THE NEW ZEALAND ELECTIONS

The superficiality of most political comment has been demonstrated once again, this time concerning the New Zealand elections. "The Age", Melbourne (November 30th) claims "...Mr. Muldoon cannot claim to have scored a resounding victory. But he appears to have scored a victory nonetheless." A victory for what? Prime Minister Muldoon claims that he will continue in office, stating, "We will go ahead with our growth strategy. That's what this election was all about." If that was the major issue in the election, then at least 50 percent of those New Zealanders who voted (voting is not compulsory) are against that "think big" philosophy.

Mr. Muldoon skillfully exploited the CHOGM conference in Melbourne. This helped to ensure that controversy concerning high inflation, unemployment and heavy taxation was minimised. It can be seen in retrospect that if Mr. Muldoon had banned the South African rugby tour; he would have been decisively defeated on Saturday. What would have been said about his "think big" philosophy then?

In the absence of an Upper House and a written Constitution, New Zealand suffers from Executive Dictatorship more than perhaps any other member of the Crown Commonwealth. Assuming that the National Party retains its two-seat lead over Labor (this is not certain until all overseas votes are counted) Mr. Muldoon does not have to call Parliament together until May. Executive Government will continue. Some time before the election, when it was obvious that the "Social Credit" vote was likely to be a decisive factor in the elections, Mr. Muldoon threatened that if "Social Credit" candidates held the balance of power, he would have another election at an early date to allow electors to "come to their senses". But Mr. Muldoon is not now keen to do this, realising no doubt that with the continuing depressed economic conditions, he would be decisively defeated.

In referring to Social Credit, we use the term in inverted commas in the New Zealand context, as Mr. Bruce Beetham, leader of the Social Credit League has specifically rejected the author of Social Credit, C.H. Douglas. However, his candidates in the main provided much better answers to a Voters' Association pre-election questionnaire, than did either the National or Labor Parties, which specifically stated that their candidates should refuse to answer the questions asked, like back Mr. Muldoon and Mr. Rowling, in the New Zealand League of Rights magazine, "New Zealand First", which was used to saturate New Zealand.
Eight Labor candidates defied their party to provide answers to the policy questionnaire, but only three National candidates. To their credit 32 candidates for the "Social Credit" League answered, some of these very well.

Only one Member of Parliament, Mr. Gary Knapp, Mr. Beetham's deputy, gave a firm commitment, agreeing to put electors ahead of any party loyalty. Mr. Knapp caused a political sensation when he won a strong National Party constituency at a by election, and has demonstrated that by effective representation it is possible to retain what was, in the main, originally a protest vote. If Mr. Knapp and Mr. Beetham do continue to hold the balance of power, and use it in a constructive manner, and if the growing grassroots movement being developed by the New Zealand League of Rights continues to grow, New Zealand could be at the beginning of a move away from the disastrous policies now resulting in escalating disintegration throughout the whole Western world.

THE RACE RELATIONS INDUSTRY

Large numbers of people throughout the world, many in the media, now make a living out of what has been aptly described as the "race relations industry". The more race problems, real or invented, the more profitable for those engaged in this industry. The Al Grassbys have done extremely well, for themselves. Consider the latest annual report by Australia's Community Relations Commissioner, Mr. Grassby. We are told that although Australians are now more racially tolerant than in the 200 years of European settlement, there is a need for more resources to "fight racism". There was "an urgent need for a national campaign to combat bigotries". This means more bureaucracy, staffed by liberal do gooders and financed by the taxpayer.

As usual, Mr. Grassby criticises the Australian League of Rights, striving to link it with the practically non-existent National Front. Mr. Grassby's accuracy may be judged by his claim that by supporting State rights, tax and monetary reform, the League has built up a membership of 90,000. As even matured critics of the League know, the League's formal membership is relatively small. The League is a service movement, and support depends upon issues.
On the immigration issue, the League has millions, not thousands, of supporters. If Mr. Grassby and his allies do not believe this, let them hold a national referendum and they will discover the truth.

Those advocating the creation of a multiracial society, with large numbers of blacks and Asians, are in a small minority. When the Brixton and other British riots broke out, Mr. Grassby and others engaged in the race relations industry, were quick to insist that race had little if anything to do with the riots. Not even the Liberal Lord Scarman endorses that view in his recently published report. Lord Scarman says that racial "prejudice" is so bad that a national campaign must be conducted to eradicate it. Lord Scarman partly blames the police, who allegedly have a "bias" against blacks. But as one policeman who has worked Brixton streets for years says, "I'm sorry to say it, but most of the crime here is committed by blacks. In pursuing these people we are accused of racism."

Events are confirming what Mr. Enoch Powell has been saying. Dr. Ashton Gibson, a Western Indian group leader, has been inundated with requests to participate in a programme for repatriating West Indians to their home countries. Now comes the news that a national opinion poll conducted by the mass circulation paper "News of the World", reveals that the overwhelming majority of blacks would like to return to their native countries. One in four said they would be happy if the Government paid their travelling expenses. The figure rose to one in three if expenses were paid for the whole family. Most said they preferred to live amongst their own kind. Dr. Gibson says he is not surprised about the results of the survey; his only surprise is that it did not reveal a bigger number wishing to leave the United Kingdom!
Australians with commonsense should carefully note what has happened in the United Kingdom, where truth has overtaken those living off the race relations industry for so long.

BRIEF COMMENTS

Readers have queried the claims that Australian taxpayers will ultimately have to find $11 million! (not $1 million as we incorrectly stated recently) to finance Treasurer John Howard's superannuation payments. "The Bulletin" commissioned a superannuation consultant to calculate what ex-Members and their spouses might receive. Because of his age, if Mr. Howard were defeated or decided to retire in 1986, he would still have a life expectancy of 29 years. If Mr. Howard lives to 75, and the rate of 10 percent annual increase in parliamentary salaries continues, with ex-politicians' payments geared automatically to the C.P.I., Mr. Howard will eventually cost the taxpayers over $11 million. The only consolation (?) is that if inflation continues at an average of 10 percent a year, the $11 million will only be worth $1 million in 1981 terms. Still not bad for a man whose policies are eroding home ownership, extending the taxation net, and sustaining inflation and high unemployment. The League will shortly be producing a special brochure on just how their political masters are looking after themselves - at the taxpayers' expense. Incidentally, neither Mr. Howard nor any other Minister has challenged "The Bulletin's" story (August 18th) very appropriately entitled, OUR MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR MEN IN THE MINISTRY.

Mr. John Howard doggedly insists that his Sales Tax legislation cannot be altered, or abandoned, because this would upset the "budget strategy". But his "strategy" has already been upset by the fall in the rate of capital inflow. Mr. Howard, and his Treasury 'advisers', based their Budget on an expected $7,800 million for the financial year. Mr. Howard has been forced to admit that the Government could be forced to change its economic strategy and allow a greater expansion of credit and an increase in Australia's money growth than was indicated in the Budget. But he is not prepared to consider a relatively minor credit expansion rather than impose Sales Tax legislation, which will have a destructive effect. Some of the effects are already being felt with pet food manufacturers putting off staff as a result of falling sales.

The win by the new Social Democratic Party in Britain's latest by-election demonstrates that a majority of the desperate British electors have had enough of Mrs. Thatcher, but will not support the Labor Party. But Mrs. Shirley Williams and her colleagues have yet to offer coherent alternative policies. In the absence of such policies the SDP must prove yet another party political red herring.