The Daily News FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1935. THE GOVERNMENT’S CASE.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 November 1935, Page 4

The Daily News

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1935. THE GOVERNMENT’S CASE.

OFFICES: NEW PLYMOUTH, Currie Street. STRATFORD, Broadway. HAWERA. High Street.

It is not surprising that in addressing his constituents at New Plymouth last night the Hon. S. G. Smith should have devoted a considerable of his remarks to refuting the implications of opponents to. the Government that humanitarianism has had neither part nor lot in its legislative and administrative efforts during the past four years. The chief of the charges in that direction has been that in regard to the relief of the unemployed the Ministry has been callous as well as stupid. Mr. Smith’s brief review of the conditions since 1930 was salutary. In that year it was thought the number of registered unemployed would never exceed 20,000, and Parliament framed legislation accordingly, legislation that inevitably was experimental in character. Its first function was to give immediate temporary relief to those in need. Within two years, the unemployed figures had reached 75,000, and it is no wonder the scheme devised for the aid of 20,000 was tried to the utmost when asked to cope with nearly four times that number. Of course, mistakes were made, and there was during those two years grievous distress and suffering. But the whole community was suffering, some parts of it as much as the unemployed, and the relief that could be afforded was limited by the money available. Gradually the temporary relief phase and the worst of the depression passed, and it was possible to turn towards the only lasting method of reducing unemployment, namely, by stimulating more employment. All political parties agree that this is the only sound method. The Government believes employment should be increased by encouraging private enterprise through direct subsidies and by a cautious programme of State public works; Labour, that the State should itself provide work for all, regardless of its cost. Mr. Smitfti showed how key industries had been stimulated, and that a series of smaller enterprises were also being assisted, the condition for such assistance being that their establishment will increase employment and that they have a reasonable chance of becoming self-support-ing at a comparatively early date. The Minister referred to the success of the Small Farms scheme, and to efforts made to relieve the conditions of unemployed girls and women.. He explained the improvements in relief measures made possible by the general betterment in conditions, and claimed, with some justice, that they betokened not the mere promise of sympathetic treatment but its application when most needed. Moreover, all the relief afforded has been paid for by the taxpayers of the Dominion. It has been given without any tearing up of the monetary system, or leaving posterity to pay for generosity displayed with borrowed funds. That self-reliance has stood the Dominion in good stead, whatever may have been its effect upon the Ministry’s popularity. In regard to his policy as Minister of Education, Mr. Smith was able to show that as funds permitted the various inhibitions rendered imperative by the state of the Dominion’s finances in 1931-32 were being removed, and that what may be termed the technique of the system would be overhauled on the return of the Director of Education from his visit to England and America. The Minister’s

reply to his critics was pungent and pertinent. The Government, he said, had a record of actual accomplishment upon which it sought the verdict of public opinion. Whatever its failings, the National Ministry’s policy had brought the Dominion safely through a very perilous experience and to a point where the more exacting conditions of the policy could be eased to some extent. For those accomplishments, wlijch. the Government’s opponents could not deny, the latter offered a series of promises. Many of these were attractive enough on the surface, but as to the means of carrying them out not a single specific exposition had been given, and the more they were explained the less substantial the promises were seen to be. - When the choice of the electorate lies between reasonably satisfactory performance and irresponsible promises resting upon the availability of borrowed funds there should ,be little hesitancy in supporting the former.