LABOUR ATTITUDE

Stratford Evening Post, Volume I, Issue 79, 12 March 1931, Page 5

LABOUR ATTITUDE

GOVERNMENTS PLANS SPEECH BY MR. HOLLAND WAR ON WAGIT REDUCTIONS WELLINGTON, March 22. Increased death duties and a supertax were advocated by the Leader of the Labour Party. Mr H. E. Holland, M.P., in an address to-night, as a means of securing revenue to make up the antieapated shortage of £4,500.000 at the cud of the financial year. Explaining the Labour attitude towards tho Government’s economic proposals to a crowded meeting at the Town Hall, Mr Holland stated that the Labour Party would fight wage reduction to the last ditch and uso every form tho House allowed to achieve that end. Mr Holland said his party stood for a special moratorium that would give some measure of protection to mortgagors during the present crisis. Every scat in the body of the hall and galleries was occupied, while Parliamentary colleagues and officials of the Labour movement occupied seats on tho platform. Mr P. Fraser, M.P. for Wellington Central, presided. Generally speaking Mr Holland received an attentive hearing, his remarks being frequently punctuated with applause. One or two persistent interjectors made their presence, felt and one man made such a nuisance of himself that ho was removed by the police. Mr Holland SJ 1 - for an hour and a-half.

At the conclusion of his address, Mr S. Semple moved a motion expressing confidence in the Labour Party’s policy and pledging support for the party in opposing the Government’s wage and salary reduction policy. This was seconded by Mr B. McKeen, and carried with applause. Mr Holland remarked that it was unnecessary for him to remind public servants and wage workers that they were about to pay a heavy price for the votes cast by a huge section of them in 1925 and 1928. “It is open to any party to review and revise its programme,’ ’ said Mr Holland, “but no party is entitled to continue in office when it has jettisoned almost every plank in the programme on wlrish it was elected.” Changed United Policy. Mr Holland mentioned that the Hon. E. A. Ransom had told the House less than a year ago that it was not the policy of the United Government to cut salaries or discharge employees. Before departure fo r the Imperial Conference, the Prime Minister had said there would be no wage reduction, but on his return Mr Forbes had proclaimed a wage reduction. The reason was that Sir Otto Niemeyer had come to New Zealand with a message from the financial dictator to reduce the wages of the workers. When Mr Forbes was home he had that message supplemented there. “Apparently interest is to be sacred,” continued Mr Holland, “but no agreement between employers and employees is to bo treated as such. The Labour Party agree that the Budget should be balanced, but we do not agree that the wages of the workers should be levied upon to make up the shortage. The Public Service is to bo asked to find £1,500,000 out of a £4,500,000 shortage. The party holds that the proper method to make up the necessary money is a. super tux and substantial increases in death duties.” Mr Holland added that while the Labour Party did not favour wage reductions, it -was fair to suggest that even if reductions were necessary it was a lop-sided arrangement that would take ten per .cent, off every salary without making a raid on the high salaries first. Mr Coates’ Position Mr Coates was not in the happiest position because his distinguished Conservative colleague, Sir Francis Beil, had come now to do penance for one of his many sins, incidentally to admit that the Labour Party was right in 1922. Mr Holland said he ventured to say that there was no working farmer in his constituency who wanted to see reduced wages- When it came to wage reductions the Prime Minister was definite and emphatic, but it was iu a different tone that he talked about interest rates. Apologetically Mr Forbes made what ho termed an earnest appeal to the banks and also to the money lenders to review each individual case- A reduction of two per cent, and oven one per cent, in the rate of interest would briug an enormously greater measure of relief to bona fide working farmers than any system of wage reductions could give.

TJio Labour Parly stood for a special moratorium ru connection with tiro present crisis. Legislation should ue passed during lire short session which would give some protection to debtors. Conditional legislation should be passed which would include authority to set up a tribunal which .vould be representative of the Government and the other interests involved, such tribunal to have power to deal with cases on their merits. Financial Obligations. “It is not the desire of the Labour Party to assist people iu evading legitimate financial obligations, but it will be obvious to everyone that we are passing through abnormal times which demand special efforts on our part to save the people from immediate disaster,” said Mr Holland. A moratorium alone, without any other objective, would be useless and probably harmful, in the meantime, legitimate eases of hardship should bo carefully and dehuitely dealt with. The Labour Party held that the Dominion’s credit should be molfciised. It was done in the days of the war. The Labour Party stood for a Staie bank" for the purpose of controlling credit and finance and for the purpose of re-

ducing interest rates. The Parly aimJiameut had lo vote money for railways. ed at the nationalisation of the bank- f iug system and public control and organisation of tyedit. It would be far

better than a dictatorship of the banking institutions. Referring to the railway losses, Mr Holland said his party was out for coordination of the transport services particularly railway and motor serservices. Neither the Coates or Forbes Governments had shown any capacity for co-ordinating these services. Mr Holland contended that there could be no non-political control so long as Par-