LABOUR PLATFORM

Hokitika Guardian, 29 June 1932, Page 2

LABOUR PLATFORM

POLICY SPEECH i ADDRESS BY MR J. O’BRIEN. PETITION “TO OUST GOVERNMENT.” Urging iho recall of the present Coalition Government, to be brought about by securing a majority of the signatures of the electors n L New Zealand to a monster petition voicing opposition to the legislation passed at the'K'cent session of Parliament. Air J . iQ’Brieu, Member for Westland, addressed it meeting in the Hokitika Town Hall last evening, and painted it ■ gloom v picture of the Dominion under -the present regime of Coalition. The '.notice 0 f the meeting attracted a as 'well as others drawn thither by the as well as other drawn thither by the text of the announcement. The chair was taken by Air D. Greaney. After the introductory remarks by the chairman, Air O’Brien said that he was there that evening to lay before his audience some of the legislation passed during the past three months, and its effect on New Zealand as a whole. The legislation passed by the Grey, Ballftiwe and 'Sodden Governments had been swept away by tlu* followers of Mr tied don. leg'aInti on that hud been purred for the benefit of the working people of the Dominion. The Labour Party had the platform, while, the others had the press, and Air Gladstone had said that when the platform clashed with the papers, the platform must win. He referred to the graduate! bind tax and .said that there were onlv two men in Westland who benefited to any extent by the remirsion of tux, one, with 100 acres to the value of j Us fid. The result- was that the burden of tire farmer had ,n 1,0 way been lifted. H-ow tlroi was the small i farmer to be assisted.

There were- seventy-five newspaper* in the Dominion, lie said, and their editors had been sent for by Air Coates so that lie could give them leaders

that they should publish and prepare „ the people for the legislation that ur* being ' brought down. No man or woman in New Zealand had any idea prior to the election last year that widows' pensions were to be reduced and the doors of the- schools shut in the faces of toe children, and the Arbitration Act interfered with, although ATr Forbes might have had something in bis mind. “I warned you when I came before the electors prior to the election wlra-t----would happen if the Coalition Gov-

ernment got into power with a large majority, and it has come true, although newspapers ridiculed it at the time, and I was accused if being n ■i,-. scaremonger.

Mr O’Brien then quoted an extract from the Grey “Star,” of Nov. 24th.. last year in which it was stated tlmt the Labour Party was falsely assert ivg that the Government was out to destroy the Arbitration Act. He still maintained that the prophecy was correct. A* far -ns the- wage worker was concerned, it was not going to mean a ten or twenty per cent’, cut-., j hut a- fifty per cent, out, if Alessrs Coates and Forbes got their way. The Act had been there for forty years, but now it was swept away.

The Grey “Star” of Nov. 18th., referred to 'Labour's “weechingV about further dismiss Is hv tlje Government-, abolition of the Arbitrat'on Court, and cuts in pensions. “We did not misrepresent the intention, but we did not think that tbey would have the infernal hide to commit the mischief thev did jn tl ? recent Parliament.” The first Isolation of the Coalition Government was the Unemployment Amendment A< t which kept the burden on thoee who were unable to bole themselves. Tt nut Is in the pound on the earnings of all the people in New Zealand. We went on to say t’.'t camps hod been established in the district lu re, and the Member had not been aware of it until quite recently. One individual jn South Westland had gone over to Canterbury and interviewed another individual, end-

ing up in a camp being established ]rore, and tlr> H ,,£, rn ployed were to work on tin’s individual’s farm. “That’s where your shillings are g«-

ing,” he, added. He referred to the proposal to place men on the land in

the vicinity of a sawmill, “giving him about ten cows which his wife could milk while lie worked at the. mill.” Wasn’t it a glorious scene'? Where there were- dangers like this facing the country, it was Labour’s duty to let the people see where they were. “We pleaded for greater protection

by the Arbitration Court to women anil pointed out the conditions under which they worked, but the Government took away the prot. cl ion from the women workers.” The National KxjjOTiditure Bill had cut the salaries of civil servants, and reduced soldiers’ and widows’ pensions, and the Government seemed to take pleasure in doing co. Reference was also made to the incident in tbe House when Air Healey was alleged to have gone into ih.-e lobby and persuaded tbe late Air T. Alakitinara to rote in favour of the cuts, Air Wright having been persuaded in the same manner. When Air Healey was challenged and the

Speaker sought to give a ruli"g,

they were refused. “I challenged the attitude of Air Nash, but we were again refused. It was then that, the

“cuts” went through the House.”

