LABOUR’S BOMBSHELL

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 77, Issue 157, 5 July 1934, Page 5

LABOUR’S BOMBSHELL

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE PARTY STATEMENT READ II DEPUTY-LEADER NOT PARTICIPATING FURTHER IN DISCUSSION A novel plan for disposing of the Address-in-Reply motion, so far as the Labour Party was concerned, was put into practice by the Opposition in the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon, when the Deputy-Leader of the Opposition, .Mr. P. Fraser, obtained permission to read a statement, which was put forward as the Labour Party’s sole contribution to the debate. He said the Government had no new policy, and therefore there was no need at that stage for a reaffirmation of the LabourParty’s attitude. Labour wished to hear what the Government’s plan was for restoring prosperity, and also what the Government’s intentions were in regard to various questions of the day. Government members described as extraordinary the LabourParty’s attitude, and said there was nothing practical and nothing constructive in Labour’s statement. It laid down no workable way by which its suggestions could be carried out. If Labour had a plan it should be brought out in the debate.

LABOUR STATEMENT CONTRIBUTION TO DEBATE. • [ Per Prean Association. I WELLINGTON, July 4. AV lieu the Address-in-Reply debate I was resumed in the House or Jicprescn- ; talivos this afternoon, Mr. P Eraser . (Labour, \\ euington Central)* sought! . permission to read a statement on ue- | ; naif of the Leader of the Opposition, i j who was in Auckland, No oojectiion ; | was raised. I Mr. Eraser said: “On behalf of the | Leader of the Opposition and the i Labour Party as a whole, 1 have to I say that we do uot propose to particij pate funther than this statement in ; I the Address-in-Reply debate. Apart , | from the personal note in His Excel- i iency’s address, which we appreciate and reciprocate, and the hospitable re- | ; i'erence bo the projected visit of the ! i Duke of Gloucester, both of which mat- i ; ters are outside tne scope of political ! controversy, the address, for wnich of ! ' course the Ministry is responsible, in the opinion of the Labour Party is . empty and devoid of any hope or prospect of that constructive policy which New Zealand so urgently needs. Most I certainly it does not warrant Parliament devoting much time or considera- ’ uion to the discussion of its contents, j the Labour Party has repeatedly, in i the House and on many platforms - throughout the Dominion,- criticised, ondemned and opposed the GovernI meat’s legislative and. administrative ' policy and actions. The Government’s I programme, as announced in His Excelency’s address, indicates no deviation .roin that policy and its administration. I rherefore, there is no need at this stage for a reaffirmation of t<he Labour Party’s attitude, which is clearly understood by the House and country. The Labour Party will reserve further criticism until the actual proposals and measures are before the House. “Both the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance have affirmed that the Government has a plan to restore prosperity to the country. The labour Party is anxious to give the Government an early opportunity to bring down its plan and the legislation necessary to give effect to Urat plan. We are particularly desirous of learning as soon as possible what steps the Government proposes to take in connection with: “(1) Return of purchasing power to the mass of the people by the restoration of wage, salary and pension cuts, and raising relief pay to standard rates, thereby assisting industry and business generally, as well as those immfiately affected. “(2) Restoration of employment in productive development work for those at present unemployed. “(3) Guarantee to workers in all fields of industry and service, of wages and salaries sufficient to secure a standard of living in accord with the resources of the Dominion. “(4) Maintenance and development of primary and manufacturing industries on a basis that will give a reasonable return to the farmers and manufacturer, and improved working conditions and hours for the employees con cornea. “(;)) Readjustment of indebtedness to save the equities of those who built up farms and homes, and lifetime savings of many people. “(6) Reorganisation of the system of public works, and the transfer of many of those at present on relief work to the construction of roads, railways, bridges, school and houses, e/tc., necessary and essential to the deve.opnicnt of the Dominion. “(7) Extension of a marketing system for surplus products, and the making of reciprocal agreements for the exchange of those products for commodities and service which will not interfere with our national progressive manufacturing industries. “(8) National control of banking, credit and currency. “We ask for the Government’s plan and its legislation. The Government has been in. office for two and a-half years, and the distress to-day is greater than when it asked the peopb to give it the alleged blank cheque to redeem the country. We afiiriu that the democratic development of the Dominion can only be ensured by a dissolution of the House at the close of the present session, and an appeal to the people to say whether they approve or disapprove of the Government and its policy during the three years for which it was elected to office. “In conclusion, we would once more direct the Government’s attention to the appalling fact that thousands of families have been driven below the subsistence level, and are short of even the bare necessaries of life. It is surely something to be ashamed of that in a country that produces an abundance of food and clothing materials for adequate and comfortable homes, many thousands of men, women and children are suffering through a lack of these. Surely it is time in New Zealand, at any rate, to end the anomaly of poverty in the midst of plenty. Once more we appeal to the Government to reverse its disastrous policy and to restore the purchasing power to the people generally by the means we have indicated and embark on a bold and effective plan of reconstruction. The Labour Party will sup-

