REPLY TO DEMOCRATS

Taranaki Daily News, 25 November 1935, Page 13

REPLY TO DEMOCRATS

MR. SMITH AT WAITARA CHARGES OF STATE SOCIALISM. PROBLEMS OF UNEMPLOYMENT. A detailed reply to criticisms made by Mr. T. C. A. Hislop, leader of the Democrat Party, at New Plymouth on Wednesday night, was made by the Minister of Employment and Education, the Hon. S. G. Smith, when addressing a meeting at the Clifton Hall, Waitara, on Friday. The Mayor, Mr. J. Hine, presided over an attendance of about 200. A vote of thanks and confidence in the candidate, moved by Mr. J. Parry, was earned after he had had some difficulty in speaking. Mr. T. Ewens, who had previously asked several questions, attempted when Mr. Parry was speaking to ask another question. He was ruled out of order by the chairman, and immediately appealed to the audience, which unhesitatingly demanded that the question should be heard. Mr. Hine thought otherwise, however, and again ruled Mr. Ewens out of order and this time the questioner accepted the ruling. An incident which kept the crowd in good humour occurred immediately before Mr. Ewens’ outburst when a man stood up near the back of the hall and attempted to ask Mr. Smith a question. He was ordered by Mr. Hine to sit down but he persisted and was finally spoken to by Constable F. Lemm. The man reiterated several times that he was a single man and the Minister good humouredly replied that he would do his best to get the questioner married. “I ■ just wanted to have a cackle,” the man said as he sat down.

One other incident of note occurred when Mr. Smith was reading rapidly from his notes. “Mr. Speaker,” a hollow voice from the back of the hall called, “the honourable member is reading his speech.” “I ask your leave to read the speech,” said Mr. Smith in reply. “As a Minister, I am in a responsible position and in my desire to have absolute accuracy in my statement I am reading the speech.” The audience applauded the reply. Replying to Mr. Hislop’s criticisms, of the public accounts, the Minister said the question resolved itself into one of bookkeeping. Treasury had used certain methods of accounting which were in accord with the accountancy practice and with the way the British Treasury presented its accounts. The AuditorGeneral had said that this way of presenting the accounts was not right. But what Mr. Hislop .failed to tell the people was that the Auditor-General did not raise the question of the correctness of the accounts. ABSURD CHARGE. ' Mr. Hislop also charged the Government with what he termed “State Socialism” and said that three members on Mr. Coates’ staff believed wholeheartedly in State socialism. By inference he made it appear that these gentlemen were responsible for and dictated the Government’s policy. The charge was too absurd to 'be taken seriously and Mr. Hislop did not know what he was talking about. Mr. Hislop instanced the Agriculture (Emergency Powers) Act and tried to raise a bogey to scare the farmers in regard to the powers given to the Executive Commission of Agriculture, said Mr. Smith. The Democrat leader overlooked the fact * that the greatest problem confronting the Government in 1934 was the parlous condition of the dairy industry, and raised the bogey of compulsory closing of butter factories, and of complete power and control over every farmer. The main function of the Executive Commission would be directed towards co-ordinating the activities of the producers’ and towards the extension and improvement of existing markets. The men comprising the personnel of the Commission' were experienced, despite anything said to the contrary by Mr. Hislop. They were out to help and not to hinder primary industries and had no thought of throw-

ing thousands of dairy factory cm-! ployees out of work, as had been sug- < gested. Another gross misrepresentation by: Mr. Hislop made at New Plymouth, was that a pamphlet issued by Mr. Coates contained the final utterance that gen-! orally the great need was socialisation • of agriculture. This was a gross mis-! statement, said Mr. Smith. He made the J definite assertion that this statement did not occur in any pamphlet issued by Mr. G»osiLes» In a paper read to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Wellington) by Dr. Campbell on September 10, 1934, entitled “England's Changing Agriculture— Its Implications for Countries of Supply” there appeared a remark which was ■ a purely objective statement summarising the discussion on the various cquii-j tries examined. It was as follows: “Generally the developments and the prospects sketched in these pages point to the need, to a degree, that is not defined, of socialisation of agriculture.” At that time Dr. Campbell was on Mr. Coates’ staff but he was now in England. It would be seen that a very clumsy attempt had been made .to attribute remarks to Mr. Coates which were taken from a talk by Dr. Campbell and with which Mr. Coates had nothing whatever to do. TASK OF RECOVERY. Mr. Hislop on the eve of municipal election at Wellington, said: “I stand on a platform of actual work done, and not of mere words, saying what I will do. I had to face a fall in revenue of no less than 33 per cent. ... the full blast of proportions . . .' an actual deficit in our accounts. Compare this with the position to-day. Financial stability has been restored ... I have had a difficult time, and now, with gradually improving times, I desire to complete the task of recovery.” If Mr. Hislop practised what he preached, said Mr. Smith, he would stand down and let those who were competent get on with the job. Mr. Hislop referred at New Plymouth to unemployment and ridiculed the efforts of successive Ministers. He boasted that when the Democrats were in power they would cure the evil and implied that everything in the garden would be lovely. Unemployment was not peculiar to'Nev? Zealand, the Minister commented. The best brains had tackled the problem all over the world and been unable to evolve a complete cure.

Brushing aside all that had been done in New Zealand, Mr. Hislop had said there were 10,000 more on the dole today than at any time during the past three years. This would be a ludicrous statement, if it were not so tragic, Mr. Smith said. What Mr. Hislop meant but did not wish his hearers to understand was that to-day there were 10,000 more men on sustenance than at any period during the past three years because of the inability of local bodies to provide suitable employment under No. 5 scheme. Mr. Hislop, said Mr. Smith, very carefully avoided any reference to the fact that this state of affairs was in no small measure due to the action of the Wellington City Council, under his own chairmanship, in deciding ;to discontinue operating under No. 5 scheme at the end of the financial year and in advising all other local bodies to follow suit. Mr. Hislop referred in scathing terms to scheme No. 5, out he did not tell the people that he voted for its retention at a meeting of the Wellington City Council. “Notwithstanding all this,” said Mr. Smith, “I state unhesitatingly that the total number of men who are to-day a charge on the unemployment fund is substantially reduced as against the increase a year ago and is the lowest at any time during the past three years. It is only fair to state that the Wellington City Council absorbed several hundred men in full-time employment as an alternative procedure to having large numbers on scheme No. 5, but it inevitably means that the number of sustenance referred to as ‘on the dole’ must increase as a result of this action.”