LABOUR AND UNITED

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1026, 17 July 1930, Page 1

LABOUR AND UNITED

Reform Member’s Attack

GOVERNMENT BEING FORCED ON

N.Z.’s Marketing Problems

THE BUS'S Parliamentary Ecporter

WELLINGTON, Wednesday. A STORMY passage in a fighting speech was experienced by Mr. D. Jones (Reform —Mid-Canterbnry) in the closing stages of the Address-in-Reply debate this evening. He was subjected to many interjections which grew so frequent that once Mr. Speaker had to threaten to name a member. Mr Jones contended that it was the Labour Party which was forcing the Government into its present policy. He was fiercely condemned for his speech by Mr. P. Fraser, Labour rnomKflp for WoHinorfon fiont.r^l,

Mr. Jones said he had not intended to speak, but after hearing the statements made by the member for Hutt. Mr. W. Nash, he had decided to reply to them. He criticised statements made regarding the tariff, and said that Mr. Nash knew nothing about the subject. The Minister of Agriculture, the Hon. A. J. Murdoch: He hasn't been abroad. Mr. Jones: He is abroad tonight. Mr. Jones said he had been to America and had found there that sensible people were beginning to think that they had blundered. He was of the opinion that New Zealand would do

the same unless she paid more attention to her markets. New Zealand was pouring her produce into Britain, and her prosperity was wrapped up in Britain. A Labour Member: What is Britain wrapped up inT Mr. Jones: Under a Labour Government she is not wrapped up in much. Interruptions from the Labour benches became very frequent at this stage, and Mr. Speaker threatened to name members if they did not desist.

Britain was our natural market, Mr. Jones continued, and it was our duty to see that our imported goods were bought in Britain. New Zealand sho ild trade almost entirely with Britain, he contended. The member for Hutt had dealt with the taxation put on the country by the Reform Party, and he was quite ready to admit that the Reform Government had put on taxes greater than those ever applied by any other Government, but they had been for war purposes, and they had been reduced in 1918. If Mr. Nash had studied political economy he would be glad. Mr. Nash: You increased taxation by £3,000,000. The hon. member could take the Customs tariff left by the Reform Party, Mr. Jones said, and he would find that there was practically no taxation on necessities. Mr. Nash had not taken the increase of population into consideration.

Mr. W. E. Parry (Labour—Auckland Central): What is the increase? Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Labour—Avon): ,How much did the population increase during the war years? Mr. Nash had not considered the increase in imports or the increase in prosperity, Mr. Jones continued. Luxuries had been taxed by the Reform Party, but necessities had teen reduced. DISPUTE OVER FIGURES Continuing, Mr. Jones said that he knew that Mr. Nash had misled the House with the figures he had quoted, and that he had another set of figures which he would have used if they had been necessary. Mr. P. Fraser (Labour —Wellington Central) here rose to a point of order, and said that Mr. Jones had accused Mr. Nash of deceiving the House The Speaker said that he did not think the word deceive had been used, and several Labour members suggested that the Hansard reporters should be called on to settle the matter. The Speaker decided that the matter should be allowed to pass. Continuing, Mr. Jones said that the Prime Minister had admitted that his land settlement policy had proved a failure.

Government Members: He did not. Did they remember what the Prime Minister had said about land settlement last session, Mr. Jones asked. During last year lamb had been bringing from 7Jd to Bid a pound, but in the Reform slump period it had been down as low as 41d. The Prime Minister had admitted the failure of his land settlement policy, but still members of the Government continued to throw Reform’s soldier settlement policy at them. Thousands of returned soldiers could thank the Reform Party for the sound position they were now in. (Labour laughter.)

Mr. Jones emphasised the enormous increase in production during the 16 years of Reform administration and said that in that time there was practically no unemployment. (Labour laughter.) No party in New Zealand had done as much for the worker as the Reform Party. A Voice: They took them down, all right.

Mr. Jones compared Australia with ' New Zealand, saying that every v«s----i sel coming to New Zealand had to be searched for stowaways who wanted 'to come to the Dominion. It was the State Governments that had sunk Australia. The Labour Party in England was not solving its problems. Mr. J. H. Thomas had said during the election that if the Labour Party in England could not solve the unemployment problem in 1 i "months it deserved to he kicked out. A Labour Member: When did he say that? Yet, continued Mr. Jones, he was shifted to another office because during his term the unemployment numbers swelled by 600,000. Mr. W. E. Barnard (Labour—Napier): It was not the Labour Party’s fault. Mr. Jones: Whose was it? He went on to say that the Labour Party in England had put £40,000,000 on in taxation and he had found a spirit of pessimism there because people did not know where the taxes were going to go next. It had been found at Home that Labour members had no business or administrative experience and naturally t!»«y would fail. A Voice: Are you joking? LABOUR'S EXPERIENCES Mr. Jones said it was the same with the Labour Party all over the world. With all due respect, what business or administrative experience had its members in New Zealand? Lack of experience had got the Labour Party into trouble all over the world. The trouble in New Zealand today was that bad administration had been forced on the United Party by Labour. Then the l»nd tax had brought on additional unemployment. and the Labour Party had broken down the whole employment system of New Zealand as far as the public works were concerned. The Labour Party had in its pigeonholes damnatory evidence regarding the payment of wages in the Public Works Department, -and dared not use it, because if it did it knew it would have to vote the Government out. Every member of the United Party knew things were going to break, and the Labour Party was forcing the United Party on.

He was not speaking from a rartv point of view—(.laughter)—but from the point of view of New Zealand. The reason for the increased taxation contemplated was that £1,400,000 had been spent on unemployment relief last year. Mr. Jones knew the reason, and the Minister of Railways, the Hon, W. A. Veitch, also knew. The greatest danger in New Zealand wa» the Labour Party, and the greatest blow to the labouring man was the policy forced on the Government by the Labour Party.

Regarding taxation. Mr. Jones said the farmer was getting now 10 per cent, above his prices for 1914. and the position the Prime Minister had to look at in bringing down the Budget was that if the farmer was responsible for 9S per cent, of New Zealand's exports, and had to pay from 50 to 60 per cent more for what he purchased, and still gained only 10 per cent, above 1914 prices, where was the money coming from for taxation? Had not the farmer as much right as any other person to a good standard of living? The greatest financial heresy Mr, Jones had ever heard was Mr. Nash's statement that taxation did not matter. LABOUR ANSWERS BACK After an argument over a point of order, in which Mr. Speaker held that Mr. Jones had not misrepresented Mr. Nash. Mr. P. Fraser (Labour—Well ington Central) rose and criticised Mr. Jones strongly. He said Mr. Jones did not know, throughout his whole speech, what be was talking about, and there was no foundation for his rash and baseless assertions. Dir. Nash had not sait. a word about taxation not mattering. Mr. Jones had been like a second Columbus discovering America in Lis speech, and nothing more ridiculous had appeared in the New Zealand 'ress than the cabled statement, obviously inspired by Mr. Jones, that he had been shaking his fist at Wall Street and threatening the United States with tariff retaliation. It was like Tom Thumb trying to fight Goliath. There was loud laughter here. Mr. Fraser continued that it was ridiculous for Mr. Jones to pose as an authority on finance, economics, or business, as he had no knowledge of these subjects. He had criticised the British Labour Government for lack of business or administrative experience, and yet there were men in that Government who controlled worfh millions. -