A GOOD RETURN

Timaru Herald, Volume CLVI, Issue 22968, 11 August 1944, Page 4

A GOOD RETURN

The Man On The Land Claim By Labour Member (N.Z.P.A.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 10. An overseas visitor to New Zealand might imagine from the remarks of Opposition members that the plight of the Dominion's farmers to-day was desperate, declared Mr C. M. Williams (Government, Kaiapoi) resuming the debate on the Budget in the House to-night. Actually they were getting much better returns for their labour since this Government took office. His own family were farming to-day and they were getting a better deal than ever he got as a farmer under the Tory Government. Year after year under the present regime farmers were steadily reducing their mortgages, indicating an improvement of their financial position. They were getting a reasonably fair share of the national income. The position of farmers in New Zealand compared well with that of farmers elsewhere. Their costs had been stabilised more successfully and they benefited by extensive subsidies. An instance of the subsidies to farmers was that last year the Government paid £1,100,000 as a superphosphate subsidy. This year, with the increased ration, the amount would be considerably greater. Another example of the Government’s assistance was that freight subsidies last year totalled £114,000. It had to be remembered, too, that farmers did not produce all the value of our exports. Freezing workers, transport workers and others also contributed to that national wealth. Mr Williams suggested that the lump sum received from Britain was necessary to the maintenance of our stabilisation policy. That argument might have been presented to Britain on our behalf. He advocated universal family allowances. The present system, he said, led to some men refusing to earn more because by doing so they would lose the allowance. Determined On Freedom Mr E. B. Gordon (National, Rangitikei) said it was strange, in view of the paramount need for primary production, that the Government did not always back farmers up. Actually at times the Government seemed to go out of its way to antagonise the farmer and annoy him by introducing contentious legislation, by using the war emergency to further its socialistic programme, by failing to consult the industry and thus bring about national co-operation for the country's welfare. Was it, perhaps, that the forces behind the Government were trying to get control of the primary industry? If so they were trying in vain, for farmers' were determined that after the war they were going to regain their freedom and run their own industry. Farmers were suspicious of what the Government might do next. Their implements and equipment had deteriorated so that farmers were unable to bring their farms into full production immediately when the Government called on them, for increased yields. In addition, the cost of materials they had to use daily had increased to a great extent in spite of the Government’s claims to have stabilised costs, with a result that the farmer’s income was further reduced every time he had to make replacements. Mr Gordon also contended that the meat schedule was against the production of more meat as prices did not encourage the breeding of heavier stock. Use of Credit The Hon. F. Langstone (Government, Waimarino) said the greatest problem

facing New Zealand to-day was not rehabilitation or land settlement, but getting out of debt. There was talk about the four freedoms, but the only wav the four freedoms could come was by getting out of debt. But New Zealand was piling debt upon debt. He believed that most of the debt could be cancelled out through the use of public credit. Of the £35,000,000 put into circulation £23,000,000 had been spent on housing. Houses had been built and paid for, so there was really no debt, because all that had been done was to transform materials into homes owned by the State through the use of the public credit. Tire whole of the £35,000.000 could be cancelled out and the internal debt reduced by that amount. The people had paid for everything. No Government could give the people anything; all that the Government could do was to organise. Then there were £55,000,000 in Treasury Bills. That was use of the public credit. A tremendous amount of purchasingpower had been pumped into circulation, and in the trading banks current accounts had increased from £34,000,000 in 1938 to £87,000,000. That was an increase of £53,000,000 in purchasing power at a time when there were fewer goods on the market, and therein there was a danger of inflation. There was a plethora of money, but not among the working people. It had gone to people who could not spend it, so they were looking for investments. As a result bank and industrial shares were in demand, and had increased in value. He suggested tnat the way to stop inflation was to put all or a proportion of that surplus money into the Reserve Bank and freeze it there.

Mr M. H. Oram (National, Manawatu): How would you get hold of it?

Mr Langstone said the hon. member knew the power of legislation. If there was a will to do a thing it could be done.

The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 10.30 p.m. Mr Fraser announced that the Imprest Supply Bill would be introduced to-morrow, and he hoped it would pass through all its stages.