GOVERNMENT’S POLICY

Taranaki Daily News, 8 November 1935, Page 7

GOVERNMENT’S POLICY

MR. SMITH’S EXPOSITION

REPLY MADE TO CRITICISM. ACHIEVEMENTS OF COALITION. ADDRESS TO CROWDED HOUSE. Standing room was at a premium in the Empire Theatre last night when the Hon. S. G. Smith, National Government candidate for the New Plymouth electorate, continued his political campaign. Several hundred persons unable to gain admission to the hall heard the address through loud speakers placed in Devon Street. Mr. Smith expressed gratification at the presence of such a large number to hear him fire the first shot at the main centre of the electorate. Mr. Smith had a good reception. There were interjections but they were mostly good-natured and the audience appeared to be in an exceedingly good humour. It was only when he was dealing with such topics as the Labour Party that the interruptions occasionally were in any way congested. To begin with the candidate reviewed the work of the Government on lines similar to those already published. Every step taken to apply remedies during the depression had been carefully thought out, he said, and every section of the community had been asked to help. Now the Government faced the election with a record of achievements and not with impossible promises. In relating the benefits brought about by the raising of the exchange rate he claimed that it had enabled the farmers to pay their debts without putting up the cost of living. (Laughter.) It was a record that could be substantiated— Mr. P. B. Fitzherbert: Then why run down inflation? Because that was inflation.

Referring to education the Minister said there would be a complete review of the' system when Mr. Lambourne returned from abroad. He was the first director of education to visit Great Britain and the Continent for 30 years. He had already written several very interesting letters concerning his investigations. Mr. Smith mentioned several directions in which it was hoped to make improvements and he predicted that visual • education and broadcasting would play a greater part than ever. SYSTEM STILL INTACT. Mr. Smith said that despite economies the system remained intact, which was more than could be said of some other countries. There had been no ruthless closing of schools and teachers’ salaries had been paid. He quoted conditions in America by way of contrast. Since he took over the portfolio teachers’ salaries had been increased by the restoration of cuts, 5 per cent, and 7% per cent.; the grant for handwork material had been increased; boarding allowance for primary children had been restored; high and technical boards and school committees’ incidental allowances had been increased; additional grants were made for the maintenance of buildings; the kindergarten grant was restored; and there was an increased grant for the Institute for the Blind; and a grant was made to school and class libraries. The five-year-old question was the subject of a petition and would be reviewed by Cabinet, .It was a question of finance. The reduction of large classes was also a question of finance. Much had been done in this connection, but the lack of finance had restricted the work. : Touching on the question of rationed teachers Mr. Smith said their position had been improved until this year they received £92 plus boarding allowances where necessary. Next year they would all be back in employment. • Every teacher would have a job to go to at the beginning of the year and he had received the congratulations of the president of the New Zealand Educational Institute on the position. Mr. Nash at New Plymouth had said the Government had not even allowed enough to keep schools decently clean and warm. That was utter rubbish. The Government had not decreased the vote. Last year and again this year £4OOO over and above the amount committees were entitled to under the scale was provided. He was aware some committees found it difficult to make ends meet. At present the department was working in an endeavour to find an improved basis for payment. To a questioner Mr. Nash had said he favoured the provision of transport for children to central schools where facilities for instruction were superior. This, however, was the present policy of the Government. It had been in force for years. The first consolidated school in New Zealand was established at Pio Pio, and others had since followed. There was no compulsion, however. Conveyance was a very heavy item of expendi-ture-more than £lOO,OOO per annum was spent. There was no doubt about the advantages of consolidation. LABOUR CRITICISED-

The Labour Party came in for the Minister’s criticism, particularly the guaranteed prices plan. He referred to the various interpretations of the scheme by different Labour members and quoted Mr. L'angstone as saying that if butter were sold at London at 6d they would pay the farmer Is 3d. A voice: He did not say that. Mr. Smith quoted Mr. Langstone’s pamphlet to confirm his statement. Mr. Savage had said at the Wellington town hall that the real issue of the election was “whether private banking corporations should continue in control of currency and credit.” Mr. Smith countered that by saying that currency and credit were now controlled by the Reserve Bank, which was owned and controlled by the people of New Zealand. Mr. Savage had said the money necessary to complete capital works must be raised by one or more of the following means: Taxation, borrowing, or an intelligent use of public credit and that further taxation was out of the question. Mr. Savage did not say that further borrowing was out of the question, but did admit that this method of financing “means debt in perpetuity." The Labour Party’s last card was the intelligent control and use of currency and credit, which would provide a “money service at cost.” What did “money service at cost” mean? Labour claimed to have a constructive policy, but during the depression there was not the slightest evidence of it. Summed up, •the party’s policy, if there was any, was nothing more or less than "buying a pig in a poke.” The local Labour candidate talked of 15 years of Labour Government in Queensland, but Mr, Smith contended Labour Governments there had been failures. They had been failures everywhere and such a Government would be a failure in New Zealand. A voice: What about Dick Seddon?

