A STONEWALL

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 183, 2 August 1913, Page 8

A STONEWALL

ON INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS. AN ALL NIGHT SITTING. SOMZ WARM INTERCHANGES. PLEA FOR WAGE EARNERS. LARGER TAX FOR LARGE INCOMES. 'By Telegraph.—Parliamentary. Reporters WELLINGTON, Friday. The Government's measure to provide an income tax concession for taxpayers earning over £300 a year having dependent children, uame in for further battering from Oppositionists in the House. The bill was considered in committee last week, but only got ac far as the short title discussion. Progress was resumed this afternoon. In reply to inquiries from members, the Minister in charge (the Hon. Mr. Allen) explained that no relief could be given under the bill to people in receipt of incomes under £300. The Government however, was considering the question of the customs tariff, and information aboirt it would be given to the House later on. Respecting a question regarding the payment of mortgage tax by people having leee than £300 a year, the Minister said that unjler certain circumstances those paying mortgage tax had Teaeon to go to the Government for relief. Nothing had been included in the 'bill on the subject, but he would go into the matter to see whether any relief could be given to those who paid mortgage tax. Mr. Poland suggested that relief should bp afforded rather to people having more than four children, and he also argued that for people with small incomes reduced railway rates and other remissions should be granted. CAUSTIC CRITICISM. Members on the Opposition benches spent some time in criticising the propoeaJs in the bill more or leee severely, such expressions as "I ha\e no time for this bill," "A tinkering tinpot bill," and "What will this bill do to reduce the cost of living?" being cast at the Treasury benches from the Liberal side of the Honse. "TSMs is a distinct pull in my opinion to appease people who come within the scope of the bill," exclaimed the exI citable member from Wellington South. "an attempt to obtain a political pnil." "The outcome of political imbecility and bankruptcy of ideas." was Mr. C'raijjie'e sweeping condemnation of the measure. an ■α-mendmext moved. The member for Nelton dubbed the measure "A giving to those thnt have bill," "I would," t-j-id Mr. A'more, "'do something to attack land monopoly nnd j rent monopoly for tile benetii. oi the poor j and la.ndlcfis." ■ Mr. McCallutn moved an amendment to strike out the word "four" respecting the number of children. "Let them have I exemption for all the rich men's childi ren, 7, he said. The Minister raised a point of order. eayinjr that this would mean increasing the burden of taxation. He declared I that the concessions under the hill already meant a revenue loss of between £15,000 and £-20.000. If exemption were allowed on more children it. would probably mean a loos of nearly £40.000. LARGER TAX FOR LARGE INCOMES '•This little bill," prefaced .the Prime Minister ("Yes, a. very little bill," chorused the Opposition). The said the bill contained an important principle of taxation, that of dirTi-re.iitia-tion in -favour of taxpayers with families. Approximately an extra burden of £100.------000 had been placed upon the taxpayers this 6es*ion for the purpose of increasing pensionfi. Another bill was ready as a necssary corollary —a measure increasing the income tax on incomes st the other «nd of the ecale. It would fro further than anything in that way over attempted in the Dominkm. It was impossible to deal with lower incomes than were dealt with in the bill under discussion. The proper thing to do for the man who had a small wage wae to keep the eoun-try as prosperous ac poseible. With work plentiful and wages good, the Government only that day had given instructions that employment i be found for 200 men if they required it. As for customs taxation, he did not know what could be done this session, because the Government had to keep a particularly eound finance, but he certainly would not ajrree to striking out the duty on both .boots and shnes. He was not exactly what would be called a protectionist, but once an industry was buiUt up behind a protectionist tariff one had to be particularly careful about what was done. FTVE CHILDREN. The Prime Minister went on to say that he would recommend his colleagues to accept the first part of Mr. MeCalhim's- amendment, by agreeing to strike oat the word '"four" and insert '"frEe!" He certainly thought they might go a little further in the matter of relief. "This is simply a beautiful example of fie sympathy this great Reform Ministry feels for the toilers and the moilers, and the underpaid workers of this Dominion," declared Mr. IsHt. " This bill will put a label on the great Reform party, indicative to the whole, country of its intentions." " What does tbe-hon. member know of the toilers? Why, I don't believe he has ever done an honest day's work in his life!" retortpd the Prime Minister. (Government laughter.) Mr. Forbes rose to a point of order, while Mr. laitt remarked: ''Oh, the Prime Minister is just losing his temper now." POINT AND COUNTERPOINT. The Hon. Mr. Maseey explained that he meant that Mr. Isitt knew nothing of manual work. " No doubt he has done many a day's work in his own way," he said, amid loud laughter. The Premier proceeded to Tebuke members for wasting time. "We have enough 'to keep •this Parliament working for the longest session that New Zealand has ever seen. 1 sincerely hope we shall get our legislation through, but this sort of thing is certainly no good to members and no good to the country," he said. IS IT WASTING TPME? Mr. Hanan immediately called the Prime Minister to account for his own share in the process. "And you talk of -wasting time," he cried. "Iβ it wasting time to urge that the most

