Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Volume 33 No. 12. 5 August 1970

Social Credit Leader Speaks on Campus

Social Credit Leader Speaks on Campus

"New Zealand today finds itself in an economic disaster," said Social Credit leader John O'Brien, opening a debate at the university on 27 July.

Debating the motion 'That the Social Credit budget be preferred to that of the National Government' Mr O'Brien, leading the affirmative team, said that the Social Credit draft budget was designed to remove distortions and imbalances in the present economy.

The cost of credit, he said, is New Zealand's major financial problem. "The National budget is designed to restrict and contract in every area, causing increasing costs which come back to the consumer in falling true income." he declared. Mr O'Brien said that the difference between the National and Social Credit budgets is that National puts the money in the pockets of the money lenders, whereas Social Credit wishes only to serve the interests of the people.

Opening the ease for the negative, the leader, Mr Dave Shand, said that what he had heard from Mr O'Brien was not an outline of party policy but merely a collection of extravagant statements. An attitude, he said, which was typical of Social Credit was "dont's let look at anything in detail."

The second speaker for Social Credit, Mr Stuart Dickson, said that the present high level of industrial unrest in New Zealand is solely the result of spiralling costs caused by National budgets.

Speaking for the negative, Mr Anderson said that "the only thing brighter about the Social Credit budget is its cover" and, affirming the motion. Mr Les Hunter said that "the money merchants of New Zealand control the money supplies."

Photo of John O'Brien

The final speaker for the negative said that "the three honest and sincere men in the affirmative team have been misled, and they have honestly and sincerely tried to mislead this house tonight. This budget is not a budget—it is a political manifesto. It is an abortion. But for the purposes of this debate the negative is prepared to concede that this is a budget.'

About a hundred students attended the debate, which was twice interrupted by the Chairman with requests for interjections to be more to the point. The motion was lost by 42 votes to 26.