Mr. Smith; Who tried to undermine Seddon in 1904? The Labour Party. The candidate recalled L bour's attitude in 1913 and contended that Labour had undermined the old Liberal Party, Yet the party had the audacity to say that the mantle of the Liberals had fallen on it!

Speaking of Miss Elsie Andrews, Mr, Smith declared that a vote for her or the Democrats would be a vote for Labour. He quoted Mr. Ramsay MacDonald on the need for strong defences in contradistinction to Miss Andrews’ declared policy as a pacifist. Mr. Smith said he had a wife and six children and not for Mias Andrews or any other paci-

fist would he leave them defenceless. In the course of her opening address at Huirangi the Independent candidate said that she would vote against the Government on a no-confidence motion. She stated also that she had a great deal of sympathy with the Labour Party, and if it gained office she hoped it would have a fair deal, but she could not pledge herself to support Labour in everything. “I am sure the Labour Party must be very pleased with this extraordinary outburst of affection, coming as it does from one who is opposing its candidate,” commented Mr. Smith. “It is obvious that the Labour Party’s candidate was not aware of this friendly gesture on the part of the Independent candidate for New Plymouth, because at Fitzroy on the same evening he is reported to have characterised the Independents as ‘just a collection of heterogeneous ideas, with no common policy.’ I have already stated that the Independent candidate says she is prepared to vote to put the Government out of office. I am afraid it is another case of a voice crying in the wilderness.” NO “RIFF-RAFF.” Mr. Smith said he had been very surprised the other day when Miss Andrews had referrfll to the “riff-raff” that had come to New Zealand. During his period in Parliament he did not know of any “riff-raff” migrants to New Zealand and he. thought it was a very unfortunate remark for the candidate to make, (Hear, hear.) Mr. Smith next dealt with the Democrats. The deputy-leader, Mr. Veitch, at New Plymouth had referred to unemployment, he said. While Mr, Smith had not the slightest objection to fair criticism he took strong exception to remarks of his being distorted for the purpose of making political capital. Mr. Veitch had said it was little encouragement to the country to hear a Minister say, as the present Minister of Employment had said, on taking over the portfolio, that “T can’t solve the problem, the board can’t solve the problem and the Government could not . solve it," Taken from their context remarks could be twisted to mean something entirely different, - and that was precisely what had happened in this instance. On Jurte 21’ the Wellington City Council waited upon him as a deputation. The Mayor, Mr. T. C. A- Hislop, who had since been announced as the leader of the Democrats, was present. Tire council had previously announced its intention of ceasing all work under No, 5 scheme on July 31. That would have meant that Wellington relief workers would have had to go on sustenance and receive 3s a week less.

The Unemployment Board had no power to start major works in cities, and municipal bodies would be the first to object to interference in this respect on the part of the board. In the course of his reply to the deputation Mr, Smith remarked that co-operation was essential. He emphasised that the board alone could not solve thi unemployment problem and the Government alone could not solve ’it. They must have the complete co-operation of all local bodies, companies and private citizens as it was essential to supplement official measures for the solution of unemployment. “This is a vastly different statement to that bandied about by the Democrats,” commented Mr. Smith.

A number of questions were answered by the candidate. He said he was trying to rectify anomalies regarding the transportation of school children, such as the position of a boy, say, at Okato who had to pay bus fare to a high school at New Plymouth whereas a boy at Waitara could travel free by train. Unemployment administration cost 2j> per cent, of the income. A. questioner asked why it was necessary for the post office to get anything extra. Mr. Smith said the work was being done very cheaply and every care was being taken of the money. By doing the work the post office was keeping men employed on the staff. Answering a question about single men getting sustenance of 14s a week while the Unemployment Board had £1,300,000, Mr. Smith said that the board had certain commitments and actually the reserve was nothing near what it appeared ed be. Mr. Fitzherbert asked if it was true that 120,000 men had passed through the unemployment bureaux, meaning that they were stripped of everything they had. It was not true, said Mr. Smith. No one had been stripped of everything. He did not know what was meant by 120,000 persons unless Mr, Fitzherbert was including those who had been through twice, He said he was strongly in favour of a reciprocal arrangement with Australia so that a man over 65 years of age could receive a pension without having been 25 years in the Dominion. Was there any danger of the Government again voting itself in for four years? “The danger zone has been passed,” said Mr. Smith laughingly, “and there will be no further extension of the life qf Parliament.” . Replying to Mr. J. McKay he said that the watersiders at New Plymouth were under'the same rules regarding relief as watersiders were in other centres. After Mr. Smith had answered other questions a vote of thanks was moved by Mr. C. E. Bellringer, who was on the platform. The chairman, the Mayor (Mr, E. R. C. ■ Gilmour), asked for a vote, upon which there was a general chorus of “Ayes” followed by loud "Noes” from the back of the hall. Mr. Smith: What do you think of that? Those people have not even the courtesy to show their thanks. That is one of the main reasons why I am sure to go back to Parliament on November 27.