WHAT OTHER WRITERS ARE SAYING.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18045, 4 January 1927, Page 8

WHAT OTHER WRITERS ARE SAYING.

Our Land and Immigration. The Minister for Lands recently told the country that there is no idle or waste land which can now be taken up for profitable production. Is this really the case? Apparently the Minister honestly believed it is. for he has also offered to make a present of areas of land to syndicates of business men on the condition that they undertake to make them productive. If this is what of our immigration policy? Every passenger ship brings batches of immigrants. Our secondary industries cannot absorb them. Well, we refuse to take up a Defeatist attitude. We prefer to tirge that there is more to be said on the problem of land settlement than the Minister has set down. Are wc too sanguine in affirming that a more hopeful attitude is justifiable? If we are. then is it not highly important that Parliament should be asked to take up the land question as an urgent one? If the pessimistic views emanating from Government sources are justifiable then it is very clear that our immigration policy is a blunder. Whatever views may be entertained it seems clear we may all agree upon this—that it is the duty of the Government to produce a land policy or to go out of office.—“ Napier Daily Telegraph." Reduced Expenditure. The question will be asked, where are the Government to obtain their revenue if customs duties are lowered, to which it may be pointed out that the expenditure must be reduced. The Civil Servants arc not overpaid, but there are a great deal too many of them. There is a constant starting of new departments and sub-division of old departments. A Finance Minister who would go into the matter would find many opportunities of reducing expenses, and it is better to do so now than to wait until such a course mav be forced upon us. The interest on loans is steadily mounting up, and as we borrow a substantial sum each year, the total naturally grows. Much of this borrowed money is spent on making railways, although the chief engineer of the department returns from a trip round the world to tell us that motof competition threatens the railway in every country. We know he is right, for the same information reaches us by every mail. We are increasing the number of labourers engaged on public works instead of offering them opportunities to settle on land. Jf farmers have some constructive ideas to put forward they will meet with respectful hearing, for many people feel that there is something wrong with the state of affairs, although thev may' not be prepared with a remedy’. It is at least possible to reduce duties, and it would be well at the same time to 1 abolish a number of regulations, war 1 time rules, and various other anomalies I which serve no useful purpose, but rej quire officials to carry them out. while the officials require to be paid.—“ Wai- { lcato Times.” Wheat-Growing. W'hat the farmers in New Zealand should fight for is less protection, and therefore lower prices, for the things they have to buy. and for less interference with and restrictions upon their industry -in other words, for lower costs of production. It is quite a mistake to suppose that the primary industries will gain anything bv sharing the protective shelter that is given to manufacturing industries. That shelter can only apply to a part of their market; their wool, meat, cheese, butter, and other products must find their principal market, in other countries, where they receive no protection. W heat is so far an exception in that the Dominion does not at present produce sufficient for home consumption. But a moderate duty has not proved satisfying, nor would a heavier dutv. because this would inevitable be followed by increased duties on other things and new duties on things not yet protected, with the result that costs of production and of living would increase and none would be am* better off. Farmers of all branches should unite to secure lower costs and greater production per acre rather than to obtain higher prices with the artificial aid of tariffs. —‘' Tar ana k i Herald." Un-British Politics. Whatever may be Mr Langs private reasons for clinging so desperately to office in the face of successive reverses in Parliament, the fact remains that to dispassionate spectators the political tactics and deportment of the New South W ales Premier arc decided!v unBritish. It is in accordance with British political practice and sentiment that if the party in power encounters a strong expression of disapproval of its acts, it should appeal to the people for endorsement. In New South Wales the Upper House, in a strong!y-wordecKresolution, has protested to the Governor against the Premier's breach of faith in suifimoning the present session of Parliament before the expiry of the period of prorogation. Both in the Lower and Upper Houses the Premier's intentions with regard to the Budget have been frustrated by an adverse vote. These serious reverses ar/5 the last of a series which, in the British Parliament. would have sent the Government party to the polls for a popular mandate. Not so Mr Lang. He is the leader of a party which, by its class-con-scious constitution, has definitely seceded from the body politic: a political sect which remains in office for its own ends rather than for the general good. This is not government of the people, by the people, for the people. The virtue and force of Abraham Lincoln’s famous axiom has not been lost upon the American worker, who has consistently refused to regard himself as politically apart from his fellows. He has preferred to concentrate his energies on improving his industrial and economic osition independently of f politics.—" Dominion.”