REPLY TO CRITICS

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 959, 30 April 1930, Page 11

REPLY TO CRITICS

MR. BLOODWORTH IN FIGHTINQ TRIM TEN WASTED YEARS” The reply direct to critics of the Labour Party for its socialistic leanings was given by Mr. T. Bloodworth, Labour aspirant for Parnell, at St. Heliers last evening. Mr. J. W. Carr presided over an attendance of from I'D to 90 electors in the Peerless Theatre. The candi - date was accorded a vote of thanks and confidence. “Mr. Endean.” said Mr. Bloodwortll. “has been reported as stating that 'the Dabour Party's policy will sufl** private enterprise and the L>est energies of the nation.* "If there is anything in this country approaching Socialism. ” said the speaker, "it is the Auckland Power Board. It is a monopoly established by the Government, and handed over to a public body to administer in the interests of the people. To the Kb Hon. J. G. Coates, in fact, credit has been given by the Reform Press for making hydro-elec trie power a public monopoly; the Auckland Power Board is one of Uie units in the main schema. Balance sheet figures for the Auckland Power Board for the year just ended show that it has collected in revenue the sum of £640.000. It has a capital of £2,900.000. of which £300.000 represents earnings put back into business. This years profits, totalling £74,000, represent 12£ per cent, interest on capital invested, but none of that goes to shareholdeds; after ■urrent expenses have been met ail thi* goes back into the industry to be used for the benefit of the people.” The Auckland Power Board could not be said to be stitling private enterprise, continued the speaker. ID* quoted many instances where small users of power under the board had been able to show considerable expansion in* their individual enterprise*. The record of the Auckland Power Board and that of many other similar concerns proved the fallacy of Mr. Endean’s criticism. Mr. Bloodworth quoted the Auckland Savings Bank and the trading concerns of the city of Dunedin as further examples of public institutions giving wonderful returns to the people. Labour, he stated, did not ask for the socialisation of all industry; it asked merely that all that which was socially necessary should be socially owned. CRITICISM OF REFORM Dealing with the Reform Party * regime since the elections of 1819 Mr. Bloodworth stated that, although the party’s written policy had been an admirable one it had lacked men with the vision and courage necessary to carry it out. No section of the community had recognised this more than the Reform newspapers which liad accused the party, with, among other things, bringing about a deceleration* as against acceleration of industry. It was Reform’s legislation, not iis platform, that had been responsible for much of the depression of the last eight years which had been wasted as far as national development wan concerned. This was shown even in the rate of population increase, which was the lowest since the severe depression of the ’9o’s. The speaker urged the development of waste lands by the unemployed under expert supervision as one of means of bringing prosperity back to New Zealand.

Mr. Bloodworth was supported by Mr. R. Semple, M.P.