IMMIGRATION.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 August 1922, Page 5

IMMIGRATION.

AN ATTACK ON POLICY. OPPOSITION IN THE HOUSE. HOSTILE MOTION DEFEATED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. Tn presenting the annual report of the Immigration Department to the House to-day the Minister for Immigration (the Hon. W. Nosworthy) made a statement in reply to the recent criticism of the cost of immigration. The Minister said statements had been made that the cost of immigration for the past year was £247,060. This was not correct. The fact was that the department vote had been in credit for three successive years, from 1918-19. For 1918-19 Parliament appropriated £20,000 for immigration and the expenditure was £23,676, but there were credits amounting to £35,693", so that, deducting the amount expended, the department was in credit at the end of the year by £12,018. A point which should not be overlooked was that the Government had had the use of the credit balance for two, three or four years and interest on these at five per cent, would mean approximately another £13,000, so that it might be said that foi* the years 191821 it had really not cost the Government any money for immigration purposes, while the interest on accumulated credits would practically meet the interest on the expenditure for the past year. For the past four years the total figures were as follows: Voted, £346,000: expenditure, £540,637; receipts. £375,512; credit balance, £82,385. These figures- showed the average expenditure on immigration for the past four years had been £41,285. The number of immigrants who arrived in the Dominion from 1918-19 to 1922 (both years inclusive) was 21,829, at a cost of approximately £8 per head. WAS LOAN MONEY USED?

Mr. T. M. Wilford (Leader of the Opposition) said the Minister’s statement was ingenuous, but it was no answer to the criticism by the Opposition, who said the Government had paid £247,000 out of loan moneys during the past twelve months on immigration. This was demonstrated by the public accounts, but of course the pubic accounts might be wrong, and be asked the Minister in his reply not to evade the question, but to tell the House frankly whether or not loan moneys had been expended on immigration. In order to test the feeling of the House on the subject he moved: ‘•That while approving of the necessity for a strong policy of immigration for New Zealand, it is considered that while unemployment is acute the bringing of immigrants to New Zealand is unwarranted.” He personally favored immigration, as we wanted population, but while the country was passing through the present stress the Government should provide work for our own unemployed before bringing more people into the Dominion. The Hon. Sir William Herries (actingleader of the House) asked the Speaker to look into the Amendment, as in his opinion it did not comply with standing orders. The Speaker promised to du

Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Central) seconded the amendment, winch he said was not worded exactly as he would have liked, but it was near enough to enable the Labor Party to express its opinion on the immigration policy of the Government. He reiterated the arguments advanced by himself and his colleagues that until houses and employment arc available for immigrants people should not be brought out from Britain. If the Government would do that not only would the Labor Party not object to immigration, but they would help them, because there was no doubt this country could carry many more people. Under the present circumstances, however, it was criminal to induce people to come out here. IMMIGRATION OPPOSED. Mr. W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) eaid New Zealand’s prestige was being injured, because immigrants found, the conditions so different from what they were led to believe. The Minister had stated that immigrants had been guaranteed both houses and employment, but the fact was that they got neither. The unemployed situation called for more sympathetic attention than the Government was at present giving to it. Mr. W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) contended that the present labor situation was to a large extent due to the immigration policy. Mr. G. Mitchell (Wellington South)

declared that returned soldiers were being thrown out of work every day and these, he thought, should be of greater concern to us than immigrants from Britain.

The lion. T. A. Hanan (Invercargill) thought a much larger question was whether or not we were going to admit a free stream of people from India. They had heard a good deal about this of lato and he felt confident we would before long have to seriously face this question.

Mr. IT. Holland (Leader of the Labor Party) said much of the trouble arose through misleading information circulated through the medium of the 'English Press and if the High Commissioner had nothing to do with these advertisements why did he not publicly contradict them lu spite of what the Minister said immigration must be costing the country large sums of money, yet they were faced with the fact that the Givern ment declared they had no money to meet the needs of the local unemployed. The Minister, in reply, said last year 7005 immigrants came to the Dominion and of these 1256 were wives, 172 intended wives, 1056 domestics and 2085 children. This left 2436 who were sup posed to flood the labor market. An examination of these figures showed that 566 of these went on the land, IS9 were miners and 1681 represented almost ev’6rv skilled trade, so that no one could seriously contend their arrival seriously interfered. with labor conditions. A division on Mr. Wilford’s amendment resulted in its defeat by 33 votes to 17.