EGMONT ELECTORATE

Taranaki Daily News, 11 October 1928, Page 10

EGMONT ELECTORATE

HON. HAWKEN AT CARDIFF OPENING OF REFORM CAMPAIGN. CRITICISM OF INDEPENDENTS. An audience of between 20 and 30 people gathered at Cardiff last night to hear the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. O. J. Hawken) open his campaign in the Egmont electorate in the interests of the Reform Party. Mr. C. J. Belcher presided. “My opponent has left -me at the barrier and is half-way round the course," said Mr. Hawken, who said the session had been a very busy one and he had had some very • late mornings. That part of the electorate was a new one to Egmont, and was somewhat unsatisfactory. He did not know what now possessed Mr. Wilkinson. There was nothing personal in it, but it seemed to be hardly playing the game to change round and rush in as he had done. It might be on account of a difference with the Government policy, but Mr. Wilkinson was apparently determined to “act the independent.” Independents never got anywhere in the House. Some thought they would remain independent, but few did. The parties worked together as teams and were very jealous. They kept together by compromises, and agreed together as a team. Not in the House were promises made, but in the party. Any old parliamentarian would agree with that. Mr. Wilkinson would not take the electors into his confidence, but had reserved his right to side with the United Party. It was like buying a pig in a poke politically. Speaking of the Parties in the House, Mr. Hawken said it was difficult to controvert Mr. Wilkinson’s arguments as they were from no party. Labour depended on unionism and not on country voters. It had a common purpose —higher wages for the workers. If Labour got into power as it did in Australia there was only one way it could get higher wages logically, and that would be to put up the protection duties. It was well known the Labour Party was a “high protection” party, and farmers were naturally free traders. “THE DIS-UNITED PARTY.” The fighting point was the unionist party. During the last two years it had nearly gone out of existence, and it was a pity it had not gone out. In British politics there was a tendency to eliminate the third party. There probably was no more “dis-united party” in New Zealand than the United Party. People were told they had a leader, but the two old hands were eliminated in the first and second ballot. Then the old members got together and got Sir J. Ward. He had done a lot of good for the country, but he was in ill-health and not a young man. It was beyond Sir Joseph Ward to reestablish the United Party, for the disunion was there.

Why did the two presidents and secretary resign? Why did Messrs Wilford, R. Smith and Seddon not attend? They were not there and only about four were voting. It was a most extraordinary position. Why did they not call themselves Liberals, which had a good name in politics? In reality the United Party’s expectations were not very bright. Labour and United could not upset Reform. There was a chance, but a very faint one.

Arguments that the Reform party was too strong were not credible. It was a unanimous party. Mr. Coates was as much its leader as Mr. Massey had been, and that was saying something. He felt sure Reform would come back with a good working majority. It had come through the war and its aftermath difficulties, and justified itself.

Taxation was a subject not well understood by the people, continued Mr. Hawken. The only real statement of the country’s position was in the Budget, which contained the details of revenue and expenditure. Mr. Wilkinson had declared New Zealand to be the second highest taxed country in tha world. He instanced Mr. 'Winston Churchill’s figures as to the taxation in New Zealand in 1913-14 as £6 3s per head, while in 1925-26 it was £l4 Os 9d per head. In Australia the figures in 1913-14 were said to be £3 Bs, and in 1925-26 £9 Is 6d. COMPARISON OF TAXES. Mr. Wilkinson had fallen into a bad error and had not included the /hole of the taxes. The real Australian position for 1927 was £l4 5s per head. Taxation had been going up heavily for the past five years, whereas the Dominion’s had been coming down. Taxation in 1913 was not £9 3s, but £8 2s fid. In 1927-28 it was £ll 8s od per head, much lower than in Australia. In 1913-14 it was £8 2s 6d, but the war charges amounted to £3 7s 10d per head, so that the present taxation was actually below that of 1913-14. It was lower per head than before the war, and the Government had done very well indeed. No one could get out of the war debt until it was paid off. The bald statement of Mr. Wilkinson as to increased taxation was alarming until understood as erroneous. “Other debt charges” had been reduced from £1 17s 3d to £1 7s Bd. Defence was practically the same. General and administration expenditure showed a big reduction. It was £2 3s 7d per head before the war, and was now £1 13s Id. The reduction in debt charges was 9s 7d per head and administration was 10s fid. The cost of social services had risen to £4 2s Bd, an increase of £1 6s 2d. “Where would you economise asked Mr. Hawken. “What would you cut out? No one would advocate the. reduction of pensions and social services. The Government has gradually increased social services.” The charge of extravagance against the Government was unfounded, continued the speaker. In spite of all criticism as to the attitude to the poor man, the figures as to social services quietened criticism. The country was able to take decent care of the old, needy and the poor, and the charges, though heavy, were just and necessary. Taxation on the wealth of the country as a basis was high, but on the population it was not. I ei J little could have been done in reduction more than had been effected. . Those who thought the country cou.d do without the railway had absolutely no idea of the problem and the indispensability of the service, said the speaker. A' ton was hauled one mile for 1.41 d. Could busses do it for four

