Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1929, Page 3

PREMIER AND LABOUR. LAND AND UNEMPLOYMENT. (Special Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, Feb. 4. Sir Joesnli Ward, in addressing the deputation representative of th© Labour Party which waited upon him on Friday, did not regard witli favour a suggestion made to him by Mr 0. H. Chapman, the new member for 'Wellington North, that a special session of Parliament should be held to “devise ways and means of finding a solution of the unemployed situation generally.” The Prime Minister had sympathy with the unemployed and schemes for their relief, but he did not think a special session of Parliament, which might be indefinitely prolonged, would lie the most effective means of solving the problem. “Once Parliament was called,” he said, “I don’t know how long we should be in session. I am afraid such a proceeding would be too big an order.” His own idea for the relief of unemployed was to attract a much larger proportion of the population to the land, and towards this end, he said, his policy would be directed. EXAMPLE FROM FRANCE. While fully alive to the necessity of providing immediate relief for the unemployed, Sir Joseph looks to the land as the ultimate solution of the problem submitted to him by the Labour deputation. “I was in a country not so many years ago,” he told the deputation, “in which 10,000 men who had been workers a few years previously had been placed on small areas of land of from seven to ten acres. That country to-day is wonderfully prosperous. 1 am referring to France, which is the healthiest country in the world from the joint of view of the worker. This, to my mind, is due entirely to the action of the Government in placing men on small holdings. I hope to be able to do something similar in New Zealand.” Whether or not Sir Joseph can inspire in the unemployed of this country tile industry and thrift that distinguish the French peasantry remains to be seen. But even at the risk of failure the experiment is worthy of trying. EDUCATION POLICY. While the Prime Minister himself was receiving a deputation claiming to be represntative of th© workers out of employment, his colleague, the Minister oi Education, the Hon H. Atmore, was addressing a deputation from the New Zealand Educational Institute with his accustomed candour. If the representatives of the Institute had come to instruct the Minister, they must have tnought their good intentions somewhat brusquely frustrated. Referring to the fiist question put to him—the reorganisation of the education system, lie emphasised the fact that the opinion to be given would be the opinion of the Government. All questions of policy would be enunciated by the Minister and not by the permanent head of ■the department or any other official. Education must be in a state of flux, and the Department must be keen to observe the altering conditions. Plain speaking of this kind may be expected from Mr Atmore, and the officers of the institute muM reconcile themselves lo i,is liaoit. THE OLD ORDER. The “Dominion,” this morning, having had time to review the situation, rebukes mildly Mr Atmore’s assertion of authority. “It had been the custom in this country,” it says, “to fill Cabinet positions by men having, if possible, some practical and even expert knowledge of their particular department. . . Mr Atmore, like Ins predecessor Mr Wright, has had previous experience in the local administration of education affairs. Neither, of course, could be described as educationists in the academic sense. A little knowledge, even if it is not expert knowledge, is necessary to enable Ministers to control present day tendencies in the direction of government by departmental regulations. The complaint too commonly heard is that the Departments govern the country, and impose regulations and restrictions which Ministers too lightly accept and endorse.” If the concluding sentence of this pronouncement is intended as a compliment to Mr Atmore, it is deserved. The present Minister of Education, in all probability, will insist upon having his own way.