CONFIDENT OF SUCCESS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 7 October 1938, Page 5

CONFIDENT OF SUCCESS

PROSPECTS OF THE NATIONAL PARTY ADDRESS BY MR J. H. IRVING. BIG MEETING AT CLAREVILLE. (“Times-Age” Special.) “I am quite confident that I will be your member after this election so it is all to the good that you should come along and get to know me and to like me,” remarked Mr J. H. Irving, National candidate for the Masterton seat, when expressing pleasure at the very large attendance at a meeting he addressed last night in the Clareville Hall. Mr Irving was later applauded for stating that when he was returned to office he would do the best he possibly could for all his constituents, irrespective of whether they- supported his party or not. Mr G. E. Allen presided and introduced Mr Irving, who was given a splendid hearing. After stating that he was fighting the contest on the principle of playing the game and playing the ball and not the man, Mr Irving said that on account of the radical legislative changes of the past three years people were more politically minded than they had ever

been before. Unlike a lot of people, he would say that it was absolutely wrong to contend that everything that Labour had done was wrong. The Government had done a lot of good for the country, but it did not seem to have any regard for money. The country was being committed to a financial policy far beyond its resources. It was admitted that the previous Government had made mistakes, but the thing to do was to guard against repeating those mistakes. The present National Party was not the “old gang.” It was a new party and of the seventeen members in the House last term at least half were comparatively new to politics. LEADERS DEFENDED. The Leader of the Party, the Hon. Adam Hamilton, was being blamed for all the bad things done by the old National Government. It had been said that Sir George Wilson had. resigned because he was not satisfied with the party. That was incorrect. He had resigned because he had wanted his close friend, the Rt. Hon. G. J. Coates, to be the Leader of the party. During the depression, Messrs Coates and Forbes had done things they, did not want to do simply because they had to. A fall in the national income had made necessary drastic cuts, which was a position not peculiar to New Zealand but then existing all over the world. The two leaders had become very unpopular, but today there was a growing feeling throughout the country that they had done their best for New Zealand. (Applause). Throughout the depression a higher rate of sustenance and relief had been paid in New Zealand than in any other part of the world. They had made mistakes, but credit had to be given to them for their efforts. When the slump was over they left the country in a buoyant financial position. In spite of the Labour Government New Zealand was passing through the best times it had ever enjoyed. It was all so much nonsense to say that the country could only be prosperous with Labour in office. The National Party made certain promises to the people and he was prepared to stand by those pledges and say they would be carried .out. They would not interfere in wage disputes between employer and employee, but would leave the matter to the Arbitration Court without Government interference. At present a wedge was being driven between employers and employees by trade union “bosses” who wanted the impossible. The National Party said that the highest wages should be paid that the industry could afford and no more. That was the fundamental difference between the Nationalists and Labour. PREFERENCE TO PRODUCERS. A certain amount of preference should be given to one section of the people—those who produced the real wealth of the country for export overseas. They should receive first consideration if anyone did. That however, was not the position in New Zealand today. It was the big trade unions that were receiving all the benefits. Per head of population. New Zealanders paid a higher rate of taxation than in any other part of the British Empire. Taxation on companies was having the effect of driving investors out of the country and was crippling company promotion. Some members of the Labour Government set themselves up to be financial'experts, but the sooner they were removed from the pedestal on which they had placed themselves the better for the country. Labour said it had a plan to insulate the country against a future depression, but it did not do any one of the three things necessary for insulation. It did not reduce the country’s liabilities. it did not spend on the assets of productive works and it entertained further long-dated commitments. Discussing the Social Security Act, Mr Nash had said he was not concerned with future years but only with the finances of the first year of the scheme. REDUCING UNEMPLOYMENT. When Labour said it would put every unemployed man into work it had been

thought that the men would be absorbed into industry and that the unemployment tax would be removed. Last year, however, the country had found £4| millions for unemployment. Today the country was committed to a huge increase in national expenditure, all of which was taken ’from the pockets of the people. The public works programme of the Labour Government was a credit to the country, but even so the £2l millions in the Public Works Account was not being spent on reproductive or worth-while undertakings one would naturally expect. It was agreed that a National Health and Insurance Scheme was both necessary and desirable, but he would not give credit to the Labour Government for being better intention ed or more humane than the National Party. If Labour’s grandiose scheme fell down because the country could not affoid it, Labour might prove to be the most inhumane Government that New Zealand had ever had. He would not say that Mr Savage and members of the Labour Party were insincere, but that they were not practical. Labour had brought down no legislation that wouid contribute more to their defeat at the polls than the Social Security Act. The scheme would cost £I7J millions in the first year and some years later would cost £25 millions. broken promises. Labour had not reduced the cost of living, had not removed the sales tax. had not given the farmer a standard of living commensurate with that of workers in other industries, and had not remedied the unemployment position. Taxation had in three years increased by £IIJ millions. In his Budget speech 1936, Mr Nash had promised to build 5 000 State houses for £6OO each. In an address at Clareville, however, Mr J. Robertson, Labour candidate for the Masterton seat, had told an audience of 12 —two of whom were Nationalists from Masterton—that the houses were costing £lO2B. The real workers were not living in the State houses.. After stating that Mr Hamilton wa" gaining ground everywhere becjin' his sincerity and knowledge -ne people. Mr Irving concluded his address by outlining points in the programme of the National Party and directing criticism at the Socialistic policy of Labour. On the motion of Mr J. McKenzie, a motion thanking Mr Irving for his address and expressing confidence in mm as the National candidate and in the National Party was carried unanimously by acclamation.