times that amount? For fruit, timber and coal freight was particularly Tow. If we eould lift the cost to 1.56 d the railways would pay working expenses. The New Zealand Railways had done as well as any other country’s. They were up-to-date. Competition was very fierce, but it would die out. Mr. Wilkinson had criticised the construction of new railways. Did we not at present have to go to Marton to go. to Auckland? It was ridiculous to think that the construction of the StratfordMain Trunk line should be stopped because the railways were Mi paying at the present time. The country must go ahead, and the United Party had become the conservative old Tory party.' Money borrowed for reproductive activities was fully justified. No Government which said it could not be done would last six months. Borrowing was lowered from £11,009,000 to £5,000,000, and that latter figure was not overdoing it. The nett debt was small, and as long as the project was sound the people would not raise objections. If we did not increase the rate of borrowing it was quite sound to borrow up to £5,000,000. Seeing smiles at the mention of hydro ■ electricity, Mr. Hawken said he thought at the time of the Eltham scheme that the people should have waited for the Government scheme, simply reticulating in readiness. The availability rate would make people use power, and it seemed to him there should not be such a rate for long. It hit moneyed people hard, but the Act had been altered a few nights ago to assist a little. WHEAT PROTECTION. Freetrade in New Zealand was out of the bounds of politics and there never had been such a preponderance of farmers as in ths House to-day. Regarding wheat protection the speaker had argued that though he would like it free he knew that without protection the farmers would not grow it. North Island farmers held advantages and if this protection was taken away not six Reform members would be returned and Labour would come in with its high protection. He agreed the South Island people were entitled to protection on their wheat. Thousands of men would be thrown out of work if the Customs protection were lifted. He laid it down as a policy that the farmer should have protection as well as the townspeople. A good many primary industries had been assisted. A sum of £198,000 had been given by the railways in reduction of manures freight—a pretty solid sum, but a big help to the farmer. He had told Mr. Coates the best thing to help the country would be to carry manures free, and a 40 per cent, reduction had been -made. A voice: It’s paid by the farmers in the long run. Mr. Hawken: Oh no, it comes from the Consolidated Fund. All the people bear it. The fruit industry had been assisted to the extent of £13,000, but there were 6,000 engaged and it had helped them to make a living and added to the growth of the industry. The pig industry had been assisted by a bonus amounting to about £30,000. The poultry mtn had also been given a guaranteed price. The policy of a little help to encourage the farmer was sound from every point of view and induced, production. They could get it no other way. They had helped herd testing and he was sure it would help the farmer tremendously. A grievous error was being made when freetrade was advocated in New Zealand to-day. A Government could only do what the people allowed it to do. The Old Country had gone back a lot on freetrade. It was imperative that a country should use a reasonable amount of protection. Duties mentioned by Mr. Wilkinson had been revenue producing, and the farmers could not do very well unless the Government collected substantial Customs duties. Duties had been decreased in a great many cases. The deception was that the total amount had gone up. The population’s growtn made the total bigger. MANIFESTO NOT DISCLOSED. The Reform Party manifesto would not be made public by the speaker yet. It was a progressive policy and should appeal to the people generally. Regarding the land settlement policy, the Government put a great many .soldiers on the land and between them and the civilians a great deal of difficulty had been experienced in settling their finances and a good deal of money had been foregone. Tile time wo: Id come when a forward move could be made. Of recent years the Government had not bought much land. When a scheme was commenced it would mean extensive borrowing. Money was being borrowed cheaply—cheaper than in Australia —and there was no difficulty in securing cheap money in sufficient amounts. Any party going in for land settlement would need to borrow extensively—£l,ooo,ooo would not settle more than 500 men.

Relief for local taxation on roads was mentioned. There was a revolutionary change taking place. The old idea of “the land borne cost of roads” had been dene away with; it would have ruined the farmers. Local rates in Taranaki would, he felt sure, go down. A voice: What about dairy control? —You’ve started me off again. Control was brought in by the farmers on a referendum, he said. A great many people were opposed to co-operation, yet cooperative business —farming—was the greatest and most successful in New Zealand, and that only with co-opera-tion. He had received a great many requests to cut out. the control clauses, but he said “Go steady.” The meat board’s reduction in freights alone had justified it. The compiilsory clauses were of value because of the power they invested. A voice: Why take a man’s right away ? Mr. Hawken: It’s really co-operation. A voice: It is not! “1 am satisfied the spirit of co-oper-ation will grow until there is very little objection to the man qualified to manage,” said Mr. Hawken. “It helps the little man. If people used the control Acts properly they would be of greater value as time went on.” A vote of thanks to the speaker was passed without dissent.