PLAN DEFENDED

Taranaki Daily News, 27 September 1933, Page 7

PLAN DEFENDED

COALITION AND THE SLUMP

ADDRESS-1 N-RE PLY. DEBATE

LITTLE FRESH ARGUMENT

GAMBLING FACILITIES PLEA

PROBLEM OF SETTLEMENT

(By Wire—Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night.

With the opening of the Address-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives last night and in the Legislative Council yesterday afternoon, Parliament settled down to the business for which it has been called together. The debate in the House was initiated by the Government member for Christchurch North (Mr. H. Holland), who took up practically the whole of his time with a defence of the Government’s actions not only during the depression but also for many years past. His defence of past Governments brought him into conflict with the Labour Party, members of which constantly reminded him that there was a decided difference between the actions of past Governments and those of the Coalition Government, but Mr. Holland’s response was that they were all in the one camp now. Arguments advanced by Mr. Holland broke very little fresh ground. The seconder of the motion, Mr. W. J. Broadfoot. (Waitomo) dealt largely with land settlement problems, but the point in his speech that aroused most interest was his plea for an extension of gambling facilities. The debate was adjourned on the motion of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. H. E. Holland). k In the Council the debate was initiated by the Hon. W. W. Snodgrass and seconded by the Hon. C. J. Carrington, both of whom dealt with a wide variety of subjects.

CUT IN PENSIONS AND WAGES

“STATESMANLIKE POLICY”

RAPID SETTLEMENT URGED

By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night.

The formal Address-in-Reply motion was moved by Mr. H. Holland (Coalition, Christchurch North) when the House of Representatives resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr. Holland paid a warm tribute to the work that Lord and Lady Bledisloe had performed in all parts of the Dominion. Defending the Government’s policy in relation to social services, Mr. Holland said the pension cuts in New Zealand had not been so great as in other countries and the New Zealand Government had also cut down rents and other charges. The cost of living also had been reduced since 1929 so the pensioner was really better off to-day than he had been before the cuts. Mr. Holland defended the Government against any charge of treating returned soldiers harshly in the matter of pensions. He said the Dominion executive of the Returned Soldiers’ Association itself was convinced that the reductions were unavoidable. New Zealand was the only country in the world that paid its returned soldiers an economic pension. The Government in reducing the wages of the working community exercised a due sense of responsibility, Mr. Holland contended, and followed a statesmanlike policy in spreading the burden. He congratulated the Government and the Unemployment Board on the manner in which they had handled the tragic question of unemployment and favourably compared New Zealand’s efforts with those of other countries. He urged the Government to inquire into the possibilities of manufacturing industries absorbing more employees.

EXCHANGE MISAPPREHENSION.

Mr. Holland suggested the Government should take early steps to remove the misapprehension in the minds of merchants and importers regarding its future policy on the high exchange issue. He said rumours were in constant circulation that it was the intention of the Government to decrease or remove the exchange' rate almost immediately, and people were afraid to import because they feared that when goods on which they paid 25 per cent, exchange were landed the exchange would have been lifted.

He considered a clear statement as to the position of local tenderers for contracts on the new Wellington railway station would be appreciated. It had been stated local tenderers would not be penalised, but there still seemed to be some doubt on the point. Congratulating Mrs. McCombs on her success at the recent by-election, Mr. Holland expressed the hope that her career would be very successful and that Parliament and the country would be the better for her presence in the House.

LAND SETTLEMENT.

The motion was seconded by Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (Coalition, Waitomo), who said that for vitality and strength in the people one had to turn to the soil. That was why he had always advocated land settlement on right lines. For many years land settlement had been denied to the small man but the small farm scheme was providing avenues for settlers with little or no capital Land settlement was a slow process but progress to date had been sound. There were also areas being prepared for small settlments and in a short time the number of people on the land should be considerably increased. Mr. Broadfobt advocated simplification and resiliency in the administration of the small farm scheme. It was essential that the pace of settlement should be accelerated as far as possible. It had been said men with capital would not get an opportunity under the scheme but he contended the man with a few hundred pounds was a most suitable person to settle on the land.

NATIVE DEVELOPMENTAL WORK.

Mr. Broadfoot complimented the Native Minister on the excellent developmental work that had been done for Maoris. He had inspected the schemes and examined the costs and was convinced that a greater advance had been made than ever had been attempted, before. He suggested, however, that where there was more land available than was necessary for Native settlement the surplus should be taken over at a fair price for European settlement. The money arising from the sale of the land should be put into the hands of the Native Minister for developmental purposes. Mr. Broadfoot advocated amalgamation of all lending departments of State. This policy had been adopted in the United States and it was providing better facilities for advances to farmers. He suggested the State Advances Departments limit for lending money on stock should

be raised and that the time allowed for repayment should be extended. Mr. Broadfoot said it was well known that betting with bookmakers was on an extensive scale and he advocated elimination of this practice by providing an opportunity for silver bettors and larger investors to keep within the law. He considered racing clubs should be provided with the facilities for which they had been asking and that a State lottery should be established. He referred to the profits realised on State lotteries in Australia and the amounts r*ceived by the Governments in taxation.

The debate was adjourned on the motion of the Leader of the Opposition and the House rose at 9.10 pun. „■■■