THE DEMOCRATS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 56, Issue 17, 1 November 1935, Page 3

THE DEMOCRATS

FINANCIAL POLICY EXPLAINED.

REPLY TO MR COATES.

(Per Press Association). CHRISTCHURCH, October 31.

The leader of the Democrat Party (Mr T. C. A. Hislop) addressed a meeting in Christchurch to-night in the Radiant Hall. The audience was upwards of 600, and Mr Hislop was given a quiet hearing with occasional cordial applause. The Deputy-Mayor (Mr J. W. Beanland) presided, and tended apologies for the Mayor (Mr D. G. Sullivan, M.P.), who left this evening for Wellington. At the conclusion of his address, Mr Hislop was applauded and a vote, of thanks was carried with prolonged applause. Mrs Hislop was presented with a bouquet.. Mr Hislop said that Mr Coates had at last made an effort to explain how he made up the ridiculous total of £22,000,000, which he had given as the additional cost of the Democrat policy proposals. Mr Coates had estimated that the Democrats’ reductions of taxation would cost £4,193,000, while the increase ip annual expenditure would amount to £17,650,000. The actual taxation reductions proposed by the. Democrats, based. on the returns for 1934-35, amounted to some £2,680,000. Mr Coates had stated that the restoration of salary cuts would cost £BOO,OOO, but this obviously was inconsistent with his own Budget, and the Democrats had allowed £500,000 for this item. A large proportion of this would be carried by trading or revenue earning) departments which which themselves would carry the increases without passing the cost on to the taxpayer. Last year commissions of inquiry, useless boards, allowances in salaries to special departmental officers, also extravagant trips abroad by Ministers and others forced up the expenditure by nearly £500,000. Wit regard to the Superannuation Fund, the Democrats proposed to increase the present contributions from the State by 50 per cent., involving an additional expenditure of £IOO,OOO. On this item Mr Coates was only £400,000 wrong. The Democrats’ health scheme, 'including tuberculosis land (cancer, would cost £1,650,000, and the total pensions provided under the scheme were £4,000,000. The totaL additional cost of the health and pensions scheme was £2,211,000, so on this account Mr Coates was £600,000 wrong.

A Summary. Summarising the Democrat position they had the following:— ■ Expendtiure: Tax' reduction £2,680,000; superannuation subsidy, £100,000; other amounts on account of other proposals £400,000; total £3,180,000. , . ~ Receipts: Provided through the health scheme, £1,750,000; normal increase in revenue as estimated by Mr Coates, £1,000,000; savings on account of capital works at .present being financed from revenue and of maintenance of unfinished works which would come under the Democrats’ national development and employment scheme, £450,000; total, £3,200,000. Mr Coates had stated that to put 40,000 men to work at standard rates of pay would "cost £12,000,000. It was absurd to assume that they would put these men permanently on the pay-roll of the fixate. The Democrats believed that it was through encouragement and assistance to private enterprise that the most sound solution of unemployment was to be found. Produce Subsidy. Mr Coates had estimated that the Democrats’ produce subsidy scheme would, cost £13,500,000. Apparently Mr Coates was somewhat .confused, as this figure was the actual cost of his exchange subsidy system. The Democrats’ proposal was that a 9 and when exchange falls they would pay to the farmer a subsidy equal to the net benefits he received from the exchange, hut not in excess of the economic need of the producer. For instance, if butterfat was more than Is per lb, the normal market price, no subsidy should be necessary. On present day prices the total amount necessary to pay farmers in need as subsidy would not exceed £3,500,000. Mr Hislop estimated the cost of Mr Coates’ policy at £94,100,000 of which more than onethird Was or would be annual charges and costs. Many of Mr Coates’ proposals were subject to the condition that they would be introduced “as soon as financial conditions permitted.” If Mr Coates were allowed to continue with his ruinous policy, financial conditions would permit only of national bankruptcy. Either Mr Coates did not appreciate the meaning of liis own figures or he was indulging in a belated and futile attempt to appease the just indignation of the people.