Labour Censure Motion On Australian Budget

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28658, 7 August 1958, Page 11

Labour Censure Motion On Australian Budget

(Rec. 9 p.m.) CANBERRA, August 6. The Federal Labour Opposition will move a motion of censure next week, against the Government’s 1958-59 Budget, which was introduced in the House of Representatives last night.

The motion is designed to censure the Government for its “failure in the Budget to manage the financial affairs of the country.” The decision to move the censure motion was made at today’s caucus meeting of the Federal Parliamentary Labour Party. The Leader of the Opposition (Dr. Herbert Evatt) said today that the Labour Party would tell the people that the Treasurer (Sir Arthur Fadden) had broughi down a hopeless Budget that should be rejected and replaced with some budget prepared either by this Government or another Government designed to meet the needs of the people.

In accepting the large. budgetary deficit, Australia’s Finance Minister was taking a risk, but it may well be the right risk to take, the “Financial Times” said today, says a message from London.

The deficit was bound to have some inflationary effect to counter the disinflationary influences which existed in the economy, the newspaper said rn a leading article. The Budget, it said, recognised the conflict between the various aims of economic policy without being able to solve it. “The reserves will, of course, receive some benefit from the inflow of capital. Yet a disinflationary budget would have aggravated the pressure of recession caused by the fall in export earnings. “It was the orthodoxy which demanded balanced budgets when export earnings were falling that produced such disastrous results for the world in the 1930’5. “Yet the alternative course, a policy of deliberate re-inflation, would have had its own disastrous consequences. . . . ‘ ‘The Australian Finance Minister settled, therefore, on a middle way,” it said.

Australian morning newspapers today were generally critical of the Government’s Budget proposals. The “Melbourne Sun Pictorial” said that it was “certainly a ‘stay-put* Budget and no-one is going to be happy about that.” The “Sydney Telegraph” said

that the. fact that this was Sir Arthur Fadden’s final budget “probably is the only comfort that taxpayers will get from it.” It said the Budget was “dismal and unimaginative?’ The ‘‘Sydney Morning Herald” said that it was “a dismal failure to meet the country’s needs.” and added, “this Budget is bad and its unpopularity will be deserved.” The “Melbourne Age,” however, said: “It is fair to say that on the facts the Budget, should be accepted as a workmanlike assessment of our capacity and our potential, and a recognition of the dangers and risks that still exist.” .