REFORM VICTORY

Otago Witness, Issue 4029, 2 June 1931, Page 19

REFORM VICTORY

HAURAKI BY-ELECTION MR MASSEY’S BIG MAJORITY UNITED CANDIDATE'S CRUSHING DEFEAT. AUCKLAND, May 27. The following are the details* of the voting in the by-election for the Hauraki scat: — MASSEY, W. W. (Reform) 3876 PETRIE, C. R. (Labour) 2514 ALLAN, E. (United) . . 973 ROSS, A. (Country) .. 508 Informal . . . . . 28 The figures for the general election in 1928 were as follow:—A. W. Hall (Reform), 3S2G; E. Allan (United), 2935; C. R. Petrie (Labour), 2411. DETAILS OF THE' VOTING. MARKED PREFERENCE FOR REFORM. AUCKLAND, May 27. The Hauraki election figures are provisional owing to the outstanding absentee postal and seamen’s votes, but the relative positions of the candidates cannot be affected. The voting was considerably lighter, even allowing for outstanding votes, than on the occasion of the general election. Proof of the overwhelming preference for Reform throughout the electorate generally lies in the majorities secured by Mr Massey at 38 of‘the 47 booths. A strong preference was shown in his own district of Mangere. At Mangere East he polled 307 votes to Mr Petrie’s 158, and at Mangere Bridge 188 to the Labour representative’s 125. Mr Allan received only 77 votes at these two places and Mr Ross 20. Reform was definitely preferred at Papatoetoe. At the hall Mr Massey gained 510 votes to Mr Petrie’s 350, and there was a corresponding result at the school. As was generally expected, Labour was in favour at Otahuhu, though Reform was accorded a comfortably solid support. At the Masonic booth Mr Petrie secured 807 votes, which represents the highest single vote in the election, against Mr Massey’s 49G. The vote was smaller at the school and the proportion rather more in favour of Labour. At no stage during the election did the Government and Country Party candidates threaten the strong positions of Reform and Labour. Mr Allan gained only one majority, and discontent with the United Party’s administration could have been given no greater point than in the decline from 2935 votes gained by Mr Allan at the general election to the 973 of to-day. Apart from the significance of this position, and it resulted in spite of the utmost efforts of the leaders of the United Party in the campaign, there is the story of the Country Party’s utter failure, Mr Ross, though recognisedly an able man, must realise that the party he represented found disfavour in practically all parts of the electorate. At three booths only did he gain 30 or more votes, his greatest support being 35 votes at Hitnua.

MR W. W. MASSEY. Mr W. W. Massey is the eldest son of the late Mr W. F. Massey. He has always been active in local body work in the district in which he lives, and also in the work of the Auckland Agri cultural and Pastoral Association, oi which he was president for five years from 1925. For several years he has represented the combined agricultural n nd pastoral associations in the Auckland pro vincial district on the New Zealand Board of Agriculture, and has also been join” president of the Auckland White, Exhibition. Mr Massey’s brother, Mr J. N. Massey, is M.P. for Franklin, and his uncle, Sir John Massey, has unsuccessfully contested an election in the Manukau constituency. Mr Massey has not been a candidate before. MR C. R. PETRIE. Mr C. R. Petrie, who is a Scotsman by birth, entered the co-operative movement in his native land at the age of 15. He spent 14 years in the service of that organisation, and became closely associated with social welfare work, with the result that he developed a bias towards the Labour movement. Following several years of business experience in both the North and South Islands, Mr Petrie entered into business as a storekeeper at Otahuhu. He has been chairman of the School Committee and a member of the Otahuhu Borough Council, and has made a close study of social problems. MR E. ALLAN. Mr E. Allan was born at Strathmartin, in Scotland, and educated at the public school at Carnoustie and high school at Dundee. He was apprenticed to the seed and nursery trade and served his time with Messrs D. and W. Croll, the Scottish rose growers, going from there to Inverness, whence he emigrated to New Zealand. For over 20 years he filled the post of farm manager to Messrs Yates’s seed growing farms. He is at present in business in Buckland on his owu account as seedsman and seed grower. Mr Allan has had considerable experience in local body work, having been chairman of Pukekohe East Road Board, and vf

the Manukau County Conference, which created the county councils of Franklin and Manukau. He was chairman for some time of the Mangere School Committee, and for three years was president of the Buckland Bowling Club. For two years he held the position of president of the Franklin Agricultural and Pastoral Association. Mr Allan, who is a justice of the peace and an elder of the Presbyterian Church, holds the diploma of horticulture, and for over 10 years he has been Government assessor on the Assessment Court. Other interests include close association with welfare of youth movements.

