MR VEITCH IN SHANNON.

Shannon News, 12 November 1928, Page 4

MR VEITCH IN SHANNON.

UNITED PARTY’S POLICY EXPLAINED.

The ©raids’ Hall wias packed on Saturday evening, when 'Mr W. A. Veitch, president of the United Party, during a political address, fully ex- , pounded his party’s policy, criticising Reform’s administration and outlining the remedies which the party lie represented proposed to apply. With Mr Veitch ou the platform was Mr P. Small, the United Party candidate for the Manawatu electorate. Mr W. Murdoch presided. Tho chairman, in introducing Mr Veitch, said he had represented Wanganui for many years and was wellknown throughout the Dominion. It was unnecessary to ask that he be accorded a fair hearing as the suggestion that he would not would be an insult to the people of Shannon. Mr Veitch on rising w r as received with applause. He said this was not the first occasion he had said a few words in that hall, as he had spoken at the banquet at the opening of Mangahao, at which tlici late Mr Massey had been present. “We have met tonight to consider the political situation of the country,” he continued. “We are a young country with great potential wealth, with many ways of developing it; but up to this point the Government have never done much to build up our primary productions.” Quite another feature of development was that which could be brought about by hydro-electric power. Already a considerable - amount of money had been spent in that direction. The cost of Mangahao hydro-clectric works had been criticised, but when one started to model a, great plant nut of the side of the mountain, it was hard for any engineer to be .certain of whether he could carry out the work for the estimate. At election time it was always’ easy to pick out petty faults and quite easy for opponents to produce figures to show the cost had been more; but if they discussed the matter all night it would not, help the country. He would therefore pass the minor question and look at the great realities. Although a great deal of money has been spent in installing power, they should consider that using the power for only lighting and cooking was not going to enrich New Zealand. Our primary and secondary industries wanted to be powerful. This country was go'ing to lead tho world in primary industrial development and cheap power. If we looked at the history of great nations that have become powerful, we found they had not been content with only primary productions. New Zealand must not be. She had great potential wealth outside of primary production and should create secondary production. Australia. was striving hard for industries within her borders New Zealand had greater opportunities, being able to produce vast quantities of hydro-electric power and should be able to competo with any other country in the world. In some countries the suceess of secondary productions was at the expense of the physique and mentality of the people; in New Zealand we could do so without lowering the standard of living. A vdice: When will we get this? Mr Veitch: When the United Party ‘ get into power. When you get a Government in that will carry out wliat I advocate to-night. So soon- as you put Mr Small in! Continuing, he said, Australia was working behind a tariff wall, that did not exist in New Zealand. Secondary production would advance the prosperity of New Zealand and the people in it. Why should New Zealand which was producing thousands of bales of wool have to sell it at its lowest selling price? Was it not desirable to do something? New Zealand had immense possibilities for secondary industries. An important plank laid down by the United Party was that the high protective tariff was not required in New Zealand. The primary producer afterall, was and for some time would be, the principal revenue-producer in New Zealand.

“Wo must analyse the position. At present the country is heavily burdened by a large external national debt, but nevertheless the future of Now Zealand is a very fine future. The primary producer to-day is in the hollow of a slump. The United Party’s policy is one that will overcome these evils. The present Government has borrowed vast sums of money and increased onr National debt, but has not to" any extent increased our national revenue. If the money has been wisely spent on works, wo are not getting revenue, but we have had to increase our taxation and interest charges.” Under Liberal administration the main consideration was the prosperity of the sottlers who were placed on the land at a reasonable price with a rear sonable amount of cheap money to help them along.' It was proposed by the United Party to raise £60,000,000 for the purpose of lending cheap money. There was in New Zealand a great and powerful financial monopoly which had placed a load on the back of the farmers. The rate of interest ran from 7 to 10 per cent and with that on their backs the fanners could not produce

as they should bo able to. That was the chief cause of the Reform Party's laud settlement policy. The United Party intended to borrow money from Home, of which a million-or so, would’ be available at a time, as required. It would.be passed on to the State Advances to lend out to fanners at a narrow'" margin of interest, sufficient to cover administration. This would supply the primary producer with capital and thus increase the .income from the ports. All this would come from the United Pavty.’s highly scientific policy. The increased borrowing would not. increase taxation. Therein lay the great fundamental weakness of the Reform Party’s administration. “I tell you that if our party goes into power we shall get the money. I have the assurance of Sir Joseph Ward." (applause). He charged the Prime Minister with great weakness in permitting the money lenders to dictate to him how the money was to be used. All economists realised that the country's prosperity could uot be restored without cheap finance. The Reform Government had certainly built some useful roads, but it was no good constructing them for the farmer to take his furniture to the mart because lie could not raise money to work his farm. . i “This money .we intend to raise will' be the means of helping the farmer, increasing 'wages and driving unemployment out of the country. When that is done we may be in a position to raise money in New Zealand. This is the highly scientific and masterly scheme evolved from the financial brain of Sir Joseph Ward. (Applause). It will benefit the - worker, create a demand for labour and provide money for homes. It. has been said to be. a wild'scheme. Mr Coates says it will create a “boom and burst," but if he complains that we are spending £70,000,000 to create a boom, while his party spoilt £190,000,000, which included the cost, of the rvar, and £112,000,000 with the cost of the war, to bring about i slump, then we are not in a grave position. It will not be necessary to draw the £<50,000,000 in one sum; it can be taken as-required. The farmer will borrow for a, term of 32 vears with interest and sinking fund, and the latter will amount to just aboutthe interest he is paving now. We say emphatically that the lending of cheap money will not create a land boom. Our policy is to restore prosperity to the farmer. The Reform Party’s land settlement failed for the reasons that they failed to get cheap money and that they paid more for the land than it was worth." lie criticised the Reform land laws which he said were no use without money. His Party’s policy would be • (stablished on a comprehensive scheme that would uot increase taxation and vet- provide cheaper money. Mr Yeitcb said he had not come to • Shannon to injure any person, but to do all in his power to support MiSmall,, the'' United Party’s candidate. Me claimed that the policy he had enunciated would raise New Zealand from the trough of the stump it was iu to-day and put it on the road’ of prosperity. (Applause). He. did not. know whether it wa3 necessary to say much move. (Hear, hear). The speaker: “Thank you." • Continuing, he said ho .would answer questions raised by auy “doubting Thomas" after his address. 'The Reform party had said ‘‘Let us get into the pigeon holes and rye will show you the vile transactions of the Liberal party," but they had not given the country one yet. The Reform Party’s slogan had been, “More settlement and still more settlement,” but instead it has been “No settlement, and still no settlement." They had placed their own interests before those of the welfare of the people. “I have not said a word against the sitting member, and because as the sins of Reform are upon his shoulders I do not want to increase his burden.’ *

In making a strong appeal on behalf of his party Mr Veitch said the troubles of to-dav were .those of 1890 when the Liberals droyo out the Conservatives. “Allow the same remedies to be used again and you will make Now Zealand one of the bright spots of the Empire as it was intended to be.”

Asked why the Conservatives drove out the Liberals in 1912, he said that it had been suggested that his (the speaker’s) vote was responsible, but it was owing to Mr Coates and others going over to the Conservatives. It was the Reform party's unjust and scandalous criticism of Sir Joseph Ward’s public reputation at that time. He was sorry to say he had voted against him, but in less than six months he had found out his mistake and had regretted it ever since. The speaker was then deluged with questions, each of which he answered with every indication of satisfaction. A vote of thanks to Mr Vcitch bringing to a conclusion a very capable address.