THE ELECTIONS

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22521, 1 October 1938, Page 22

THE ELECTIONS

TO THB EDITOB O? Tfl» PEESS. Sir, —I should like to support "S," "A Returned Soldier," and another "S," correspondents in your columns, who, as former voters of Labour now, on looking at their living circumstances, find it necessary to change- their vote to the other side. Those people are at least open enough to admit that the policy of the Labour Government has increased their difficulties/instead of easing as Labour:; promi . d to do.. There are thousands of workers who know they are at least 20s a week worse off since Labour came into Eower, but, beir.g Labour mad, they go lindly on, nrt being honest to themselves or to teeir families. The cost of living is nothing less than 40 per cent, up—that is 8s in the £, and Labour candidates cannot deny it. The worker of this country likes to be a faithful party voter, but even if that is so, he must be sensible and awake to what his party is doing to him. In this Dominion 72 per cent, of the population earn less than £<: 7s 6d a . week, and the Labour. Government wants to load further taxation to the extent of £22,000,000 on those small incomes. What did the worker pay in taxation in 1929? He paid nothing except . in indirect ways—a little duty perhaps. He had good wages then, and

a Government that was not Labour. The election stunt of Labour is to compare slump years with prosperity years; there is nothing fair in that. There are still 37,000 men drawing pay from the Unemployment Fund. Industry cannot absorb, them with 50 per cent, taxation, which cripples expansion of trade. There will be idle capital to a larger degree than ever in New Zealand shortly. People will not invest in business to suffer taxation that will bring their returns to less than savings bank rates of interest. Idle capital means idle men, and the worker should seriously study the position of his employer. This coming election is the time to vote for the retention of the business which supplies the bread and butter. It will be too late at the next election. We all have to stand by one another for individual progress—not for State domination and control. Let us see: how can the returned soldiers stand by their comrades whd are now on a war veterans’ allowance, broken in health, and invalids, through their years of hardship when fighting for New Zealand. To-day we have a Government which in its attitude 10 the war veteran, deserves the greatest condemnation returned men can give it. , Here is my point! A civilian invalid gets 30s a week, as from April i next, and also 10s a week for each child. The war veteran (burnt out), certified medically as invalid, is allotted 25s a week for himself and 5s a week for his child. There is discrimination against the soldier who has given his health to the saving of his country, and also his child is only considered as being in need of one half of what other invalid people’s children can have. Not so long ago the Labour Government gave old-age pensions to people who had resided in New Zealand for 10 years only. To give those people their pensions, and so. catch their votes, this kind Government left the economic pensioners—the blind, the paralysed, the legless, the gassed, etc.—still without the restoration of the balance of their pension cut. The economic pension will be restored in • April next—another six months’ to wait—and yet the Labour Party are shouting from the platforms, “We have carried out all our promises.” I hope the soldiers will. stand by their comrades and squash a party that would treat men who saved the country by their sacrifice, which no money can ever compensate them for, their health, in such an inconsiderate and unfair manner. *

It would be interesting to know, and I invite the secretary of the Returned Soldiers’ Association to tell us in the open press, how many remits •vere made to the Government recently and how many were granted by the Government in their entirety. Those are facts which should be brought to the notice of the people, and so that they may be, I am asking the question so that all returned men can rally and help the pensioners.—Yours, etc., A RETURNED S. September 30, 1938.

Following are extracts from letters o*. the elections: —

A. Wilson.—l am surprised at “The Press" and also the Hospital allowing the letter of a Woolston boy to pass. Is it not libellous to call the charitable aid people, drinkers, wasters, and invalids? I suggest the “boy” should obtain facts before he writes such a silly outburst. A minor ,is not capable of writing to a paper. Youth should be reading fairy tales instead of creating them. Perhaps he is not such a youth 1 ,

“Truth.”—Your correspondent Geo. Sage, in. his attempt to belittle , the Nationalists, is bewilderingly inconsistent in his statements’ He “is pleased that Mr Hamilton and ‘The Press’ are quite well on the Socialist road”; then he says, “They are not very intelligent.” How, could they be if they are cultivatihg Socialism of theßt. Hon. M. J. Savage’s, type. Leap before you look is one of its' characteristics.' Would Geo. Sage take it as a sign of lack of intelligence that, the Nationalists have taken the ’inspiration of their policy, from their opponents? If so, there he would slip, English history proves thai political' parties often pass one another’s measures. Some of the greatest reforms have-been so passed. I quite expect the Nationalists to pass, without, taxing women, children, and old men, the sanest possible Social Security Bill. . . . Mr Hamilton declared that "the nation was built on the life of the family, a great, an important truth’ that, all politicians should keep in view. . . . Geo. Sage thinks the Nationalists want children for similar reasons to Hitler—with him for cannon fodder, the employees for cheap labour. He ’ is welcome to. these exalted thoughts.- -Many of the candidates have considered this matter a fit subject- for humour;- but-I am sure many ,of our young people will bless the name of Mr- Hamilton for'the measure he proposes, for their , benefit.

