Power to change taxation

Press, 11 July 1979, Page 18

Power to change taxation

Sir, — I wish to express mv support for those constitutional experts and economists who have opposed the Government’s intention of removing from Parliament its prerogative of determining the levels of taxation. No-one questions the need for a modern government to be able to respond rapidly to changing international economic circumstances. Nor is it disputed that current ma c r b-economic analysis indicates that it is better to use revenue adjustments rather than expenditure changes to offset cyclical fluctuations. However, if the economic situation is sufficiently grave to warrant immediate action to reduce revenue, and thereby stimulate consumption, it is certainly serious enough to call Parliament to debate the issues. The argument that Parliament would be able to enact retrospective validating legislation, perhaps six months after the event, is absolutely repugnant. Mr Muldoon would do well to remember the fate that befell one overweening English Monarch who ignored and abused Parliament’s prerogatives. — Vours. etc., JONATHAN BOSTON. July 9, 1979.

Sir, — Unfortunately Mr Muldoon annears to want to persist in his desire to alter taxation of the people of New Zealand, without- their representation in Parliament. The last time this happened in England (ca 1641) Charles I lost his head (1649). I hope Mr Muldoon does not lose his head in the present circumstances. — Yours, etc., J. V. PETERSEN. July 9, 1979.

Sir, — Your editorial of July 9 was pertinent and timely. However I disagree witl para 5 viz: — “The power that Mr Muldoon is seeking need not be denied completely.” Basic democratic principles have been under constant attack by the Prime Minister ever since he took office and to provide hi i vith “foot in the door” authority on this issue would be dangerous in the extreme. “No taxation without renresentation” should obviously include modification of anv tax. Grant the Minister of Finance opportunity in this area when Parliament is not in session and extensions of such authority will surely follow. “Government bv the people for the people” is ranidly becoming a pathetic farce and anv further inroads into our democratic rights and Government bv decree, will become an unpleasant fact, far easier to initiate than dispose of. finally. if our economic plight is such that semi-tntai'tarian methods are so urgently needed for “fine tuning” or “ouick footwork” then this man is admitting his own incompetence. — Yours, etc.. ARTHUR MAY. July 9, 1979.