STATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLV, Issue 21088, 14 July 1938, Page 12

STATE OWNERSHIP OF LAND

Government View Sought ‘ Minister Should Resign ” WELLINGTON, July 12.

A request for an explanation of the Government’s attitude towards the objective of State ownership and control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, was made by the president of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, Mr W. W. Mulholland, in his address to the farmers to-day. He contrasted statements made by the Hon. F. Langstone about State ownership of farms, with more recent statements by the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. M. J. Savage, making the claim that if Mr Savage’s statements could be accepted at their face value, then Mr Langstone should resign.

“I do not know what the Government's policy is with regard to the State ownership and control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange,” he said. “I do know that the leaders of the Federation of Labour, who claim to have 180.000 members. stand definitely for this policy. I do know that the Labour Party at its last conference discussed and reaffirmed it as the first plank in their platform, and I know further that they omitted to mention that fact in the official report of the conference appearing in their official journal. “When Mr Savage finds it necessary to take some notice of the demand to know what the Government’s policy is. he gives an assurance that the Government is not trying to socialise the people’s clothes or their perambulators. This manner of turning off a most serious question only strengthens the suspicion that a State ownership and control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, is the deliberate. but undisclosed policy of the Government.” An examination of some of the measures passed by the Government shows that they have powers which without reference to Parliament would enable them to take over and control transport and industry to an astonishing degree. All of these acts have been introduced as measures intended for their immediate purpose, and can quite well ave no ulterior motive, but the powers which they give to the administration are startling and make the necessity of knowing the real objective of the Government imperative. “Addressing the Labour Conference in support of the Government’s land policy the Minister for Lands, the Hon. F. Langstone, made it quite clear that it meant what it said, that it was the policy of the Government and that State ownership and control of farms was actually in operation.

“No Specific Denial” “The Prime :Minister has seemed to contradict Mr Langstone’s statement of policy when he said at Levin recently: The Government was supposed to be going to socialise the lana, but what on earth could it do with the land, if it did socialise it? It would have to put the people now on the land back to work on it, and they would not work as hard for 'he State as they did for themselves.’

“This should be a definite denial of the Government’s intention to embark on the State ownership and control of

farms. But is it? There is no specific denial. It may seem to be an unworthy suspicion that a Prime Minister would employ such a subterfuge, but I am faced with the fact that the Minister for Lands lias said that that policy is now in operation.

“If the Prime Minister’s words can be accepted at their face value, then the resignation of the Minister for Lands seems to be called for.”