GOVERNMENT DEFENDED

Taranaki Daily News, 5 September 1935, Page 7

GOVERNMENT DEFENDED

REPLY TO LABOUR PARTY CRITICISM OF ITS PLATFORM. ACHIEVEMENTS OF COALITION. IMPROVED ECONOMIC POSITION. By Telegraph—Press Association. ..Wellington, Last Night. Sir Alfred Ransom, who replied to Mr. M- J. Savage, Leader of the Opposition, in the Address-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives to-day, said he welcomed the opportunity of exposing the fallacious policy declared by the Leader of the Opposition. What the House was anxious to hear was that if the country had no confidence in the present Government, what was the Government that was to succeed it going to do? The Leader of the Opposition had not put forward any policy whatever. Mr. Savage had stated the national debt between 1928 and 1933 had increased by £33,0(10,900, but,-Sir Alfred said, he knew that if the Labour Party were in power and gave effect to its own proposals it would increase the national debt by more than £30,000,000 in one year. Sir Alfred said he regarded the passing of the Unemployment Act as on© of the noblest things ever done. The sacrifice the people of New Zealand had been prepared to make under that Act to his mind was wonderful in the extreme when they had regard to the fact that those in employment had contributed not less than £14,000,000 to meet the needs of their fellows, who were unemployed. ‘ THE BLANK CHEQUE. Referring to the fact that in 1931 the country gave the Government a blank cheque in regard to its administration, Sir Alfred said he could prove the cheque had' never been dishonoured and that the people of N©W Zealand were the better for having given the Government a blank cheque,’ Th© administration of th© Government had been of. such a character that non© of th© Dominions of the Empire could show a better record. Sir Alfred proceeded t© deal with points made by members of the Labour Party in various parts of the country during th© recess- Mr, Savage had said the prosperity of the country depended on the buying power of the people, but it should be well known to Mr. Savage that it depended almost entirely upon the buying power of the people of the United Kingdom, and the buying power of the people there was ever.on the increase under th© present administration. Labour’s policy, if put into operation, would more than double the taxation per head of population, and not a single penny of it would ©om© from overseas. The member for Lyttelton was frank when he said the money would come from those who had it. EXPANDING MARKET.

Mr. Savage had said th© raising of toe exchange had lessened the British market for Dominion products, but his own statement showed that the export of dairy produce had doubled in ten years. New Zealand’s problem was one of price, not of demand. Labpur advocated guaranteed prices, but if this were to be done by a levy on imports it would mean the raising of th© rate of exchange from £125 to £l5O if it were based on the average prices for the past six or eight years. Exchange was now a matter for .th© Reserve Bank to determine.'_ Mr. Savage had contended that credit should be controlled in toe interests of the people by a national credit authority. It was controlled now by th© Reserve Bank, 'Sir Alfred denied that recent legislation established a virtual dictatorship in primary industry. He said that in effect it did toe exact opposite, by removing its operations from political', cpntrol to an elecfiv© corporation, Increased production, Sir Alfred claimed, was not a matter for regret. There had. been a huge increase ©f supplies to the British market, but it was ‘a factor over which New Zealand had no control.

Mr. Savage had said an adjustment of the overseas debt should be attended to immediately, but that was already being done as the loans fell due. He claimed the Government’s legislation and administration had kept the country’s credit good and that it was necessary to maintain a stable Government whose credit overseas stood high. Sir Alfred dealt at length with guaranteed prices. He said dairymen at a conference had rejected the Labour proposals, ,and that that was the opinion of men well versed in the dairying industry. They endorsed the view that the scheme of guaranteed prices was economically unsound. Sir Alfred defended the formation of the National Government, which, he said, was done to deal with the problems of the depression. It had reduced the rates interest and rent, which had benefited town and country alike. .He also referred to other acts of the Government. He said the graduated land tax was intended to enforce the breaking up of large estates, but it was not MW effective. It was a heavy charge pn primary industry, irrespective of income, and was abolished by the Government to the benefit of town and country alike. There was indisputable evidence, Sir Alfred concluded, that improvement in the country’s prosperity was both apparent and real, and he contrasted the position to-day with that of 1931-32. He said the trading position had improved, imports had increased, wool and butter were up in price, the meat position was good, finances were buoyant, bank returns showed. an increase in business, unemployment figures were down and the wages bill had increased by £3,600,000. LABOUR’S PLATFORM. Mr. W. Nash (Lab., Hutt) defended the guaranteed price proposal. Referring to Sir Alfred Ransom’s statement regarding the sacrifice by those in work he said he did not think any wage earner who received anything over a living wage objected in the slightest to paying money out of that wage to help his unfortunate brother, but the tax was not fairly and equitably levied. He asserted that the British manufacturer was not satisfied with the exchange position, which raised a 25 per cent, barrier against British goods. Mr. Nash criticised the Government for endeavouring to pay back loans and not borrowing when the people through the last four years were starving. The Labour Party was concerned with seeing that the farmer received a fair return for his labour. He wanted cash, and that was what the Labour Party would endeavour to give him. He was surprised that the Minister had referred to the Post Office Savings Bank, he said. He thought that sort of propaganda had disappeared Jong ago. The Minister knew those with whom he was associated would not do anything to the people’s savings that he would not do himself. He criticised the Mortgage Corporation, practically a public body, for increasing the rents of houses which had fallen back into its hands, which, he said, was done simply because there was an acute shortage of houses. He thought legislation should be passed to prevent the corporation raising rents to an uneconomic figure. Mr. Nash Government with

things it was proposed to do in this election year, such as the improvement in soldiers' pensions, invalidity pensions, national insurance and standard rates of pay for the unemployed. Mr. C. H. Clinkard (Co., Rotorua) said it was humbug to suggest the people of New Zealand could consume all the Dominion produced; New Zealand had to export the surplus in order to secure goods of which she was short. He would have liked the Labour Party to have given the House an estimate of the cost of putting its schemes into operation, Throughout the depression the Government had carried a pensions burden of more than £3,000,000 a year; yet not one word of commendation came from the Opposition benches. The debate was adjourned and the House rose at 10.30. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. ADMINISTRATION AMENDMENT. Wellington, Last Night. When the Legislative Council met today the Hon. W. H. Mclntyre (Buller) and the Hon. W. W. Snodgrass (Nelson), whose terms expired this week, were sworn in again as members of the Council. The Administration Amendment Act was introduced and read a first time. Members of the Council paid tributes to the memory of the late Mr. James Craigie, and a motion of condolence was passed with the relatives.