LABOUR’S BESETTING SIN

Hokitika Guardian, 12 May 1927, Page 4

LABOUR’S BESETTING SIN

EXTRAVAGANT LANGUAG*

(Contributed by Taxpayer.)

Either as a private individual or as the leader of a political party Air H. E. Holland is free to entertain just what views he pleases concerning the morals and methods of the business men who direct the trading operations of the Dominion. But when from a public platform he proceeds to cast shameful aspersions upon the mercantile community, without a tittle of evidence to justify ids words, he is grossly abusing the uses ol tree speech and legitimate comment. To show that Air Holland has offended grievously in this respect it is not necessary to recall passages from his impassioned speeches on the hustings and in Parliament, where extravagant language is all too readily condoned. It will suffice to quote two or three sentences fi*oin the Press Association s siininiiiiN of his recent studied address at A) align nui. THE INDICTMENT. ‘‘Vested interests,” Air Holland said, ‘‘naturally fought- co-operative marketing, because they realised that such marketing would deprive them, of the opportunity of exploiting both the producers here and the consumers at (lonic.”

“The trouble which followed the iustutiou of control was the result ol storing supplies previous to control and of the gambling methods of speculative interests.”

“All cunimunieatinns so lar made available to the public reveal the New Zealand Government was behind Mr Paterson in his attitude of hostility to control and the London management.” “What Air Paterson was then doing was approved, notwithstanding the fact that his ((induct could only result to the detriment of New Zealand producers.” “It is imperative that marketing should he conducted oil lines that would eliminate all the elements which gamble in the people's loud.' CO.MAIERC.TAL .MORALITY.

’I he purpose of this protest is not to reiterate what already has been said in regard to “absolute iiiulrol, a subject worn almost tcioadbaro. 'I he high standard of (■■mmercial morality maintained by the business men ol this country, however, is such a valuable national asset that it is doubly deplorable to find a public man ol Mr Holland’s parts attempting to smirch it nit rely with the object ol advancing his own political creed among (ureless people who have taken in trouble Lo make tiiemselves acquainted with even the rudimentary facts. VESTED IX I FRITHS.

It i- -imply a perversion ol the truth for Air Holland to say that “vested interests"—meaning, ol ionise, the men bants and agents- -have fought cooperative marketing. '! he inisivpivseni.• t i.;;i i-, aggravated by ibe addendum asserting that the merchants anti agents "fought co-operative marketing bee,itt.se they realise such marketing would deprive them of the opportunity of cxlniting both the pinlmer here am! the consumer at Home.” The) have raised no ohjeition whatever to co-operative marketing, nor have they discouraged it in any shape or Form. Co-operative prodtu lion and co-opera-tive marketing have been outstanding foilttires ci ike dairy industry in the Dominion since it was first instituted. ( e-operative factories outnumber the proprietary factories by fully ten to one. It is I here I ore simply liidicrm:Fu- .Mr Holland to talk of the merchants mill agents lighting co-operative mnrkitiug. As a matter ol fact the very reverse has been the ease, ihc efforts of tin merchants and agents being directed towards securing the business of the iinoperative lactnrios I y offering them the- best possible terms. Exploitation iu the circumstances would have been the very last expedient they would have employed. The first count in !Alr Holland's indictment. to put it mildly, is simply a figment of his own fruitful imagina-

t ion AVI lAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN. Mr [joll.iiul’s attempt to saddle tho trouble which followed upon the inst i tut ion of control on to the .shoulders of “the gambling methods of speculative interests”—fnoaning again the merchants and agents—is scarcely less unhappy. -It was the advocates of “absolute control” that wanted to take charge cl tho market, fix prices ami make the British consumers dependent upon the whims of the Dairy Board and the judgment of its representatives in London. Ol course it is easy enough now to say that- had a majority of the members of l lie board stood firmly by the Chairman in bis attempt to extract more from the British public, the British public would have approached the London Agency as suppliants for butter at, any price that seemed good to Air Grounds and his colleagues. But the probabilities seem to have been Jill against, such a development, anff in any (use the merchants and agents in New Zealand were not responsible lor what actually happened. They had to share, however, in whatever losses were occasioned by the board's attempt to bold up the market. THE PEOPLE'S FOOD.

Finally Mr Paterson, the Government’s representative oil the London Agency, is held responsible for Jill the ills that have befallen the producers. He allowed the Government, according to Mr Holland's statement, to stand behind him in his hostility to control and tlie Loudon management, and in his effort to save the producers from what he conceived to he an approaeling catastrophe. These do not appear in the eyes of the onlooker to be very grave lapses, since the poolman had no means of preventing the Government agreeing with him; but if they really were grievous offences smvly it is the Prime .Minister and his colleagues that should be called to account. Air Holland’s suggestion that it is the malign influence of the merchants an ( [ agents that prevents the elimination of "all the elements wlnen gamble in the people's food’’ betrays a curious ignorance of the practical things of life. The seed time and harvest. the weather and the crops, the inexorable law of supply and demand are the chief gamblers in the people’s food and these are not yet under the control of man.

A deplorable disservice

No one wishes to quarrel with Air Holland over any one of the many panaceas by which lie would banish ail the ills that beset, humanity in this world and the next. The leader of the Labour Party serves many useful purposes. He keeps the political conscience of the country awake; he holds fast to the faith of his party ill the holiest belief that one day it will move mountains; lie fans the- embers of discontent in the hoj« that they will break forth into the flame of benefit ient achievement, and, according to his lights, he gives of his best to his constituents ami to the country. But bis efforts and his achievements all are sullied by his extravagant speech, by his disregard, on occasions, of the amenities of public life, and above all, by bis reiteration of charges lie knows to be unfounded. His repeated attacks upon the commercial morality of tin's country is a deplorably disservice to tho whole r-out-miG'ity.