LABOUR CRITICISED

Wairarapa Times-Age, 6 September 1938, Page 5

LABOUR CRITICISED

ADDRESS BV MR J. HARDEST LAST NIGHT ASPECTS OF NATIONAL PARTY’S POLICY SUBSIDY ON COUNTY RATES (“Times-Age” Special.) “The National Party believes that the Government should subsidise £1 for £1 all rates levied by county councils,” declared Mr J. Hargest, M.P., in the course of an address at Eketahuna last night. Mr Hargest reviewed at some length the administration of the Labour Government and dealt with aspects of the policy of the National Party. The Eketahuna Public Hall was crowded, and Mr A. H. Herbert occupied The chair in the unavoidable absence of the Jdayor, Mr W. Simpson. Mr J. H. Irving, Nationalist candidate for the Masterton electorate, was also present. Mr Hargest denied statements alleged to have been made by Labour members that in the event of the National Party taking office pensions and public servants’ wages would be reduced. Under a Nationalist Government, hours and conditions of work in industry would be settled by the Arbitration Court without any interference from a Minister of the Crown. The National Party was not the enemy of the working class. For years the objective of the Labour Party had been socialism, but with an election in the offing they could see the dangers of that policy and were treading on the soft pedal. Dealing with statements made by the Hon W. Nash when speaking at Petone recently, Mr Hargest said that the Minister had claimed that the Nationalist Party wanted to raise the rates of interest charged to local bodies. That was incorrect, as also was the Minister’s statement that interest rates were the same as they were in 1935. The Labour Government had done absolutely nothing towards reducing interest rates. The Rt Hon J. G. Coates was the man who had. forced the banks to reduce the rate of interest charged to local bodies, and he had never received any credit for his action. LABOUR AND SOCIALISM, Labour beljeved in a-system of socialism that allowed only of State ownership of all property and State employment of all labour. There was no difference between socialism and communism. The objectives of both were the same. It was “absolute bunkum” to suggest that the communists were behind the National Party. They were behind the Labour Party to the last ditch, and no National Party candidate had a chance of securing one communist’s vote. Behind all Labour legislation was the socialisation of all means of production and mediums of exchange. The Minister of Lands, the Hon F. Langstone, believed in the State ownership of farms. Recently he refused, to give the men working on tne Galatea holdings the title to the land and told them that , if they did not like working for:him all they would get was the sack. Dealing with the need for closer land settlement, Mr Hargest said: the. present Minister of Lands had not settled one man on the land since he took office.. '■

“If the only way to office is by the road of destroying the good name of your opponent, then we do not want to get in,” observed Mr Hargest when referring to statements made by the Minister of Public Works, and also by the Director of Commercial Broadcasting in a recent Sunday night address. I have never heard statements comparable with those made by the arch-pro-pagandist of the Labour Party, the Rev Scrimgeour,” added Mr Hargest. The Labour Party had just decided that they were the champions of Christianity, and the National Party were the heathens. He had never known the Hon Adam Hamilton to say an unkind word about anyone. He was a cleanliving, God-fearing man, but he did not go round telling people all about it. The National Party believed that religion and politics were things apart. He was not suggesting that Mr Savage was not a Christian, but he did resent statements that the National Party did not stand for the highest standards of Christian ethics. It was not to the credit of any Government to bring religion into politics. WASTE AND EXTRAVAGANCE The Labour Party was trying to make people believe that the National Party was determined to reduce the standard of living, but Labour was enabled to continue its headlong policy of waste and extravagance because of the thrifty way in which the previous Government conserved its finances. Labour did not find a bankrupt counry when it took office. The slump was over and everything was a going concern. It was the past Government, plus the people who refused to be discouraged and battled on, tnat were responsible for a prosperous New Zealand today. The National Party had never opposed Labour’s policy of increasing pensions and raising wages, remarked Mr Hargest, who went on to deal with the failure of the Government to honours its promises to reduce the sales tax, and to wipe out the rate of exchange. The rate of exchange had helped the farmer to bridge the gap between prices and costs. If the National Party found it could not honour the promises it would make at the coming election then it would go back to the country again and leave the decision to tne people. TAXATION BURDEN Mr Hargest claimed that the Labour Government had been deliberately trying to disguise the unemployment situation which was by no means cured. Labour was piling on taxation and by the end of this year taxation would have increased by twelve millions in three years. The aim of the National Party was to carry on with the least possible amount of taxation. Mr Hargest went on to discuss wages and the cost of living, and said that the wage-earner was finding that increases in wages were being cancelled out by increased costs. All that was concerning the Labour Government today was industry that was governed by awards.. It was becoming impossible for farmers to carry on with rising costs and low prices. He criticised Labour’s huge expenditure on public works and stated that if the’ National Party were returned to power it would not repudiate any of the promises made by Labour. Any public works in hand or promised would be carried through to completion by the Nationalists. Referring to railways, Mr Hargest said that Labour was employing 4800 more men since 1935, and only operating two extra miles of line. “Mr Nash has set • out to socialise the dairy industry,” declared Mr Hargest when touching on the guaranteed price. Mr Nash had the power to put up the guaranteed price today and take it down tomorrow. This being election year the Government would probably add another 2d to the price and pay Is 6d. If the National Party were returned to power it would continue to pay the ruling guaranteed price until March of next year. In the meantime the whole position of the industry would be investigated through the Dairy Control Board, and if it were found that farmers wanted the Government to handle their produce a compensatory, and not a guaranteed price would be paid. SOCIAL SECURITY Under its social security legislation the Government was going to give a partial service for a cost in the first year of 19 millions. The National Party would give instead of complete service to those who needed it. The National Party would relieve all women of unemployment taxation and it would not reduce public servants’ salaries or pensions. Land settlement would be encouraged and young men provided with an opportunity of owning a farm of their own. Hours and conditions of work would be decided by the Arbitration Court, and a volunteer system of defence would be introduced. At the conclusion of his address Mr Hargest answered a number of questions and was accorded a hearty vote of thanks by acclamation on the motion of Mr P. Davie. He was given a most attentive hearing throughout.