port proposalsJn that direction: it will oppose and persist in opposing a continuation of the Government’s present policy. The Labour Parity will con- ! tinue to strive for economic and social : conditions that will guarantee at least adequate food, clotuing, shelter and I other necessaries essential to the i amenities of life for every man, woman ' j and child in the Dominion. We be- i ’ lieve this objective not only economic- i 1 ally, socially and morally sound, but ; j eminently ancr immediately practicable. ” ‘ ‘Most Extraordinary.' ’ Hon J- A. Young continued the deoate. He said that the tactics the House had just seen adopted were most I unusual, and not creditable. It. seemed a moat extraordinary thing to adopt an t [attitude of that sort. The Labour: Party had been criticising the Govern- ; ■ meat all round the country, yet in the 1 House, which was the place to do it, ( 'and where criticism could be answered, { [it was going to keep silent. The Gov- ! eminent, he contended, had a policy which was laid down after the election, and after proper investigation made in many ways. A policy had been laid down which, it was estimated, would take four years to work out. He said I the purchasing power of the country [was governed by what the surplus primary products realised. The country had to live within its means. The unemployment problem was ini|proving, but it would never do if the j I Government fixed standard rates of pay i |for unemployed, as the position would I never be cured. If the unemployment ; were raised to £2 10s a week it would j mean that the present unemployment ; , taxation would have to be doubled. I The policy of the Government was be- I ginning to be seen in the unemployment I figures, which were declining. He said | there was nothing practical and noth- I ing constructive in the Labour Party 's ; statement. It laid down no workable | way by which its suggestions could be | carried out. If Labour had a plan it should be brought out in that debate He said that public works were being carried on according to the resources of the country. Care had io be taken that at a time like the presei/. an adequate return had to he received ’ from public works expenditure. The Government could not take any short cuts in deailing with currency matters. They had to proceed »very carefully and ‘ in a matter of that sort it was always wise to steer a safe course. That w.is ’ what the Government was doing. ' Mr. Young said the Government was not going to be intimidated, but would ' act in the best interests of the peoplein carrying out the policy it ha l laid ' down. Mr. W. A- Veitch (Government, Wanganui). thought the people of the Dominion had been unnecessarily taxed. 1 He advocated a reduction of the. unem- ' ployment taxation. He thought that without reducing the benefits now re- ' ceived by the unemployed, ; levy could be eliminated and the wa ■ tax reduced to ninepcnce. He criti< is< d : the raising of tire exchange, which he 2 said kept up .false land values. He sai 1 it was the wealthy farmer who received ' ihe most benefit of the exchange. The mortgagC’C took the increased share that rhe small farmer received, and he J had to buy at an increased price because of the exchange. Mr. Veitch urged that secondary industries should be encouraged, and that t they should be regarded as complemeiii- tarv to the primary industries, i Mr. 11. S. S. Kyb G ent, R I carton) said that if secondary industries were not doing well, it was the r l fault of the industries themselves. They had the benefit of the exchange. r and everywhere he went he h s-.r : r praise for the Government. In fact, 1 the manufacturers appreciated the Gov . ernment more than the farmers, and ve* it was supposed to be a farmers’ G • j ernment. Mr. Kyle also made a strong plea for i the removal of the embargo on stud t stock from Britain. f Mr. W. A. Bndkin ('Government, s Central Otago), said that the action r,f rhe Labour Partv called for some com- ) nient. He said that Government mem1 ber.s had ignored the Labour member;-' - efforts during the recess because they - felt they would have the opportunitv 2 and privilege of replying to ’.-.bnur’s e case in the House. However, the Labr our Party had apparentlv concluded s that for party purposes it was 1 profitable to exploit the suffering of ’the poor throughout the country ■ nan to nut - up arguments in the Hous 0 . Mr. Bodkin J thanked the Government for the assist* ance given to the gold-m ning indus2 try. He said the efforts were appre--1 ciated by tfye miners in Central Otaco. s and Im sab] that the industry provided r a useful avenue for work for the un--1 employed. ? A Landslide. i ’ When the House resumed at 7.30 i p.m., Mr H. Holland (Christchurch i North) said that the collapse of the 5 Labour Party night well be regarded c as a landslide. He was sure that it i came as a surprise to all, after reading > so much of the Leader of the Opposi--1 tion and a whole army of his supporter* ■ going round the country during the re< ; cess. He fully expected to bear a na confidence motion moved. One would • have thought the Lacour Party would

