Social Credit: Unsound Economic Principles

Issue No. 10 included an article written by the Social Credit Club praising itself.

I admire the group of people who, like myself, are interested in what is behind the Social Credit policy, but I deplore the way this group are studying the League's philosophy. I belong to no political party and am an advanced student of economics. After the number of votes Social Credit obtained at the last election I decided I would like to see what lies behind their policy so I attended two of the meetings of this newly-formed group.

Vote catching leaflets were handed out at each meeting which were attended mainly by people curious to know what Social Credit is and how it would deal with 1. The International Bank and Monetary Fund and 2. The European Economic Community. Both meetings were addressed by "tub thumpers" of the party who "waffled" for an hour each. Both speakers succeeded in evading the topics (as above) laid down for discussion, and insisted on mouthing numerous time honoured platitudes about "reduce the cost of living," "cut production costs," "reduce our dependence on the U.K. market," "reduce taxation," "increase the standard of living," etc. Both speakers mentioned (almost correctly) what's wrong with New Zealand's economy. Neither speaker could suggest "how to improve except to reiterate that the measures taken by the Labor Government and the present government are wrong.

Neither speaker mentioned the topic supposedly under discussion -they could only quote what Major Douglas (an engineer) had proposed at the turn of the century. The speaker on the E.E.C. seemed to know less about Social Credit than the majority of listeners. He also knew nothing about the E.E.C. as was proved by the way he not so dexterously evaded the questions he was asked by several of the audience.

At the end of the second meeting I approached the chairman of the meeting and told him I was disappointed and that I still had not had any reasonably sound economic suggestion put in front of me concerning either the E.E.C. or the I.M.F. When I asked if he could recommend a text book on "Social Credit" economic theory I was handed a two-page pamphlet (to the Householder "postage paid") containing further platitudes about Social Credit.

I contend that the V.U.W. Social Credit Club has failed already. It is unable to make available' any sound information on the economic principles underlying their movement. It makes a laughing stock of their claim to discuss "the new economic system based on sound economic principles" (Mr Dempsey's letter in Salient 10) because after attending two meetings I'm still sure their organisation has no sound principles of economic policy that could ever benefit New Zealand.

Thoss. W. Martin.

Ross W. Martin.