POLITICAL ADDRESS

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXX, Issue 273, 23 November 1935, Page 2

POLITICAL ADDRESS

Independent Nationalist

MR. ORMOND AT WAIPUKURAU

CANDIDATE WELL RECEIVED

Mr. J. D. Ormond (Jr.), Independent National candidate for the Waipawa Seat, last night addressed a large audience, which filled the Municipal Theatre. Mr. Ormond was given an enthusiastic reception, and in the course of his address interjections were few and of a good-humoured nature. At the conclusion of his address, he was accorded a vote of thanks on the motion of Mr. R. McLean, seconded by Mr. A. J. Campbell. A vote of no-confidence, moved by Mr. G. Merriken, failed to find a seconder. The Mayor (Mr. I. W. N. Mackie) presided. “You will have read Mr. Coates’s speech at Havelock North and a letter in the 'Waipukurau Press’ tonight,” said Mr. Ormond, in his opening remarks. “Mr. Coates said that a vote for me would probably be a vote for Labour —he wasn’t quite sure. I am quite sure that a vote for Mr. Jull will be a vote for Labour.”

Mr. Ormond went'on to admit that he had received a letter, dated November 11, from Mr. Coates, but he had not received it till 25 hours after nominations had closed. “Surely there were other means of communication available,” he said. “The tactics which are being used against me to-day were used against me four years ago, and that is the reason why I am standing before you to-night.” Mr. Ormond then referred to some qeustions asked in a letter in the “Waipukurau Pre'ss,” remarking, incidentally, that the “Press” had always treated him fairly.

Questions Answered.

The questions and Mr. Ormond’s answers were as follow: —

Are you in favour of the present Government or against it? —I am in favour of the present Government; I’m standing as an Independent Nationalist.

Have you never read that a house divided against itself can never stand? —I was not aware that a house had been erected! Gordon recognises you as a friend; show him that you appreciate his friendship by withdrawing from the contest.—l value my friendship with Mr. Coates second only to my duty to the people of the electorate! Mr. Ormond went on to say that he was one of the generation which had grown up since the war, and which had been through varying phases of prosperity and depression. “We have our own troubles to face and we ourselves can conquer them,’’ he declared. During the last four years people had asked: Where are the young people of to-day? The Hon. F. Waite had declared that they were not prepared to realise their responsibilities. They were not, said the speaker, given a chance. “Because I won’t do as I’m told I’m not approved of,” he added, strongly criticising party politics, which, he said, tended to prevent the voice of the people from being duly heard.

Electoral Reform.

"Before you can get men in the House who will accomplish anything in the interests of the people, you must bring the system of voting and the machinery of government up-to-date,” declared the speaker. "In electorates where there are three, four or five candidates standing the result is that the candidate who is successful is elected on a minority vote,” he added. “Why? Because the voting system is not up-to-date. With preferential voting everyone has a say in the final issue, and the people’s voice is heard.” Mr. Ormond quoted an article in “The Dominion,” supporting preferential voting, saying: "You know who the directors are.”

Dealing with the machinery of government, Mr. Ormond mentioned the Legislative Council, the House of Representatives, State departments, State boards, producers’ boards, commissions, and local bodies. “We are over-governed and the people are paying for it,” he said. The Legislative Council was a body the duty of which was to advise the Government, but it did not do so—it existed merely as a matter ■of form. The speaker advocated the abolition of the present Legislative Council and the substitution of a body made up of representatives of every trade and profession in the

country. “We would then have a Council which would do good work and do away with the necessity for commissions which at present are costing thousands of pounds annually,” he said. In some quarters, said Mr. Ormond, a reduction in the number of members of the House of Representatives was advocated, but, in a country with ’a scattered population, this might mean that the people would not be so well represented. Personally, he would favour leaving the House of representatives as it was. The newly-constituted Legislative Council would, as had already been pointed out, do away with the need for commissions.

The danger of State boards was that they tended to create interference with private enterprise, which, the speaker considered should be encouraged instead of blocked as at present. Producers’ boards were a good thing from the farmers’ point of view.

