PARLIAMENT.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20491, 9 March 1932, Page 14

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE. (MESS ASSOCIATION TELia3Mt.) WELLINGTON, March S. In the House of Representatives today the debate on the Address-in-Reply was resumed by Mr J. Hargcst vercargill), who made bis maiden speech. He urged that New Zealand should manufacture a number of articles which she imported to-day. She should produce as many of her requirements as possible, and where that was not possible she should purchase from other parts of the Empire. Every endeavour should also be made to widen our selling markets. New Zealand should insist that where she bought so must she sell on a fifty-fifty basis. A reference to trade with the Soviet might be regarded unfavourably, but it was known that the rest of the world was dealing with Russia. At the present time New Zealand was .spending large sums on the importation of oil and motor-spirit from the United States, while it was almost impossible to market all our wool. He considered that the bulk purchase of petrol from Russia, thus establishing credits here that would enable the Soviet to buy. our wool, was worthy of consideration. . Mr Hargest urged the Prime Minister to emulate the Mac Donald Govern- ' meat in getting down to business. Tne House had already been in session three weeks, and so far as he could see nothing had been done. Commission Habit. Mr "\V. D. Coleman (Lab., Gisborne) said the Government had definitely adopted the Commission habit, and was refusing to accept responsibility for any decisions of importance. Both the United and Reform Governments had been failures, and it could not be expected that two failures joined together would be a success. Ihe present Government was a failure, and Jie would lose no opportunity of-putting it out of office. Mr A. Stuart (C., Rangitikei), another new member, made his maiden speech. He expressed regret that so much time had been wasted in the House in talking about practically nothing. He went on to state that in protecting the mortgagor the Government should not take away all the rights and privileges of the mortgagee. Amongst the mortgagees were men who had earned their money by thrift and the sweat of their brow. Stock and station agents were giving producers more 'protection to-day than any of the banking institutions, and he expressed a hope that the forthcoming mortgagors' protection legislation would not prejudice stock agents. Control of Currency. Mr A. S. Richards (Lab., Roskill), in advocating the control of currency by the State, said the Government stood for wool control and dairy control, but had failed to see the necessity of controlling the medium .bv which these goods could be distributed. Labour blamed the policy of the banks for aggravating the depression. The system of competition was fast coming to an end, and co-ordination, co-operation, and scientific production were remedies for the present situation. Mr W. A. Bodkin (C., Central Otago) r agreed that reduced wages would not be enough to enable the country to recover; there m\ist also be a reduction of interest rates, rents, and local body taxation. High interest rates constituted the farmers' major trouble, and the Government would have to go further 'than it had so far gone under the I Mortgagors Relief Act. He welcomed | the efforts being made by the GovernI ment to encourage gold prospecting. | Mr J. W. ' Munro (Lab., Dunedin North) expressed himself in favour of a policy of inflation on the part of the ' Government. He considered that by the creation of a fiduciary issue the Government should inflate the currency up to £20,000,000. This, he believed, would enable the farmer to carry on and would be the only thing that would get the country out of its difficulties. Exchange Bates. Mr R, A. Wright (C., Wellington Suburbs) said ho agreed with the Leader of the Opposition that the more wages were reduced the more difficult it would become for those in business to carry on. Dealing with exchange rates, Mr Wright predicted that if the market were really free the rate would be more likely to fall than to rise. He believed, however, that if the market were unrestricted the Bank of New South Wales would artificially raise the rate, and others would have to follow. He considered that Professor Copland, in his advocacy, was speaking one word for the farmers and two for the bank. No one more than the farmers would have cause to regret an artificial increase in the exchange rate. A- Labour Allegation. Mr R. Semple (Lab., Wellington East) asserted that the Liberal Party had gone out of existence. The Government was to-day in the hands of the Reform Party. The Prime Minister was nothing mcrre than a figurehead. The conditions for which Seddon, Ballance, Grey and others had fought were being sacrificed at the bidding of the Reform Party. Mr Semple alleged that slave conditions existed in New Zealand, and that there were instances of tyranny in connexion with relief works. Attack on Government. , An attack on the Government was made by Mr H. Atmore (Ind., Nelson), who said that although he was speaking as an ex-Minister, he was not speaking with any sense of disappointment. He had realised the moment he believed that Cabinet was thinking of decreasing the facilities for educational development that his place was not inside the Cabinet, but outside, where he could do more good. Referring to the last election in the Nelson and Motueka districts, Mr Atmore said he had no hesitation in saying that although the cry of the Coalition was for the people's good, there had never been sucli dirty tactics used as were used against himself and Mr G. C. Black. He was a Liberal, and notwithstanding the fact that the Party was very. sparsely represented in the present Parliament, there was a great middle Party in New Zealand which would spring to .life the moment there

was anv indication of a new organisation There was an obvious tendency on the part of the Government to regard questions of the day from the bankers ratW than the people's point of view. After asking for unfettered authority it did not know what to do with it. lie asked why it was not doing the obvious thing Mr Forbes had stated that if he were able to do so he would go on the London market for a loan to relieve conditions, offering as security the wealth of the Dominion. If he was prepared to do this why would he not be justified in issuing Treasury notes an the same security for five or six millions? Mr Atmore said he agreed that there were conditions of semi-slavery in New Zealand. The time had arrived when there should be shorter hours in industry, but the Government would not face this position. There was no such thing as progress in its lookout. He accused Cabinet of procrastination and shilly-shallying. Mr C. H. Chapman (Lab., Wellington North) expressed himself in favour of moderate inflation, contending that an increase in the volume of the currency would-tend to increase prices and stimulate trade. Deflation had always been stagnatory in its effects. Oat Advocated. Mr C. H. Clinkard (C., Botorua) said contracts - had been made a few years ago which present conditions rendered it impossible to carry out. He suggested that there should be a 20 per cent, cut in everything, including wages, interest, rates, and rent. Otfier Speakers. Mr F. Jones (Lab., Dunecjin South) said the depression in New Zealand had been accentuated by the faulty administration. He hoped that provision would be made fofc the employment of boys and -girls. Encouragement, should also be given the secondary industries. Mr H. S. S. Kyle (C., Eiccarton), referring to the appointment of committees and commissions, contended that they shotild be appointed from members of the House and not from outside. It seemed little use electing members to Parliament their services were not availed of. » Mr W. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier) referred to the administration of the legislation affecting the earthquake area, and said the Adjustment Court had been slow to exercise the > powers which Parliament had intended it to make use of. He considered that mortgagees should have been required in some cases at least to shoulder part of the loss sustained by mortgagor-owners, and this view was shared by a number of local lawyers. The Court 'had made some concessions, but it was clear that it had not accepted the principle. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr D. G. Eeid (C. T Raglan), and the House rose at 11.50 p.m. tiir2.3o_ p.m. to-morrow.