should come first in their claims- for consideration? Is it not a matter of unassailable fact that the working class pays more in proportion to its income than any other class? Is it not then then the duty of the Governn-ent to come to .their assistance? (Liberal "Hear -tears,") MINISTER AGREES TO FURTHER EXEMPTIONS. The Hon. Mr. Allen agreed to accept the Prime Minister's suggestion 'to increase the number of exempted children to five. As to the contention that it gave exemption to incomes up to £700, they forgot that people with such incomes paid other taxation. But if they thought £700 too high, he would be willing to reduce it to £600. " But by Jingo if I do. If I were the head of a great Reform party, I would not disgrace it by bringing down a tinpot, tiddely-winking bill like this again," exclaimed the unabashed member for Chr-i-ttc'nureh North, which produced the retort from the 'Prime Minister: " I don't want to go in for recriminations, but if Ido I shall hit hard. I never hit a man, however, unless he hits mc -first"—a declaration which produced roars of derisive Opposition laughter. SWEET REMEMBRANCES. " I remember a few occasions when the Prime Minister has poured out the vials of his wrath upon my poor head, simply because I bantered him goodnaturedly about his prospects at the next election," was Mr. Russell's reproof. " But," he added, " the Prime Minister must not think he is going to silence our voice on this 'bill by talking in that lofty strain about the loss of time and recrimination. But let mc now come to the bill." Hon. Mr. Fisher: The little bill. (Laughter.) The member for Avon proceeded with hammer and anvil to pound the bill into metaphorical shreds, and, amid encouraging applause and interjections from Oppositionists, roamed into the wide and trackless deserts surrounding the cost of living, problem. CHAIRMAN TAKES A HAND. When Mr. Russell ceased speaking, the Chairman remakred: "I think hon. members have forgotten the question before the House." lie put the question, and requested a closer attention to it, whereupon tiie Hon. Mr. Fisher rose and Dep-an to talk about casual labour. " The question deals with exemptions to men with families," observed Mr. Malcolm, severely. " Yes." agreed the nimble-witted Minister, "but there is an important taxation question involved," and he -prompt! v resumed his parable. " I rule the hon. gentleman to be out of order," broke in the Chairman, who was now thoroughly alive to the necessity of putting the brakes hard down on the discursive loqimcilv competition. Mr. Payne began with Ptuldv's caution: "I don't want lo transgress Mr Chairman, and if I do I hope you will pull mc up — a ft P ,- I nay€ , ; ajd H „ (Shouts of laughter.) Mr. Veiteh asked the Minister to remove the bar restricting consideration to men with lour children, and Dr Newman rose to heartily endorse the hTn""' -. * ,'- V "Hear. hcar"s " from the Opposition benches. AX ESTIMATE QUESTIONED. The .Ministerial estimate that the concession involved £15,000 to £".0.000 was questioned by .\' r . Laurenson. The Department has based its estimate on an average exemption of three children per taxpayer, but Mr. Laurenson said three children per family was the average of the whole Dominion, while everyone knew that the well-to-do men, dra'win-> arge incomes, were not those who had large families. His estimate of the concession was £0,000. TAX OR PENSION? The Hop. Mr. Fisher argued that the present bill carried the same principal as was contained in the Widow*" Pensions! Bill brought down by the Liberal Government, wairb provided for widows with four children, but took no account of! widows with ten. twelve, or fourteen' children, of which there were cases shown by statistics. Aud in' the case of that measure the age limit of the children was fourteen. Here it was sixteen.

"It is absurd to draw a comparison between the two" was the answer of Mr. Mac Donald. "In tbe Widows' PensionBill ii pension was granted to widows with children up to four, the amounts being £12 for one, £18 for two, £24 for three, and £30 for four. That money was actually given to people in need. The present proposal by the Minister of Finance is to give 12/6 exemption per child to men with incomes over £300." (Liberals: Hear, hear.) STAND AND DELIVER The Prime Minister endeavoured to bring matters to a head by declaring that the time had arrived to choose one of two courses—either to report progress on the hill, whereupon the Government would throw out both this and the complementary bill to increase taxation on large incomes, in which case the responsibility of the position would be placed on tho Opposition, or, as an alternative, put through the bill. Mr. Hanan: Give us a little outline of the other bill? The Prime Minister: Our proposals regarding that bill will be outlined in the Financial Statement next week, probably on Tuesday, but certainly next week. Mr. Russell suggested that progress be reported on the bill before the House so that members could see what proposal was in the Financial Statement. ANOTHER CONCESSION. Members on the Liberal benches continned to take the bill to task, and at 10.45 p.m. the Minister in charge announced that he had decided to reduce the obnoxious £700 income limit to £500, and raise the number of children to five' making the exemption limit £425. The Opposition still refused to be appeased, speaker after speaker hammering at the door of the Customs tariff question, and demanding to know also what the Government proposed with its second bill on taxation. STONEWALLING TACTICS. Stonewalling was written large on the proceedings. Proof was the pulling up of Mr. Hanan under a little-used standing order against tedious re-petition. A motion to report progress was moved at 11.17 p.m. by Mr. Wilford, and briskly discussed by Oppositionists. The debate, which had developed into a frank determination oh the part of the Opposition to embarrass the passage of the bill, as a protest on behalf of the men with small incomes struggling under a high cost of living, showed no indication at 1 a.m. of coming to a speedy end. PASSED WITH AMENDMENTS. At 1.50 the amount of the total income allowable for eligibility to special exemption was reduced from £700 to £425, and the bill was pur through as amended. FORCING THE PACE. The Pensions Reciprocity Bill passed the committee stage without discussion, at 2 Km. -Mt tom&.JtoummelJbZMtki

