UNITED PARTY’S SCHEMES

Taranaki Daily News, 12 July 1929, Page 13

UNITED PARTY’S SCHEMES

LAND SETTLEMENT POLICY

iREFORMHRS DEFEND THEIR WORK.

DEBATE ON ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night.

The debate on tho Address-in-Reply ■was. resumed in the House of Representatives to-day by the Hon. P. A. de la Perrelle, who said the United Party had been criticised because of its borrowing policy. The Reform Government had borrowed £23,000,000 in three years, and that was more than was contemplated by the present Government. The Minister supported a policy of more intense land settlement as a remedy for unemployment, and said it appeared that the Reform administration had been diverted from its plans in that direction by the failure of its discharged soldiers settlement scheme. He hoped before long to see legislation brought down to remove some of the difficulties facing river boards and drainage boards. It seemed to him there were too many authorities. It was hoped also that new town planning legislation would bo introduced this year. It was intended to make New Zealand one of the beauty spots of the Empire by adding regional planning attractions to its natural scenic resorts. The country was still in its infancy so far as town beautifying was concerned, and he hoped to see great strides taken in the near future.

Mr. do la Perrelle, referring to the railways, said there was less chance of branch railways competing successfully with motors than was the case with main lines. Experience had shown that and that was the reason why the United Party had undertaken its present policy. He believed the wholeTlouse would support the proposed Bluff to Melbourne steamer service, which would increase tourist traffic, benefit trade and improve relations between New Zealand and Australia.

CENTRAL OTAGO PROGRESS.

Mr. F. Waito defended the Reform administration’s irrigation work in Central Otago, stating that there had been an enormous increase in production there as a result of irrigation and the division of many of the large runs. The difficulty to-day appeared to be to get trains to carry the produce away. He described the development of the export of apples and pears from Central Otago and quoted figures to show there had been a decrease in the number of large flocks of sheep during recent years. Surely that was an argument against the existence of aggregation of land ? At the same time there had been a tremendous increase in the export of wool and other products. Mr. Waite said the present Minister of Lands had stated with regard to land settlement that the problem before him was not as easy as it was years ago, as there were fewer large estates to divide. That actually was the position and it disarmed a good deal of the criticism of the Reform Party. Mr. Waito expressed the hope that Mr. Makitanara would never again raise the question of party in reference to dealings with the Native race. He contended that a party spirit had never entered into the deliberations of the Native Affairs Committee. Mr. C. H. Clhikard suggested that when poorer lands for settlement were selected they should be developed by mass labour until they were in a suitable state for men to occupy and earn from them a reasonable living. He did not agree with the general policy of State interference in business, but the principle which had applied in the days of Seddon must still apply to-day. For instance, if trusts or combines threatened the interests of the people it was the duty of the Government to interfere. CONCLUDE THE DEBATE!

Mi'. M. J. Savage said he would occupy only a few minutes. He renewed Labour’s appeal to the other parties to allow the present debate to be concluded. He had had a telegram from Auckland to-day drawing attention to the increasing seriousness of the unemployment situation and asking if something could be done to relieve the position. Public institutions were on trial, and it was the responsibility of Parliament to lose no time in taking what steps it could in a time of dire distress. He appealed, from no personal and no party motive, for the termination of the debate that night to hasten consideration of unemployment and land settlement legislation.

Mr. H. Holland (Christchurch North) said that despite the difficult period during which it had held office the Reform administration had delivered the country as a whole into a wonderfully prosperous state, and it was also entitled to credit for the efficiency of the telephone system, hydro-electric works, irrigation works and for the preservation of native forest. It had constructed half a mile of railway every week and one post office every three weeks of its term of administration. It had also been responsible for much valuable humanitarian and social legislation, and ho was confident there had been no truer friend of the worker. Mr. Holland contended that tho Reform land policy had not been a failure, and that it had given effective support to tho secondary industries, lie said there was a rumour—he mentioned it to give tho other side of tho House an opportunity to deny it—that the Government intended to discontinue contributing to the sinking fund. He hoped this was not so. When the Reform administration had been criticised for its socalled reckless borrowing, no mention had been made of tho assets thereby obtained, and ho asserted that most of tho borrowed money was self-supporting. MORE LAUGHTER THAN USUAL. Mr. McDougall cicated considerably more than the usual amount of laughter by his references to the critics of his party and to previous speeches. He r«viewed the statements that Mr. Coates had adopted a sportsmanlike attitude and asked, “What else could he do?” He asserted that after bad administration for many years Mr. Coates had handed over his difficulties to Sir Joseph Ward, who had graciously said, “I forgive you brother, go and sin no more.’''

Mr. McDougall criticised the public works outlined by the previous speaker, questioning whether value had been received for money expended. He insisted that land aggregation had existed and and if it took that course, “it would be allowed to have more than one farm when there were people unable to earn

a living. Ho asserted that the Reform Government had never done anything for the working man or the small farmer ana never would. It was in its proper place in the House to-day, though personally he would like to see it one stage further along the Opposition benches. He criticised the action of the Reform Party in sending a “gunboat” to enforce its policy in Samoa. Ho intended to stand behind tho leader of the United Party right through. There was going to bo no surrender, and if the Reform Party did not like the legislation introduced it knew what wag the remedy, and if it took' that course, “It would be the end of them.” He thanked the Speaker for the latitude he felt had been allowed him.

Tho Hou. J. A. Stallworthy said it had been alleged that the Government had done nothing to relieve unemployment. He could not understand how sucn a statement could be made in face of tho fact that since the Government had been in office it had made available £3,000,000 which, transferred into wages, represented employment for a large number of people. The earthquake had been a terrible catastrophy for the country, and ho would not be surprised if eventually the cost of restoration exceeded £2,000,000. As Minister of Health lie would like to express his appreciation of the splendid efforts of the doctors and nurses in the hospitals in the earthquake area.

Returning to the subject of unemployment Mr. Stall worthy said th" root of the trouble was to be found in the “returned soldiers’ settlement blunder,” which had caused gross inflation in the value of properties throughout the Dominion. The second step was to be found in the compulsory clauses of the Dairy Control Act, which had cost the country at least £2,000,000 by tho slump it created. Then there was the policy of immigration in which tho Reform administration had persisted, notwithstanding the plea of the rapidly growing army of unemployed. New Zealand could solve the unemployment problem in a few weeks by putting into effect the slogan, “Buy New Zealand goods.” The House rose a.t, 10-58 p.m