THE THAMES SEAT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIX, Issue 5350, 12 November 1928, Page 2

THE THAMES SEAT.

MR. SAMUEL AT PAEROA. ANSWERS TO CRITICISM. Mr A. M. Samuel, Reform candidate, addressed a. very largo gathering in the Gaiety Theatre on Saturday evening, at his second l Paeroa meeting. His Worship the Mayor, Mr W. Marshall, presided. The candidate was greeted with applause on arrival, and his applause was punctuated with bursts of clappipg.

Mr Samuel commenced by expressing his pleasure at being able to address the electors for a second time. The; new electorate was a most difficult onq to work, and he had had l a very strenuous time in bhf; past foxinight. He had addressed numerous meetings and travelled over 150 miles on horseback, but there wer e some, few places which he had not been able to visit. So far the contest had been fought on clean lines. References to his opponents we,re of a political nature, and not personal. When| they commenced his opponents had criticised the Government very strongly, but now it was less strong, and was more pointed at him. They were criticising his work in Parliament, which showed that they recognised tha.t he had been a worker.

Dealing with the wqrk of the Reform Government during the past three years, the candidate stressed the fact that the 16 points of the Reform manifesto of 1925 had b-.en carried cut. After reciting those 16 points Mr Samuel pointed out that the closer settlement qf land would have bee,n foolish during the period of economic depression. The Government had therefore contented itself with endea.vour.ing, to keep the settlers on, the land. In the 1927 session the Government had passed legislation enabling groups of two or more settlers to acquire land, and the Gov-ej-nmen|t would advance up to 95 percent of the cqst. This, and the provision for workers taking up small farmlets, was reducing the amount of unemployment. There was a,lso a system for exploiting the thousands of acres of pumice lands about RotOrua which hitherto had beqn worthless and a menace, as it was growing weeds. A railway had been provided. He had n’ot altogether favoured this railway, as he had always considered that the Paeroa-Pokejno line shquld be pushed bn with at t'he first opportunity. The Government had experimented with the pumice land, and he was hoping the Government would give it away to settlers. He had inspected the land .and bad found that by the application of fertilisers it could be made to produce first-class root crops. He had advocated employing men to break in the unsettled land and then selling it to thqm. His opponents had said that four million aeies of land had gone back to fern, scrub, and second growth. They were so anxious to discredit their country and the Government that they had not troubled to ascertain the true; facts. Between 1917 and 1928 a million acres of this sort of land had been, taken up. Some land had gone back, but the quantity had been less in Reform’s time than ever before. These lands had bepn settled i.n the Mme of the Liberal administration, when there were no roads or facilities. The Reform Government had to spend over £1,000,000 to assist those settlers.

Mr Samuel detailed the Government’s activities concerting agriculture, education, and assistance or protection to farmers, arid quoted figures showing progress made in these matters. Concerning pensions, he showedthat all had been liberalised in recent years, including those for disabled sojdiers, and many new classes of pension, had bcp-n started by the Reform Government. There Were only two ejasseso f pension when Reform took office.

Mr Samuel explained that he had always advocated assistance to mining, and dealt with the statement by Mr McGregor the United candidate, that no assistance had been given to mining by the Government during the last four years. The speaker read a telegram received by the Mayor of Paeroa concerning that assistnee, and which stated that during the period' 1906-11 assistance to the extent of £58,489 had been given, 1912-17, £79,£94; 1918-22, £72,713; and 1923-27, £92,937.

The candidate said that when challenged by a questioner Mr McGregor had asserted that the Government had faked its reports, and he challenged Mr McGregor to prove this corrupt practice or withdraw the statement. Mr McGregor had later admitted that he had obtained his information from the wrong source. It was a half-hearted admission of his own mistake, andl he should have admitted it from evqry platform. However, he had not withdrawn his assertion that the department w'ris faking its reports.

Concerninig the order given to. A. and G. Price for locomotives, Mr Samuel said that it had been givep a long time before the election and when Mr McGregor was a staunch supporter of Reform. Regarding Mr McGregor’s statement that the grant for tlhe prpvision of crushing facilities was aij election promise, Mr Samuel read copies of telegrams to and from the prime Mihis.tier showing, that a promise had been made to find £lOOO -on account of £3OOO and £750 a year. He would stand behind that promise, and would resign from the party if it was not cayriejl out. Dealing with the statement by Mr. McGregor that he had claimed to be responsible for a reduction in the price of fertilisers, the speaker detailed wihat he had previously stated, and pointed out that the reduction had been brought about by the N.Z. Co-operative Dairy Co. In proof of this Mr Samuel read an extract from Hansard of his speech in Parliament.

Another of Mr McGregor’s criticisms concerned the taxation of farm tractors, and he ha.il pointed out that they were n|ot liable. Mr Samuel said that tractors were, not liable for taxation while working on farms, but as soon as they wen,t on the public

road they became liable. Mr McGregor showed by his statement hqw little he knew bf the legislation. Mr Samuel explained how he had had' the law amended to allow farm tractors to use the public road withqut being liable to tax and the loss of petrol tax refund. Likewise tie had been responsible for. having the Mortgage Indemnity Act amended. He had gnt this thing done. The candidate also, dealt with Mr McGregor’s statements concerning the Auditor-General’s comments on the Government’s expenditure, and asked that Mr McGregor, give some definite statement. Had there been any irregularities Oppositon members wquld have mentioned them in Parliament. Another wild statement by Mr McGregor was that the large landholders had been evading the; payment of land tax by drawing a cheque at 11.55 a.m. and paying it in again 12.5 p.m. on the specified date. Mr Samuel showed that this was impossible, and a foqlish statement, and no responsible institution would stoop to such deliberate fraud. Another charge by Mr McGregor against the administration concerned the charges for electric power. Mr. Samuel stated that this was aiy instance of more business in; Government, and unless a contract had been entered into the Auckland Power Board would have, used' its own generating plant. In( view of the fact that the city generating plant would close down a special contract had been made. Concerning the Government publication, “N.Z., the Brighter Britain,” Mr Samuel challenged Mr McGregor to prove his statement that it stated that wages in New Zealand ranged from £7 10s to £ll 10s a week. In fact, bn. page 28 the details of wages paid per hour in various trades were stated, and alsq the number of hours allowed to be worked. The figures qutoed by Mr McGregpr did nqt con.cern wages at all, but were in connection with the question Of income tax. Mr Samuel dealt with the’ duty ort wheat, and showed that the sliding scale duty did not increase the price of bread. This duty had been accepted by the whole qf the House, and was causing a reduction in the amount of tax collected from this source, compared with the tax previously in force. Concerning Mr McGregor’s statement with reference to Mr. Coates’ attitude, on the Liceifsing question, Mr Samuel said he could' not understand his opponent making such an assertion, as Mr. Coates had definitely stated on every occasion when the Licensing Bill came up that it was not a. party measure. The- fact that Mr Todd, president qf the N.Z. Alliance, was standing as a Reform candidate should be sufficient proof. In conclusion Mr Samuel claimed that he had answered all the criticism levelled at him or his party by Mr McGregor, whose party qffered no constructive criticism whatever. Mr Samuel finished with a request to the electors to “vote for Samuel.” QUESTIONS. In reply tq a question Mr Samuel said he would not draw comparisons with the; old-age pensions in New Zealand and Australia. When Reform tbqk office the old-age pension was 10s, and now it .was 17s 6d. A yote of thanks and confidence was accorded Mr Samuel on the motion of Mr W. Forrest, seconded by Mr W. F. Jbhntetone.