THAMES ELECTORATE.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIX, Issue 5349, 9 November 1928, Page 2

THAMES ELECTORATE.

MIL McGREGOR’S CAMPAIGN.

SECOND ADDRESS AT PAEROA. Mr E. McGregor, United Party candidate, addressed for the second time the electors of Paeroa on Wednesday evening the Gaiety Theatre being well tilled. The -Mayor. Mr W. Maishall presided. In commencing, Mr McGregor referred to a “Herald” report concerning his attitude; on a np-con fidcnee motion as given at Thames. His remarks were exactly the same as were made at Paeroa the previous evening. The “Heya.ld” had misreported him, and on the mistake being, pointed out it had attributed other and worse statements to him. The candidate read a copy of his letter to tihe “N.Z. Heyald” which pointed out that he wtyj definitely opposed to the Coates Government and would vote aga.inst it oh a no-confidence motion. Throughout the campaign he had not severely criticised t,he .Labour Party or its Thames candidate beyond pointing out that it would be dangerous for the country to return a Labour Government at the present time when so many loans were coining due during the next three years. It was not a time to deliberately offend the mortgagee of the country by making Labour the Government, for the Capitalists who had loaned New Zealand £79,009,000 were fundamentally opposed to Labour. THE UNITED PLATFORM. Mi McGregor briefly reviewed the main planks of the Reform Party’s platform ami commended Sir Joseph Ward’s State Advances scheme. He pointed out how many oif Sir Joseph Ward’s proposals had been ridiculed and how they had proved practicably and sound business propositions.

Dealing with the Reform Government's hydro-electric power scheme, Mi McGregor quoted the estimates for the Mangahao scheme and stated that it had cost double that amount. One result was that Wellington City and other power boards had been sold power on the estimated cost, which had proved inadequate, so power was now being sold under a long term contract at less than it cost to produce. The same position, obtained in respect of Arapunl, and a result was that the Thames Valley Power Board had to pay £8 per k.v.a. while Auckland obtained its power at £7. Mr McGregor explained the Party’s policy in regard to completing the gaps in the main railway system to make the lines revenue-producing, Sir Joseph Ward proposed to borrow £lO.000*,000 for this purpose and £60.000,000 for the State Advances Department. It was proposed to complete all the negptiations for the loan at once to save costs, but to lift the money only as wanted over a period of ten years or so. Thus interest would not become due until the money was actually used. Money lejit to farmers would become revenueproducing immediately, so the, loan would not cost the general tax-payer anything. ACQUISITION OF LAND.

Dealing with the Government’s legislation in respect of the; compulsory acquisition of land, Mr McGregor endeavoured to show the viciousneps of the scheme and contended that it was designed to assist the large landowners. He submitted that ini all cases where th© Government purchased land it should pay* in; Government bonds instead of in cash, which would have to be borrowed. % Referring to* land settlement. Mr McGregor said that an immediate survey should be ma,de of all unoccupied land. It should be classed into three sections. The Govepninient should concentrate on the A class land immediately and' adopt the group system. Men who ware prepared to- work should be given th P ; opportunity of taking up land even though they did not have capital. Unler the- g/oup system the successful applicants for the block should be employed in breaking in; the land on. wages and under supervision. Those who did not work satisfactorily would be weeded out. The cost of breaking in theland woudl be loaded on to the sections.

The present Government had no land policy. The Prime Minister had admitted as much at -Morrinsville recently. Mr McLeod had sail in the House that the policy of the Government was to keep the mep on the land who were already there. He had also stated in the House that there were 10,000 less men on the land; than five years ago. Just before the close of the last session Mr Coates had introduced a land policy. There was nothing n.ew in it, it was obviously produced for electioneering purposes. Under this scheme it was proposed to advance 95 per. cent, of the value of land to be sold for c.uttingup purposes. Up to the present Government Departments would not lend anything like this percentage on land securities, and an effect would possibly be that a landowner would give' a prospective: settler .the 5 per cent, of the purchase price so that the Government would buy his land and pay him the 95 per cent, in cash. Dealing with the question of farmers’ financ.e. Mr McGregor criticised the actions o.f the Bank of New Zealand in defeating the purpose of the legislation. He criticisqdi t'he Rural Credits scheme, in which, he said, the Government’ was not sincere.