MR A. A. ROSS. Mr A. A. Ross is a native of Lanarkshire. Scotland, where he was born in 18GS. His parents arrived in New Zealand in ISBI and settled in the Waerengn district. He has taken part in the work of various farmers organisations, including the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, and he has been a member of its Provincial Executive for many years. Mr Ross is a member of the union’s Dominion Executive, a director of the Farmers’ Union Trading Company, and chairman of directors of the Farmers’ Fertiliser Company, which position he has held since the company was established. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Thames seat at the 1925 general electiou. MR COATES GRATIFIED. ECONOMY POLICY’ ENDORSED. WELLINGTON, May 23. “ I am naturally pleased with the result of the Hauraki by-election,” said the Leader of the Oppositiou (Mr J. G. Coates) to-day. “ The Prime Minister and four other Ministers took an active part in the campaign on behalf of the United candidate, recognising the Dominion-wide significance of the issue. The Labour Party, with its leader and prominent members, also made strenuous efforts to justify the prediction of a landslide in its direction. The Reform Party was handicapped by an attempt to split the vote of the farming community by the introduction of a Country Party candidate, and in view of all this the result must be regarded as au unmistakable indication of the feeling of the electors in Hauraki and probably throughout the Dominion. “ I accept this as an endorsement of the Reform Party’s efforts to avert the development of an economic crisis and of its actions since the crisis developed,” added Mr Coates. “ The contest was keen and hard, but good nature prevailed.”

PRIME MINISTER RETICENT STATEMENT PROMISED LATER. WELLINGTON, May 28. “ The result is not without significance, and it will require the consideration of the Government,” remarked the Prime Minister (Mr G. W. Forbes) when approached to-day for a statement upon the result of the Hauraki by-election. The Prime Minister said he would say nothing concerning |he by-election at the moment. It was his intention to make a fuller statement at a later date. THE VOICE OF THE ELECTORS SWING FROM UNITED PARTY. WELLINGTON, May 28. “ It may be asked why the swing was toward Reform and so strongly away from the United Party,” says the Dominion. “ The answer surely is that the electors felt within themselves that they could trust the Reform Party. No doubt such confidence was strongly reinforced by the man through whom they could vote for Reform and the tradition of political honour and a square deal of which he was the direct representative. On the other hand, all the parties were fortunate in the personality of their candidates, so that it was hardly a case of men before measures. Mr Massey won not merely because he was Mr Massey, but because he stood for the party which the electors felt would give the kind of Government the times demand. For, when all is said, it should not be forgotten that the Hauraki by-election has not altered the party balance in the House. The Government, still a minority Government, has onerous duties to discharge and financial problems to solve. It can expect only distraction and obstruction from Labour, and will be helpless without the support of the Reform opposition. There can be no doubt that the necessary assistance will be forthcoming. Mr Coates and his followers have consistently placed national interest above party considerations. Their working motto of helping rather than hindering where the common welfare is at stake has been appreciated and endorsed by the Hauraki electors.”

COMMENT BY LABOUR LEADER VOTE OF NO-CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT. WELLINGTON, May 28. Commenting on the result of the Hauraki by-election, the Leader of the Labour Party (Mr H. E. Holland) said its most significant feature was the slump in the United Party’s vote, which had declined by nearly 2000 as compared with the 1928 general election. So far as the Hauraki electorate was concerned, the result was an emphatic vote of no-coufidence

in the Government, and Mr Holland sail that in his opinion it reflected public feeling generally throughout New Zealand. . The Hauraki contest, Mr Holland said, had resolved itself into a struggle between the Reform Party and the Labour Party. The improvement in the Labour vote was greater in proportion than in the Reform vote. With 1000 votes fewer than the number polled in the aggregate in 1928, Labour had increased its vote by 102, while Reform increased its vote by 50. In 1928 the combined Reform and United majority over Labour iu Hauraki was 4350. On this occasion’ the combined Reform and United ■majojrity over Labour was 2335. Even if the Country Party’s vote were added, the total anti-Labour majority was only 2843, which was considerably lower than the 1928 majority. But while the Reform Party made it clear that it feared that the Country Party would take its votes, there was no doubt whatever that the major portion of the. votes obtained by the Country. Party were Radical farming votes, which iu 1928 went to the Labour candidate. “Mr Massey, the new member for Hauraki,” said Mr Holland, “ comes into the House pledged against quite a number of the principles for which his own stands. For instance, he makes it clear that he will demand the restoration of the social services which have been cut down by the United Government, and he demands equal treatment for public servants with other sections of the community. Furthermore, he is definitely pledged against wage reductions. No doubt the country as a whole will await with very great interest the Prime Minister’s statement and whatever line of action he proposes to take in view of the overwhelming defeat of his party in the Hauraki contest.”

STATE OF PARTIES. CHANGES SINCE GENERAL ELECTION. The state of parties in the House of Representatives consequent on the election of Mr Massey for the Hauraki seat is now as follows:— United 25 Reform 27 Labour 20 Independents 7 Country Party 1 Since the general election there have been seven by-elections. The United Party has lost the Hutt seat to Labour and the Parnell seat to Reform, and lias won the Waipawa seat from Reform. The Reform Party has lost the Bay of Islands seat to the Country Party and has retained the Western Maori and Hauraki seats. The Invercargill seat was retained by the United Party.