POLITICAL POINTS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16905, 2 December 1922, Page 17

POLITICAL POINTS.

WHAT THE CANDIDATES ARE SAYING. Sir Heaton Rhodes characterises as untrue the criticism that the Government paid excessive prices lor laud for soldier settlement. What does the Returned Soldiers Association say? “I do not think anyone can deny people the right to bring relatives to such a good country as this."—Mr J. Bitchener, Waitaki. “ To my mind the Reform Party is neither lish, flesh, fowl, goat, red herring, or blue rock-cod.” —Mr H. M. Jones, Liberal candidate for Ashburton. A waterside worker approached Mr Veitch and remarked that the colours lie was wearing, red and blue, were almost the same as those of Mr Massey: “ You only want the white to make them completa," added the watersidor. “ The two colours do me.” replied Mr Veitch. “ 1 will leave the white feather for Mr Massey." Mr John Gilchrist, Labour candidate for Dunedin Central, drew’ a picture at one of his recent meetings of the visions which, it is stated, are presented to prospective immigrants for Xew Zealand; "A lovely, undulating farm, with lambkins, cows and horses all playing about the feet of the sheep." And no one even smiled in tho meeting which was obviously sympathetic to the candidate. Mr A. E. Jull, Independent Liberal candidate said Hi at since his last address in Napier many voices had been heard in Napier, including that of Mr Massey. The latter had missed point in not imposing an amusement tax on political gatherings. ter). The proceeds could be disposed of by consolation stakes for the losers. The Napier newspapers had not overwhelmed him by their welcome, hut they were somewhat pannickv. Lik*» the late George Fisher. lie believed that as hoth papers were opposing him lie would he elected.

Although the Premier had declared against proportional representation, said Air dull, in 1911 the same person had advocated the very self same thing lor the Legislative Council. In 1914 an Act was put on the Statute Book hut it had never been brought into iorce. The nav proportional representation had been attacked suggested that it was a dreadful thing: perbaps.it was because it was in the Labour platform. Mr Dooley, of the Australian Labour Party, was opposed to it—but it had ended his term of service. He favoured tho majority ruling and the minority being heard, but that was not the rule in all countries. The British Government had (it) per cent of the representation or. 40 per cent of the votes. Surely such a state of affairs needed a remedy. The people should have an opportunity of giving their votes in order of preference. This could even be done in single electorates »urt the order of preference would decide who should represent Napier. He had advocated the system for nine years—-Mr A. E. .Jull, Independent candidate for Napier.

Rather an amusing interlude occurred at Mr Russell's Armagh. Street meeting last night. The candidate had .lust begun to speak on women in Parliament. and was pointing out that- a circular issued by Mrs Herbert’s supporters as to the English elections was i ncorrect. Ho stated, as showing the success of female representation, that thirty-throe female candidates were nominated at Home. Mr Bussell pointed out that only two candidates were returned -Lady Astor and Mrs V> intringham, who were in the previous Parliament. Suddenly a voice cried. Coward! Mr Russell at once walked over to tho interjeetor. and turning to the audience said. “ Ladies and gentlemen, we have Mr Herbert present. I appeal TO you whether I have uttered one word disrespectful to the lady candidate ? ’’ A chorus of noes ’’ came from the crowd. Then, turning to Mr Herbert, Mr Russell said. •* f

j'ffll will' stay ami Wr' niv Russell then preceded to say that a lighting arena like the House of Representatives was not the place for women. hut he thought they might with advantage he given seats in the- more serene Legislative Council. where there wa.s no party and which sat only for an hour or two in the afternoons. He also reviewed Airs Herbert’s platfiom and showed that in its main points he. as Minister, had already carried into effect her proposals.

Miss Ellen Melville, "Independent" Reform candidate for Roskill, doesn’t want any .sympathy votes. She said so at one of her meetings. Don’t vote for her because she is a woman, and don’t refuse to vote for her because she. is a woman. That was Miss Melville’s plea. She claims to he able to think and act as well as most candidates. \\ liatever the lady cannot do she certainly can juggle with figures. Millions of pounds sterling were talked of with studied case. She invests everything with millions—education. soldic:\s’ land, exports and imports, railwav,. houses— l,nt her address is not o\ crpoweringly more interesting as a result. Her audience was quiet and attentive, all that an audience should he. except that it was a little drowsy. It was a real women’s meeting—the audience resembled a church congregation. There were roses in a howl on the table, and they certainly looked more attractive than the usual water jug and glass which, on a warm night ; are somewhat tantalising.

The doctrine of State ownership received a rude blow in an unexpected quarter on Monday evening. Mr R. G. h. Mason, the, Labour candidate- Mr Eden, was asked what the Labour Party would do with laud surrender ’d undor its scheme. “Tho State will sell it to people 1.110 want to use it.” ho replied. Almost a shudder of astonishment went through tiie .audience, which was eo nposed mainiy of Labour supporters. Hr Mason apparently is ot the opinion that land >.u-,1 1 h<. r , ir _ cliased on present valua.i.jns, for he mentioned that in s ~:ms ; would gain and in others lose. “But would the Labour Party trade in the freehold? ' asked n mail in tones of the greatest seriousness. -‘The Labour Candida to said that land surrendered to the Crown would be leased." “I do not lit ink so, as I understand the Laboor platform." replied the candidate. Mell. Labour believes in the freehold.' said another member of the audience, which had become -most anim a ted “ Yes. ’' replie d Mr Mason. “ lth the limitations T have already referred to. Our aim is to stop specii--1 a Moil There is.no idea that men should have the worries of a leasehold tenure We will secure to the owner the fruit of his labour, and to the community the community-created value. Inafc is the essence of our land scheme.” In reply to a further question. Mr Mason said that a Labour Government, would sell land surrendered tc ft “oti the same terms." It was evident that about Mr .Mason’s interpretation of Labour’s land policy there it a good deal of elasticity.. - ’

“We m New- Zealand cannot afford not to have immigration from Britain.’’ declared -Miss E. Melville, candidate for Roskill. She thought-, unless we were very watchful, we should he overrun wifi the yellow .races of the Pacific, and that would hardly be a desirable tiling.