- “J.M.C.” (Hastings).—My purpose in writing is to beg that no one who objects to the “socialisation” of our land, our labour, our produce, and our inheritance will vote for any. Independent candidate, where a National candidate is standing. We know what the split vote did last election, and, if we wish to keep our freedom and all the pioneers of New Zealand toiled for,' we shall give our votes to the National Party.

“Tauranga Elector”.—ln your report to-day of Mr A. N. Grigg’s speech at Hororata last night, he is quoted as follows: “You should give us a chance to have a look into the money box. I have an idea not much is left, and we shall have to save a bit harder before we can do anything in the way of progressive legislation.” Well, these remarks are sufficient evidence of the intentions of the Nationalists if they get on the Treasury benches. They will certainly “save a bit harder,” and the worker, and lower classes generally, will pay that penalty in no unr certain manner. If my contention is wrong, it Would be interesting to know exactly . what Mr Grigg is hitting at. Also, in Mr Bodkin’s speech- at Dunedin last night, it was amusing to hear him say how proud he was of the fact that he .helped to look after the inter--ests of the working girl and the civil servant during the debate on the Social Security Bill. - Did : he - do • this- when his clan put the working girl on the street.and'cut wages a few years ago? Not he. At least, I could not imagine his.doing it - ' •;

: “Genuine Housewife.”—lt is all very well to sit and listen to all the rosy things -Mr Savage, is advocating in his social pie.' The real taste of it we shall get after the election should Labour fluke in, which it will not.. A tempting pie-crust makes one bite, but the contents very often disappoint; and with the first slice of this social pie the electors are going to get a rude awakening. They will not want a second helping, but it will not be a ctse of what they want, it is what they are going to goS, Every ingredient in it is taxation: indigestion will be acute afterward so be wary.

“Conscientious Objector.”—l sincerely trust that the reports in the campaign column of “The Press” of Thursday caused our worthy Mayor as much amusement as he seems to find in the two letters of the previous morning. It is most unfortunate for him that he chose to air his complaints in the same edition as the following reports. appeared:—Mr J. A. Gavin speaking at Grey Lynn, Auckland: “So numerous were the interjections that the speaker was rarely, permitted to finish a topic on which he had embarked and it was impossible to give a coherent outline .of his . policy." Mr W. A. Bodkin on the same . evening at Dunedin, “addressed a meeting of about 2000 in the Town Hall, and won a noisy duel with organised opposition of several hundred. Police intervention was necessary frequently and numerous interrupters were ejecledj’Vi.- -

“Under Age."—There has been a lot of talk lately of young people being dissatisfied with the Social Security Act, and that they have to wait years before they receive any benefit at all. Ido not think one young fellow to-day is not willing to provide, if not for himself, then for his people in their old age. It has been said that New Zealand is leading the world as far as social reform is concerned, yet it has never been considered that a vote be given to everyone from the age of 18—old enough to work, yet not old enough to vote; old enough to realise that at last we have a workers’ Government in power, yet unable to support it. It is useless to argue that a man’s years of discretion are not attained until he is 21. These are times when the youth of the country are more politically minded than ever before. The capitalistic classes started their own destruction when they allowed the working man’s son to educate himself.

“New Zealander”.—The disgraceful hooliganism organised by Labour supporters at meetings of National Party candidates is a truly magnificent advertisement, as it most clearly and definitely shows the New Zealand public what would obtain were this fine little country reduced to socialistic domination. Let New Zealanders beware and see that our British freedom is not filched from us. The time is getting close now when they will have to make a momentous decision, namely: Is this country to be a socialistic State, as in Russia, or be free?

“Challenge.”—Why has Mr Savage not answered Mr Hamilton’s challenge regarding the preservation of the country quota? Is it that the trades union bosses have decided that the country quota must go so that a number of rural constituencies will be eliminated and replaced by city ones in which the industrial unionists predominate?