ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 July 1922, Page 5

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY.

THE DEBATE CONTINUED. A WEEK OF SPEECHES VARIOUS TOPICS DISCUSSED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Rast Night. The debate on the Address-in-Reply was continued in the House to-day. The first speaker was Mr. J. Edie (Bruce).He condemned the Government’s laxity in the administration of the land laws to prevent aggregation of estates. The proper settlement of land in small adotroents would do a great deal to avert unemployment. Mr. Edie complained at the Government’s reticence in the matter of the Economie.s Committee’s report, which should be available to members of the House. He remarked that the Premier had not fulfilled his election pledges made at the 1911 election, when Mr. Massey was in opposition, instancing an elective Legislative Council, which was not yet an accomplished fact, although legislation was passed to make the Upper House elective on a proportional representation basis. It seemed to him the Premier did not intend to put the Act into operation.

Mr. A. Harris (Waitemata) commented on tlie absence of policy from the Liberal Opposition party. He believed the private financial conditions of the country were steadily improving, but Government finance was sure to feel the strain for some time. He criticised the conduct of the Railway Department in increasing fares and freights to try to stein the tide of loss. This simply played into the hands of private enterprise, and it certainly would not make the railways pay. The same criticism applied to the Post and Telegraph Department. LAND VALUES. Mr. Harris urged that the time had arrived for the re-valuation of rural lands. It was unjust to ask the farmer to pay tax on land value that did not exist. The country could not get back to normal conditions, business could not improve, and the cost of living could not come down unless the burden of taxation was reduced. The matter narrowed itself down to this: we must either decrease our expenditure or increase our revenue by taxation. Both these were impossible, and the only other thing to do was to increase our population by immigration, so to have more people to bear the taxation burden. Mr. R. McCallum (Wairau) expressed the hope that the financial Bills were not too far advanced to prevent consideration of suggestions from the Opposition. English capital should be encouraged to come to the Dominion by a remission of death duties during a certain number of years. He thought that instead of scrapping the battleship New Zealand the ship should be utilised as a trainingship, while the Chatham need not be maintained in these waters during the present time of financial stress. Mr. Massey interjected that the Chatham would be replaced by a new ship in a year or two.

Mr. R. P. Hudson (Motueka), who stressed the need for greater development of country lands. The trend of the population was to leave the country and crowd into the towns, and he appealed to the Government to make things more attractive in the country by carrying out necessary works and conveniences. Contracts for such works, however, should not be on a co-operative basis, but should be given to settlers, who should be allowed to do the work in their own way and in their own time. Small harbors, made possible by dredging, would be of great benefit to out-of-the-way parts of the Dominion, and he urged the Government to procure a dredge suitable for such work. He was sorry to say the Government did not seem sympathetic in this direction. Education in country schools should be such as to qualify country children for country walks in life. They should be induced, by suitable training, to take up the occupations of their fathers, rather than go into the cities and become clerks and typists. Some primary scientific training would be helpful towards this end. SPEECH BY MR. MASTERS. Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) said one of the features of the debate was the criticism of the Government coming from Government supporters. The speeches delivered by Messrs. Harris and Hudson were cases in point. He knew nothing of the policy of the Labor Party, but he was distinctly in favor of a State Bank and proportional representation, and he was proud to be associated with any party working to these ends. Gn the other hand, he was distinctly against immigration at the present juncture. If on these points Liberal and Labor policy agreed, that was a coincidence, but a telegram which had just come through from Auckland showed clearly there was not, aS Government supporters alleged, a compact between the Liberal and Labor parties. So far as returned soldiers were concerned, he favored an immediate revaluation of their lands. The State was bound to make a loss, owing to the price at which the land was bought, and the sooner it cut the loss the better. The railway administration was next attacked, the speaker contending that the relaying of rails was being seriously reduced, thereby endangering public safety; but while maintenance was 'being curtailed, the administration staff was being increased. The marketing of our prodiJee was being sadly neglected, for which the High Commissioner was to blame, as he failed to keep us posted in up-to-date market reports, and generally were are not, getting the benefits from his services that we should be getting. He commended this matter to the attention of the Minister for Agriculture.

Mr. E. Newman (Manawatu) condemned the proposal to re-value soldier lands at the present time, because the value of the land had not been stabilised since the war. Land purchased for soldiers in his district had been purchased at reasonable prices, and the Government had taken every precaution to see that this was done all over the Dominion, and if cases of hardship occurred he could only say that every such case brought under the notice of the Minister was treated most Sympathetically by the Government. He defended the High Commissioner from the attacks made upon him. Too much was expected of him if he was asked to cable information regarding the rises in the prices of produce.

This was particularly apparent to anyone who knew how meat prices, for instance, were manipulated by those engaged in the London trade. The arguments brought down by the Opposition had not been such as to convince him that he ought to vote for Mr. Wilford’s amendment. On the other hand, they had been such as to lead him to believe he would be doing his duty much better by voting for the Government. The debate was adjourned, on the motion of Mr. Bollard, and the House rose at 9.35 till 2.30 on Tuesday.