His complaint against Mr Linklater Avas not so much what he had done, but Avhat he'had not done. The National Party proposed to restrict borrowing, stop the leaks in the State purse by strict economy in exrenditure, revise the incidence of taxation, establish a State Bank, extend the Advances to Settlers to help the small farmer, put the Lands for Settlement Act into operation to take suitable land for settlement witliou' respect to persons and increase education facilities. If he Avas elected he would put the claims of the district first and party second, but the country's interests always." Another thing he Avould demand was a High School for Shannori. He Avould also fight for the reconstruction of the Shannon bridge. There had been too much humbug over it. The Public Works had been side-step-ping the bridge. If he w'us honoured ay election he would devote himself to the interests of this district, but' if he was defeated, like a'good cricketer he would go. out with a smile. He asked the electors to avoid the dangers of extremes and to keep to the broad highway betAveen. the Reform Party's selfishness and the Labour Party's desperation. After two or three questions had been' asked a cordial vote of thanks was passed to the- candidate, the chairman receiving a similar compliment, the meeting then concluding.