| Air O’Brien referred to the time j when the 'soldiers were- departing for i th'e front. The cry was: “Good- | bye boys. You’re not coming back to I the old conditions, etc.” The same ! men who cut the soldiers;’ pensions were the men who made the speeches to the soldiers before. Where were the men who made all the promines to the men! There were not in the i ranks of the Labour Tarty. “What f am telling you here to- ! night, I will also be ceding from as i many platforms n,s possible when I have completed my business in West-, , luod," said the speaker, who went, on to refer to the shimming of the school doors in the face of 27,000 children, of which 19,000 were between the a.ecu of five and six years. Grade O schools were closed. Grade 1. become Grade 0, etc. and this mcart that teachers ! would Jose employment, and the only employment ofl'cciim these would ho the dole. What glorious condition*! What a glorious system! Tho Public Safety Act was. perhaps, worse than the war regulations. “J could be prevented from addressing audience* „ if someone were to start a disturbance, outside.” lie added. “But I will go on addressing even if they put me where- they did in 1917.” Was the country in sirli a bad wav that hospital subsidies had to be cut down, miner*’ widows’ pensions cast out. and the widows’ pittance mimed ? If so, was it the people’s fault? Th-re had boon ti tremendous increase in New Zealand production, hut the fanners received no benefit. During the years 1914-29 the private wealth increased by £-120.009,001), while the assessable income between 1922 and 1990 wont up by £19.000.000 annually, while there was still a,n increase with the exemption reduced to £2(50. Alone,v in the 1 winks had also incrosr.od, but nil the farmers had to show was proximity to bmmkruptc.v. Here, they had a country rolling in wealth, while the farmin' had to Practise the strictest economy to stay on his land. “A-”d they talk about tire equality of sacrifice.” Tf those who had unom'es were asked f o 'a-rifir-n. to the same extent as the civil servant, the soldier and tV widow, the Treasury would not he in the position it is to-day. Figures from the Taxation Department showed that if a man had an unearned income' of £3OO a year, then, after th e increase of tax, he.would have to pay £2 13* 6d a year, whereas, if computed on the same .scale as the tax paid by an old age pensioner, he Would have to pay £3O : if on the same scale as a returned soldier £SO. and of a civil servant £BO. If a man had an unearned income of £IOO a year, it would cost him £2 8s 6d in income j tax, whereas the pen-ioncr with a ten ! per cent, cut would, on the sam e scale. | b'ive to lose £lO, -soldier pensioners j £6O, and civil servants £BO. The tax on an unearned income of £IOOO was but £56 18s 10d a year, compared with relative cuts of £IOO. £lB5 and £2OO. on. pensions, so'di-rs' pensions, and civil servants’ salaries, respectively, taking them in the same proportion. Again, the “equality of sacrifice.’’

He went on to say that there was never any need for New Zealand to have gone into the slump as far as it did. Why. her resources were hardly scratched yet. There were some methods by which hbe country could be put

on her feet. 0n e was the land. It was a well known scientific fact that if a farmer were put. oil the'land he would make work for six. Five hundred could be put on in Westland where there were thousands of acres of good land awaiting development. With the £5,000,000 being supplied for the unemployed it could suecessfnli'y be used for placing men on the land. In 1925 there "ere 10,000 men engaged in the timber mip'-ng industry, where 10-da,v there were only 2.000. .Stocks were running down in Australia which was th i? market for New Zealand timber. Tile exchange rate could also be removed, and this could be brought almost to par if the Government were to exercise pressure. Did that- body wi'-li to employ men in industry? It did not -'coin so. "Every word 1 hive uttered hero, lias been sa.id hi the House and has not he contradicted.” The mining industry could also, ;be, developed, but the Finance Bill -'had -wiped away the fund. Other, industries could be -started, and they j must b<‘ deve'opcd if New Zealand was to return to prosperity. Not only wee there 55,000 auu!ts out of World but probably an additional 20,000 young men and 15,000 girls.

Air O'Brien dealt fully with the repudiation question insofar as Britain and America wei'o concerned and outlined the transactions between the other countries, saying that Britain's ations had not benefited the colonies. He was prepared to defend his argument, even against economists. Mr O’Brien summed up the reason for the present hardships in tw'o words “overproduction,”

After doing all thuee -things the Government was not going to give thorn a chance to judge for themselves but had crawled iqto its “upward V’ castle. If it werp constitutional to extend the life of Parliament, it wa-s constitutional for them to sit year by year, or even to tell the people that they would not have another election. The electors did not give them a. mandate for four, hut three years.

Tho petition that was in c reulatum was to be signed by people declaring that they were not in sympathy with the Government. If it were signed by a majority, they would defy them. “The Government has got to repeal certain legislation, or resign. A man who was satisfied with the Government was not entitied to his rights of citizenship.

.Mr O’Brien was received with applause at the conclusion of his address, and on the motion of (Messrs M. AlcGavin and McQui-lkin, was accorded a hearty vote of thanks. A number of questions were- later answered. One of tbe audience -asked if civil servants would be penalised if they were to sign the petition, to which mv O’Briem replied “No,” as Mr Forbes had given his word in this direction provided that they took no part in gathering the signatures, but he said that there was no need for this-

“Do you believe in highly -superannuated civil servant bolding a responsible position!” was another question.

A voice: Do vo-u moan the Town Clerk ?

“No” replied Air O’Brien, “but there are many instances of it to-day. It was pardonable if the civil servant was not receiving sufficient superannuation for the needs of his family, but otherwise it was wrong.