PARLIAMENT

Lake County Mail, Issue 18, 24 September 1947, Page 8

PARLIAMENT

Member’s Budget Speech

«Throughout the speeches of members of the Opposition it has been noticeable that every point has been founded on reality, whereas, in contradistinction, the speeches of Government members have all contained a note of apprehension, and there is something very different from the cocksure Government speeches of 1936 and 1938,” declared Mr T. L. Macdonald (National, Wallace), in his Budget speech in the House of Representatives. “Indeed, there was almost a note of humility and doubt in the speeches made by Government members,” he added. “There was a certain amount of tub-thumping, but obviously it was akin to whistling to keep up their courage in face of the difficulties ahead. Perhaps it was a reflection of the uncertainty that is to be found in the minds of many Labour supporters throughout New Zealand to-day. Those people have been loyal to the Government since it came into power, but while it has been in office they have seen wages' rise several times. But as soon as those rises have taken place they have been swallowed up by advances in prices, and people now see that process taking place quicker than a few years ago. The situation is disturbing to those who give it a moment’s thought, and many people arc giving more than a moment’s thought to it. Anyone who considers the situation must inevitably be’ disturbed about the future.” Removal of Subsidies Dealing with the removal of subsidies, Mr Macdonald said there would be increases in price to the consumers of sugar, tea, and other things. It was inevitable that the costs of the family j man must rise quickly. Farmers were to pay more than double for fertiliser. In addition, freight rates were going to rise, and it was a matter of uneasy conjecture what effect that would have on production at a time when increased was vital to the future of .--c New Zealand and to the strengthening *of her relations with Britain. From the increase in the price of fertilisers it appeared that the marginal lands were bound to suffer. Farmers would bjive to pay double the price per ton of fertiliser, and they would almost inevitably decide to wait to sec how those compensatory prices for meat and milk would work, and they would decide, while watching the effect of those prices, just to spend the same amount on fertiliser as they spent in the past. The debate had disclosed one point, an important one on which both parties were,in agreement, and that was the desire to help the Motherland in the desperate economic crisis. It would be more difficult to inspire people in peace-time than it was in war-time. “We must make every allowance for that point of view,” he said, “ and that means that we must make extra effort in awakening our people to a true understanding of the plight of the Mother Country to-day and to a realisation of the fact that to-day it is every bit as true as it was in wartime, to repeat the words that have been so often quoted: ‘Where Britain goes, we go; where Britain stands, we stand.’ If Britain falls, we fall. Surely, out of our feelings towards the Motherland we will be prepared to make the necessary sacrifices.” Coal Production Dealing with coal production, Mr Macdonald said three important questions faced the Government: what steps was the Government going to take to solve the question of output? How was the recruitment of labour in industry to be encouraged? How was the industry to be placed on a healthier footing? There was no guarantee that Government control of the coal mines would mean that they would be run any more smoothly or that there would be fewer imperfections than in the past in the running of them. “ I doubt very much if any Minister in a socialistic Government can- eradicate the