have taken the first opportunity of moving one. A Labour voice: “You will get it in due course.’’ Air Holland continued, saying that local industries should be supported, as that was an excellent way to absorb a large number of the unemployed. In company with other members he had recently visited many factories and had been mu'ch impressed with tho quality of the goods manufactured in the Dominion. Hon. E. A. Ransom said that the Labour Party’s action was unprecented in the history of the New Zealand Parliament. Ho thought it would cause great concern to the country. Unquestionably it was a most weak position to take up. The Leader of the Opposition had time to go round the country making speeches, and had not time to come to the House to explain the attitude of the party. He left that to the Deputy-Loader. It was the weakest move he had over known the Labour Party to make. To run away from one’s job was cowardly in the extreme. Air Speaker: Order. The Hon. Minister must withdraw the word cowardly. Air Ransom said he withdrew. He would say that when the Loader of the Opposition was confronted bv members of the Government who could answer arguments, he was not prepared to face up to the opposition. The Alinistcr went on to refer to speeches made during the recess. lie •said that Labour threw out sops to the farmers, and made promises which they knew they had no intention of giving effect to. Air J. A. Leo raised u point of order and asked if the Alinistcr was entitled to say that Labour had no intention of giving effect to its promises. Mr Speaker sa d he was afraid he had heard that, statement .made in the House very frequently. He thought it. would meet the position by asking the Minister to put it in some other wav. Air Ransom said he would withdraw the word intention and say that they had not the ability. Cost of Labour's Promises Air Ransom went on to show what it would cost tho country if Labour’s promises were carried out. The subsidy on butter would amount to £3,689,000, cheese £2.776,000, beef £370,837 and wool £2,745,000, making a total of £9,581,000. Those, figures applied to exports alone, and if a subsidy was paid on exports, surely the producer was entitled to a subsidy on home consunretion. Dealing with pensions, Air. Ransom said that, Jf the Labour I’arty granted a pension of 30s a week to all over sixty years, it would cust £11,310,000. Iho present old age pens-ons totalled £9 650,000. Payment to' invalids at the same rate would be £L.I7u,OUO ; and the restoration of cuts to the civil service would absorb £1,935/h)0. JStaudard rales of pay to relief workers was dnficult to csiimale, but tne late Reader of lite Laoour Party said it would take ten millions adequate.y to meet tne p-_.-.tiou. Uiiuttuig the costs of increased so-cial services, the total cost per annum to the Dominion to give effect to Labour’s promises would be i,JI,6uJ,uDO. How could the money bo raised’.’ Air. Ransom said it would »>e cither by taxation or the issue of paper currency. He thought it could De assumed from ine statements of the Labour Party that it would do by the issue of paper currency. If tnat were so they would have tho spectacle of what had been done in other count.ies where paper currency had been issued withc-ut a solid backiug. If taxation were adopted it would mean that the present per capita taxation wouid bo increased fio-m £l2 17s 9d tu not less than £3O. Air. Ransom said that, criticism had been levelled at the Number 10 unemployment. scheme on the ground that certain individual.-, had benefited who should nut have benefited. AltnuugU tnat v.as tne poril to be Onipi..;-si.-cd was that they had the look at what wa., lor tho general good of the Dominion, and nut h.-r the particular good of one individual. llie direct wages paid under that scheme amounted to £900.""O and the wage tax £45,000. the direct and indirect wages in the Dominion in respe. t to money made avtulabio tho opeiation of the scheme "j 400,000 and the wage.-, tax £I2O,OUU. io receive a return or £120,U00 lor that outlay seemed very good busier. W. J. Broadfou-V (Government, Waitomo), commented on the benefits t uiiicr. ed on im- build.ng ami aniod tiadcs by th.: Number JO scheme. He touched on the pu.-.-.fiihtie.i of the development c-f Hie iron ore and goldmining industry. lie said that the kauri gum industry was dying, and one blamed the cureless methuus of those who exploited it lor that. He would like to see tne tourist badness handed over to c-ver.-eas traffic conicrns such as the Canadian Pacific Kail way. New Zealand would save £<y>,ooo or £90.1H)0 yearly and would attract five times as many tourists. Minister's Illness. I Hon. A. ID. McLeod did not think | tiie L ; -our Part} could continue its I ■ -jjd exam de fur the remainder of tho ! . .... ■■ Min ■■■ Finance had legislation ready, but ho h-ad been delayed by illness, and to age of tho i ion tas not | i'laying c.leact Tm; l.abour Party i poliev con.-isted of nothing more than .'enerahtics bound up with some extraI ordinary mouetarv system which would produr.; cxtraoi.linary wonders. Pro* I mi.-es had been made on the same lines I as the promises made by the Labour i Parties m Lug.and and Australia. Ju both cases the promises had not been ful ... I an 1 tho < >rs had given I their verdict at the following election. I .Mr. Eraser denied Liat tr.e Labour Party had taken advantage of tha I Finance Minister’s illness. He had no knowledge of the Alinistcr’.■> illness, j and he hoped it was not serious, and. that he would make a speedy recovery. If a Minister or member was ill the Labour Party always accommodated them. Duly that afternoon he had offered to provide a pair for another Minister. Mr. .McLeod said ho would accept Mr. Fraser's statement unreservedly. Mr. Macmillan sai 1 he did not know why the Lalx>ur Party wanted tho Government's policy when they had been criticising it all the recess. He said he knew there was trouble in the mining industry, but the trouble was that there were too many mines. He believed that the State mine was unique in that not a man had been dismissed during the slump, and word had been rationed out among them. It wa« his intention to introduce a comprehensive Bill regarding the mining industry. He knew the members of the Labour Party who were practical miners would support the Bill. The House rose at 10.10 p.m.