WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 13 April 1931, Page 7

WELLINGTON TOPICS

WHEAT DUTIES. LABOUR AWAKENING. (Special Correspondent). WELLINGTON, April 10. Tho Labour Party after several years of hesitating contemplation lias made up its mind to appoint a special subcommittee “to ninvestigate and report to the National Executive upon the problems of wheat production, prices and duties; production, distribution, and price of flour and broad t 0 the consumers, while ensuring standard wages to the wheat farm em_ ployees, and an adequate return to the when farmers.” The special sub-eom-committee “to investigate and report up primary production and export prices generally, with a view to Iformulating a policy of stabilisation ol the incomes of the bonafide working farmers engaged in primary production.” When all this is accomplished the National Executive is to refer the sub-committee’s report to tho Labour Representative Committee to be included in the Party’s election manifesto, Surely this manifesto might have been preduced five or sixyears ago. Its display on the eve of a general election would be very far from carrying conviction. GOVERNMENT'S ATTITUDE, it is quite likely that ill the course of a few days the Prime Minister himself will make a statement in the House concerning the future of the wheat duties, Mr Forbes has been a consistent supporter of these duties ever since their introduction, hut it is not unlikely that, consistent with his policy of reducing the cost of living, he will review the amount ot the impost upon the crop to he harvested next year, that of 1932. The harvest fertile current year will he dealth with under the existing scale, and the Labour Party therefore, will have no opportunity to deal with the wheat just marketed or with that remaining in stock. Tho original purpose of the duty, as explained at the time, was to ensure the production of a sufficient supply of wheat within the Dominion to meet its annual needs, but it is quite likely the whole position will be reviewed by the present House. AFTER FORTY YEARS. The speech upon tho Finance Rill the lion. W. Earnshaw delivered in the Legislative Council yesterday was strikingly reminiscent of many outbursts of a similar tenor thrust upon the House of Representatives by the honourable gentleman more than forty odd years ago. The position in New //3a'land to-day he declared, was appalling; thousands of families were living te’ow the bread huo, “Wo are trending the road to revolution,” he declared. "This Bill is deliberately designed to suppress and crush the underdog—the man who is struggling below tho line of existence—-anu I would be failing in my duty ns a representative of Labour all my liie i" I clid not stand foursquare against this iniquitous proposal.” The firebrand of the early nineties expressed himself with all the vigour of his political youth, describing the proposals df the Prime Minister ns disastrous — and resuming his seat with a smile for iriend and opponent alike, NEED OF THE HOUR. The Hon. Robert Masters, Deputy Leader of the Council, and one of its most effective debaters, after replying to Mr Earnshaw’s cheery on slaught turned his attention to the criticism Sir Francis Bell had levelled against the Government’s budgeting schemes, It seemed extraordinary, he declared, “that there should be such a change of front on the part of Sir Francis, whom he alleged, had declared in 1922, that taxation must be reduced, and now, with the position infinitely worse, was denouncing a reduction of expenditure and demanding an increase in taxation. Mr Masters ’(lk, charged his allotted task admir_ ably, but he was a week or two behind Sir Francis Bell’s criticism of the Gov ernments’ finance an to that extent some oi his points were not easily achieved. The Bill is passing through the Committee stage this afternoon and it it not likely to he materially impaired by any of the criticism that so ratlins been directed against it, A substantial majority of tho “Lords” are behind the Prime Minister.