Local Body Amalgamation.

Mentioning the need for the amalgamation of local bodies, Mr. Ormond referred to the fact that there were in Central Hawke’s Bay three county councils, two borough councils, a hospital board and a power board. Boundaries should, he said, be adjusted to reduce expenditure and eliminate red tape. Two years ago the Prime Minister had promised to set up a commission to go into the question, but nothing had been done.

Supporting the Government's legislation lo help the farmers, Mr. Ormond said that other sections of the community had been assisted in past years. Nev; Zealand for its prosperity depended on the value of its export trade, which had shown a decrease in volume of 23 per cent., and in value of 56 per cent. Mr. Ormond pointed out that the Mortgage Corporation meant the establishment of a body to reduce and control interest. It was a corporation of the Government lending institutions and must do good. The Rural Mortgagors Final Adjustment Act similarly meant the giving of assistance to farmers in distress. When the relationship of the farmer to' the Dominion was considered, it could be seen that the Government had to help the producers. “No other party suggested anything better at the time,” he said.

Civil Service.

“We must have a well-paid and efficient civil service, but to-day it requires overhauling very badly,” said the speaker, remarking that some departments were doing their work and others were not. Many employees of the Post and Telegraph Department were not getting wages equivalent to the wages of men in other departments, who were in no more responsible positions, yet the Post and Telegraph Department had shown a profit for the year of £OB,000. In the speaker’s opinion the Civil Service Commissioner had too much control; he suggested the institution of a controlling body with representatives of the various departments.

• “The transport authorities should be of service to the community, and their aim should be, with rail, road and bridges, to enable people to travel as cheaply as possible, and for produce to be carted as cheaply as possible, and, with the railways, to develop country as yet undeveloped,” said Mr. Ormond. “That is the prime issue, and that is how the railways and transport boards should regard it. I favour the finishing of the railway to Wairoa, which would develop the country, create employment, and would be a sound proposition from the people’s point of view.” Defence Problem.

Defence was a problem which might have been of real moment during the last few months, said Mr. Ormond, referring to the dominions’ lack of co-operation with Britain in the recent crisis. He quoted Mr. Winston Churchill’s statement that Great Britain could be best protected from the air, as. a result of being surrounded by sea. “New Zealand could be easily defended in the same way,” he stated. “Aviation services should be assisted, so that commercial planes can be used for defence purposes if necessary. Aerodromes should be scattered round the coasts of the country, and pilots should be encouraged. “Let us have a small naval base, support the Singapore Base, and the League of Nations, and co-operate with Britain and the other Dominions in defence matters.” He favoured military training for all young men; it was a good thing physically and morally. Ability to Pay.

“I’m definite on this: We should be taxed on our incomes and on our ability to pay,” declared Mr. Ormond.

“that would be fair to everyone.” He was opposed to more overseas borrowing, except for the purpose of repaying existing loans. Borrowing, if necessary, should be done internally. It was all right to advocate a £20,000,000 loan to provide cheap money, but someone would have to pay for it -eventually. He advocated the abolition of the sales tax; it was not fair and could be done without. He also thought the unemployment levy could and should be reduced. So far as women were concerned, Mr. Ormond contended that they should either not have to contribute, or else should receive the benefits from the scheme. “We have thousands of pounds going out of the country every week in lotteries,’ ’said Mr. Ormond. “And we are shutting our eyes to it. Ireland, as the result of its state lotteries, has the finest hospitals in the world. Why shouldn’t we do the same?” Old age pensioners and burnt-old soldier's were entitled to more assistance, and the money could be obtained in this way.

High Exchange.

Mr. Ormond favoured the retention of the high exchange rate. “The high exchange meant simply inflation of the internal currency,” he said. “It was brought in because it was felt to be a fair way of assisting the people as a whole.” When Britain was off the gold standard in 1925 her trade improved, and when she went on to the gold standard again, trouble occurred. Britain had to go off the gold standard again in 1931, with a 33| per cent, exchange and her trade prospered once again. As the result of going on to the gold standard Britain lost her coal trade with Canada to the United States. Unemployment.