The; candidate then dealt at length with taxation, and poi.nlted out that the Coates administration had reduced the income tax to the large taxpayers and increased it to the small men. Exemptions had been, given lai' r e landowners on his land tax, and later the Coates Government had removed the income tax from lan(do w ners. The fairest way to raise tax was by an income tax steeply graduated.

EDUCATION. The United Party stood for frtje, secular, and c.ompulsory education, decentralisation of control and greater control to school committees. The abolition of education boards would be opposed, but if Reform was returned to power it was possible that the boards would bq abolished shortly.

MR SAMUEL CRITICISED . Mr McGregor said that Mr. Samuel had gone through his address very carefully and had taken him up on miiwi points but did not touch on an.y of the major, points. Mr Samuel’s address had been alm ■;t entirely a recital of what he had done in. Parliament. There was no doubt that he had done his duty, and when he was defeated on Wednesday** next it would not be because of what lx' had not done, but because of what the Coates Government had not done. Mi Samuel had claimed that he was responsible for the reduction in the price of fertilisers. Mr Macmillan, of Tauranga, was making the same < laim. -Mr Samuel had also claimed that he Iwril .ec.uied exemption of heavy traffic fees on farm tractors. The e tractors had never been liable * for heavy traffic fees. Mr Horn, of Wakatipu, laso claimed, \vith Mr Samuel, that he was responsible for the exemption of the petrol tax on farm tractors. Likewise, the Attor-ney-Gyneral claimed the ieson(sibility for removing the Mortgage Indemnity Tax. Mr Samuel had' slated that all the financial dealings of the Government had to pass a higher authority—that of the auditor. Now, the auditor’s report on the Government accounts wag a most damning indictment, said Mr McGregor. There; were pages and pages setting out ii regularities. The speaker read extracts to show that over £11,900,000 had been spent by Government Departments without the sanction or knowledge of Parliament. The country was being ruled' by he-ads of departments and the powers of Parliament were being whittled away by civil servants. Then the country was being governed more and more by -Ordlef-in-Council. Some of these Orders over-rodei the laws mad 1 ® by Parliament. It was for the elec.tors to say whether they .were to be governed by their Parliament or by heads of departments. QUESTIONS. Mr J. W. Silcock asked if the candidate 'would support the permanent enactment of summer time. Mr McGregor said .that the preiferrefl to see the present time made permanent throughout the year. It was 12 hours ahead of Greenwich time. ) Asked if he would guarantee an action by his party, Mr McGergor said that unless the was returned on the 14th he could guarantee nothing. He reiterated his statement thot he would support his party on a noc.onfidenfce motion, but on othey. questions he reserved the right to vote as he thought best. His party left its members as free as possible, and was Vying to get away frqm party government. He qould therefore not guarantee what his party would do in certain cases. He was n,ot in favour of abolishing the Upper House, but would advocate having a smaller number, of members and aq elective system of appointment. Mr McGregor said he; would give his best assistance towards a-crushing plant for the district and to anything that would assist mining. Concerning, the attendance of members in the House when divisions were beng taken, the candidate; said he realised the desirability of all irfembers being present at divisions, but he could not see any way of making it compulsory. In reply to a question by Mr Silcock the; candidate said he had not been able to look up the assistance given to mining by the Government (fairing the last four years, but last year £13,860 had been paid. He favoured fewer members of Parliament and more pay for Uhem. He; could not see .why dairy employees should be- exempted from the provisions of the Arbitration Act. This Act was evolved by Sir Joseph Ward, and the Reform Government '■ had been unable to improve it. JThe Rqy. J. Lowden; moved a vote of thanks to Mr McGregpr, and confidence in him as the future member for Thames. The motioin was carried without dissent.