port progress, but the Governmen-t were determined to proceed with the committee stage of the Pension.- Cot-solida-tion Bill, -which was next on the order paper. The Opposition vigorously protested against forcing the bill through at such a, late hour. _»lr. Kussell: We are neither going to be bullied nor dragooned because the Premier thinks he can force the measure through a jaded House. Amid cries of "Gag!" and "No, no!" Mr. Massey accused the Opposition of a desire to kill the bill. He appealed to the member-, behind him not to be discouraged because of the attempt to -block the bilL Amid Opposition laughter he proceeded to declare that he had known of the plan to attack the bill for a week past. Mr. Kussell: Absolutely incorrect. Mr. Massey rebuked " the remnant of the Liberal party " for opposing a scheme which Mr. Seddon had so near his heart and originated. Mr. Ngata said it was a comment on our political life when, this morning, they should see on the Treasury benches the most deadly opponents of the pensions measure. The Premier had the effrontery to say that the remnant of the Liberal party was opposing the bill. (Hear, hear.) Liberals happened, under the forms of the House, to be delaying the measure on protest against Government tactics, but the bill was going through with the approval of 'that side of the House. But not just then. MINISTERIAL DIVISION. The Hon. W. H. Herries declared that the attitude of the Opposition was merely a repetition of What took place sixteen years ago, when the present Government party struggled to express its protests by delaying the bill. He added: "Wo are now going to have our pound of flesh. (Opposition laughter.) Mr. Russell accused Mr. Herries of originating a scheme to bring the Pensions Bill down in the small hours in order to force divisions against the Opposition. " Bring down the pensions ape for woment to 55 and for men to 60, and we will put through the bill," said Mr. _»__- Callum, amid cries of " Fair offer " from Liberals and Government merriment. , LABOUR MEMBERS PROTEST. At 3.40 a.m. Labour members entered a protest against an attempt to force the measure through a worn-out House. At 4.5 a.m. Mr. Webb made his maiden speech. He claimed to represent people most interested in the proposals qf the bill, and contended that every clause needed amendment. No other measure was of such importance, to the poor, and he hoped to see provision included for people incapacitated from earning a livelihood. But he emphatically protested against forcing the measure when members were unable to give it proper deliberation. The Premier complained that the Reform party had been consistently misrepresented on tbe question of pensions, and twitted the Opposition with intent to deal " stoueh " to Massev.

Mr. Russell declared, on behalf of the Liberals, that no such thing as "stouch" •or making jhings merry had ever been considered in the councils .of the Liberal party. Time after time Mr. Massey had proteiited against legislation by exhaustion, and he was now adopting the same tactics. If the Government persisted in forcing the measure after the representations made by the Opposition. Liberal members would take no further part in the bill. SHORT TITLE PASSED. At six o'clock the stonewall was steadily proceeding, both sides exchanging threats to wear the other out. The short title was passed at 6-55 a.m. In clause 2 the Minister introduced a provision excluding from income for pension purposes charitable relief not exceeding £52 a year. Six clauses were put through with minor amendments, and progress was reported at 7.12 a.m. A LANGUAGE POINT. Upon resumption of the. House. Mr. Ngata raised a language point by addressing the speaker in Maori. Mr. MacDonald called for a point of order. Mr. Massey drew an analogy between a case in tbe English Parliament, where an Irish member addTessed the House in Erse, and was ruled out of order, and a Maori member able to speak En<*lish. The Speaker said it must be left to the judgment of the member. He thought it was not altogether bearm;!' out the dignity of the House for a member fluent in English to address the House in ■Maori. Mr. Ngata asked for a ruling, as it was a matter of importance to native members and the race. He disputed the analogy of the English case, as no Irish member had ever previously addressed the House in Erse for a hundred years. Mr. Lang said the House had always been very jealous to preserve the rights of natives. He ruled that the native member could not address the House in Maori without an interpreter, but. if he wished to address the House in Maori, ■he was entitled to do so with the services of an interpreter. The House adjourned at 8.10 a.m.