Unemployment was the greatest social problem facing New Zealand and the world in general. There were in the Dominion 60,000 unemployed, and the trouble was that, when positions became available, many men would have rusticated and would not be in a position to fill them. “Why not set up instructional depots, so that they can help themselves and keep efficient in their work?” asked the speaker. He contended that those who had saved a few pounds should not be deprived of relief if they became unemployed. There were three classes of unemployed—those who were able and capable of settling in primary and secondary industries; those who were able and capable of working on public and local body works; and the type who would not work. The second class was entitled to be put on works for which they would receive a fair day’s work at full rates of pay. To help to absorb unemployed, Mr Ormond advocated the development of secondary industries such as fruit canning and top-making. He also urged the desirability of a policy of setlement on rich areas of flat land such as that near Hastings. “If you settle men on such land they’ll do well; it is much sounder than trying to put them on secondclass land,” he said. These farms would be held on lease, but the sale of goodwill would be restricted to stop gambling and speculation. On the poorer lands an immigration scheme, backed with English capital would create more employment for the wage-earners, enable us to produce more, and help ourselves and great Britain.

New Zealand, said the speaker, should wake up to the possibilities of the tourist traffic; it was being left behind by Australia. Sir Joseph Ward had said that not even the meat and dairy industries would bring as much money to the Dominion as the tourist traffic.

Education.

Mr. Ormond said that the future of the country depended on how the children were moulded. He was convinced that the educational system was in urgent need of re-organisa-tion. He believed that centralised administration was not in the best interests of the country, and that power should be restored to provincial boards and committees who were more in touch with local needs, bringing about more co-operating interests between authority and the people. He suggested that administration should be controlled by the establishment of a central board of education, presided over by the Minister, and comprising representatives of the universities, principals of training colleges ~the Director of Education, teachers’ nominees and commercial and professional representatives. There were at present 42 school inspectors, and the speaker urged that they should be replaced by a superintendent in each province, thus effecting a saving of £15,000 annually.

Less stress should be laid on ex-

aminations and more on general cultural education, and New Zealand should follow England’s example and provide free text books. Reciprocal Trade.

Mr. Ormond went on to advocate the development of trade on a reciprocal basis with Russia and the U.S.A. In 1931 our exports to Russia totalled £l3, and our imports £15,000. In 1932, the figures were £lO and £8000; in 1933, £7 and £lOO,000. “Why not balance that trade?” asked Mr. Ormond. He pointed out that New Zealand purchased a large quantity of petrol from Russia, and should deal only on a reciprocal basis, Russia taking our cheaper meats. There was also a £1,000,000 trade balance against us with the U.S.A, and we should say that we were not prepared to deal on those terms. Mr. Ormond considered that the development of trade with Russia and the U.S.A, was better than to attempt to open markets in the East.

In conclusion Mr. Ormond urged the need for freer trade with Great Britain.

Questions.

“If you’re in favour of the Government why are you splitting the vote?” Mr. Ormond was asked. “Am I splitting the vote?—Have a look into it yourself,” he replied. “Are you in favour of doing away with the waste of taxpayers’ money on the liquor ballot?” was another question, to which Mr. Ormond replied in the affirmative. “Who pays for the exchange?” Mr Ormond was asked. “The people as a whole,” he replied, adding that the Government considered it the fairest way of helping the primary producers and thereby the rest of the community.

Mr. Ormond also said that he would be prepared to do anything he could to assist in the development of the Napier Harbour breakwater scheme.

“Are you in favour of conscription in the event of war?” was another question. “If we are attacked every man should do his bit, and if he

won’t then we should make him/*

said Mr. Ormond. “Would you agree to the compulsory conscription of wealth,” the questioner asked. “Let everything go to defend the country whether it be men or gold,” the speaker replied, amidst applause. Mr. Ormond said that he would not vote to put Labour in power.