The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1927. THE FIGHT FOR RAGLAN

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 151, 16 September 1927, Page 8

The Sun 42 Wyndham Street, Auckland, N.Z. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1927. THE FIGHT FOR RAGLAN

SO far the policy speeches of the candidates for the vacant Raglan seat in the House of Representatives have not aroused keen public interest in the by-election campaign or encouraged anticipation of the advgnt of new ideas to mediocre polities. Things may be better when the contestants become morg active and hotter in the fight, but in the meantime they could not be much worse.. Most of the platform talk in different parts of the electorate has been merely a tedious repetition of political jargon—the same sort of ineffective stuff for which some members of Parliament are now asking £6OO a year. Let us all hope that at least one of the five candidates will yet step out from the rut of politics and exercise some originality of political thought with a fresh vigour of expression, so that the people may have reason to feel sure of having a voice in the Legislature as well as a vote. Apart from the merit of rival individual claims to preferment, the most interesting feature of the campaign to date is the appeal of the comparatively new Country Party for direct representation in Parliament. Hitherto, most people believed that the Reform Government not only directly represented country interests, but. served first, last and all the time as the faithful friend of the farmer and all rural interests. Time and changed and changing circumstances apparently have dissipated that belief in country places and even replaced it with a brisk hostility. It is to be noted at any rate that the Country Party’s candidate, Mr. C. A. Magner, whose speech at Ngaruawahia would make many Conservative ears tingle, made it unmistakably clear that the farmers and country-folk behind him have lost their former affection for the Reform Government, whose platform in the beginning of its long career was mounted on a plough. “There was discontent and dissatisfaction throughout the country with the present administration,” declared Mr. Magner, “and the farmers’ call had been unmistakably heard.” It may not be pleasant hearing for the Reform Government, but sometimes the call does not secure the response the caller desires. And unless the Waikato electorate has changed out of all knowledge in the past week or two, the Country Party will not raise its voice in Parliament for some time yet. In every way the Raglan by-election is a distinctive political test. It is true that the fate of the Government does not depend on the issue, but the loss of a stronghold would certainly damage the prestige of the Reform Party for the greater contest next year. Then there is the desperate fight between Labour and the Liberals for another seat in order to settle their rivalry for pride of place as the official Opposition. Though a win for the Liberals would not turn Labour out of the Opposition benches, it would give the Nationalist-Liberals an equality of numbers, thus leaving the balance of power with Mr. Speaker who, of course, would maintain the existing rule. The battle is important enough to warrant the arrival of the heavy artillery of parties.

SINKING MONEY IN SWAMPS

THERE is almost a confession in the remarks of the Minister of Lands, in a review of the report on the drainage of the Hauraki Plains, that there has been more money sunk in the 'and than ever can be taken out of it. At the least, it amounts to an admission that the land cannot carry the cost of bringing it into production. The story of the Hauraki Plains is not one that will bring comfort to the mind of the taxpayer, upon whom the burden must eventually fall. So far, three-quarters of a million sterling has been expended on draining these plains, and though the area now contains some rich and highly-productive farms, there are continuous tales of distress, owing to the settlers being flooded by waters which all the costly dispersion works have been unable to cleat;, and by the fact that many of them have found it utterly impossible to produce enough from their holdings to pay interest on the capital cost with which they are loaded. Only this week it was announced that the sum of £5,000 was to be made available for the relief of settlers there who have been distressed as the result of flood. It is but a small instalment of what the taxpayer will have to find in the future for this expensive drainage venture. “I recognise that a considerable sum will have to be written off as far as the Hauraki Plains are concerned, as it will be impossible for the land itself to carry the weight placed against it,” admitted Mr. McLeod in the House of Representatives yesterday. And who will carry the weight? Why, the taxpayer, upon whose back is placed the burden of every visionary and fantastic scheme which is carried out in the alleged interests of land settlement—and who is even now weight ed with the burden of the vast sura, written off the value of land purchased for returned soldiers at prices altogether in excess of its productive value. To purchase or reclaim land for settlement at a cost, sreater than it can ever pay interest upon is a policy of political insanity, and for the future the taxpayer cannot be blamed for looking coldly upon any enthusiastic project of settlement which does not bear the hall-mark of a payable proposition.

REMOVING AN INIQUITOUS BRAND

THIS being an age of lesser hypocrisy and of greater kindliness and toleration, there will be widespread approval, among the broad-minded of the community at least, of the promise of Sir Maui Pomare that the Births and Registration Act will be amended so as to prevent the present scandalous system of indicating on the birth certificates of illegitimate children the fact that they are born out of wedlock. That the promise of the Minister was “received with a chorus of approval from all sides <sf the House” is an indication that, whatever the failings of our legislators, they are blessed with the saving: grace of humanitarianism. The credit of drawing public attention to tHe existing iniquity against innocent misfortune belongs to Mr. E. C. Levvey, S.M., who, when the birth certificate of a child born out of wedlock was produced in evidence, condemned it as “a most improper and shocking thing" that such a certificate should have the word “illegitimate” written across it. “Why should this child be branded for life ?” demanded Mr. Levvey. “One would think we were living in the dark ages. If that is a provision of the Act, it is high time it was amended.” There are few people in any enlightened country who will not heartily agree with the magistrate.