A POINT OR TWO EXAMINED.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 121, 13 November 1911, Page 4

A POINT OR TWO EXAMINED.

Mr. Fork's' address bristles with inconsistencies, misstatements and exaggerations. In one breath he denounces the Government for their extravagant financial policy, and insists on a cessation of borrowing; and in the next breath he blames them for not buying up the land through which the Main" Trunk railway runs, and also goes the length of advocating State aid to harbors (he favored the gift, of no less a sum than £IOO,OOO to New Plymouth!). Why, if lie had his way, -the national debt would soon be double its present size. Like so many others who speak from the Opposition platform, lie does not put the debt question fairly. He contrasts our debt with that of the Australian colonies, but he neglects to explain that noiie of these countries liave as yet travelled the distance we have in the way of State enterprise—borrowing money for land for settlement, advances to settlers, workers and lovii 1 bodies, for opening State coal mines, and the like. Xor does he mention that none of these States had a native war debt to meet. The fact of the matter is, our national debt, or rather the payment of interest on it, is not. burdensome to the people. The debt i- purely a nominal liability, and has proved, and is proving, an aid and stimulant, to the development of the country. If the taxpayer had to pay interest, on iinremunerative loans then t here would be justification for the line of criticism indulged in by men of Mr. I'orlies' calibre. In that case, the borrowing wo have done and which borrowing, by the way, was supported bv practically the whole of the Opposition—would iiave proved inimical to the [ interests of the country. But the actual position i> that, whereas the interest charge on that portion of the debt that does not pay its own interest was 28s per head of population in IS9I. it was only l.Ss 7 '-'.d in 1010. A wise business mail will borrow for reproductive purposes. And -o will a State, particularly when that Kljitw is only partly developed like Xew Zealand. When men like }lr. Forbes denounce the Government lor borrowing the money they have, they : denounce advances to settlers and workers. the acquisition and cutting up of i estates by the State, and the State build- I

ing of railways, etc., for this is where, as can be proved, the greater part of the money has gone during the past twenty years, while the remainder has been devoted to roading and bridging the coun-

try, and to similar purposes that in a way are reproductive. Men like Mr. Forbes, too, hold up their hand in pretence of horror at the extent of the amount of taxation per head of population, hut they take good care not to analyse that taxation and tell the people the truth about it. If they did, they would show that the bulk of the taxation is borne by those best able to bear it, and not by the wages man or the .small farmer, who, as a matter of fact, are more lightly taxed than the people of any other country in the world. Mr. Forbes declaims against the Government for the increase in the cost of living, but he cannot credit the electors of Taranaki with the possession of much sense or discrimination. The most casual elector knows as well as Mr. Forbes that the cost of living is increasing in every part of the world, and that the problem is much more acute elsewhere than here. He does not. acknowledge the honest attempts that have been made by the Government lie vilifies to meet the problem, by remitting taxation on the necessaries of life (last year ,£843,945 was so remitted); by financing workmen to purchase their own homes; by providing cheap suburban fares; by reducing the cost of insurance, coal, etc.; by providing a system of compensation for accidents, national annuities, old age peusion.Sj relief to widows and assistance to orphans; by establishing superannuation schemes for all the great State service*. Xo; we hear nothing of these beneficent measures—measures, too, it must he borne in mind, carried into law in spite of the opposition of men on Mr. Forbes' side. Mr. Forbes talks of the need of a progressive land policy, as if it were something original. Why, the very things he advocates are either on the Statute Book or will be placed there next session, when the new Land Bill is passed, as it will be then. He also advocates the reform of the Legislative Council. If he had followed politics a little more closely he would have found • that this is a plank in the Premier's platform. Mr. Forbes' political statements stand very little examination, but in this respect they are no worse, perhaps, than those of many others who are prejudiced against the present 'administration and can see no good in anything they have done or are now doing. Tt is well for electors to bear in mind that there are two sides to every question. But it is open to doubt if they will take Mr. Forbes or his candidature seriously.