Has the threat from T.R.I.M. been more in the promise than the sting?

Press, 18 February 1982, Page 19

Has the threat from T.R.I.M. been more in the promise than the sting?

By

KARREN BEANLAND

When T.R.I.M. burst on to the political scene last October, few people had heard of the organisation or knew its aims. But in no time, cars bearing the group’s sticker, “I pledge to vote only for an integrity pledged candidate,” were a familiar sight around Christchurch. The campaign distressed some candidates and party officials. They were worried that the group, which claimed to have $150,000 to spend, would wield excessive power. They were also

worried by T.R.I.M.’s aggressive approach and its ‘ rightwing" stand. T.R.1.M.. the Tax Reduction Integrity Movement, sent packages by registered mail to 292 election candidates. asking them to sign five pledges. One of the pledges said candidates would vote for no more than a 7.5 per cent flat rate of turnover tax to replace all other forms of tax. They were also asked to sign pledges saying:

0 They would vote against any legislation preventing free competition.

® They would vote against any increase in over-all taxation or Government spending without the prior consent of the electorate.

® That party loyalty would never take precedence over loyalty to the electorate.

0 They would never vote for any form of compulsory association.

The packages sent to candidates included glossy brochures and samples of the way results would be advertised. The candidates were told that their replies would be advertised in big newspaper advertisements and in cards distributed in each electorate before polling day. If candidates did not reply they would be listed as having signed no pledges.

In <. addition, T.R.I.M. promised to publish a regular “Watchdog" newsletter after the election recording how members of Parliament had stuck to their pledges.

At the time, the national co-ordinator of T.R.1.M., Mr Geoff Russell, said the group wanted to break the monopoly of party politics. Blank spaces . predominated when T.R.I.M. did publish the results, for only 22 candidates from 21 electorates signed all five pledges. Nevertheless. Mr Russell maintains T.R.I.M. did have some significant successes. “Considering that the average person in New Zealand had not known T.R.I.M. before November we did quite well,” he says. T.R.I.M. certainly lifted its public profile, but there were still many questions left unanswered. Where did its money come from? What were its aims? Who was behind the organisation? T.R.I.M. began about two years ago as the Tax Reduction Movement, which was set up at.a League of Rights meeting in Christchurch. Mr Russell says that at first the group’s members knew only that they wanted to pay less tax.

They later heard of the

system called turnover tax and decided it was the answer they wanted. “We thought if everybody got taxed at a low flat rate it would be fair. The broader the base, the lower the tax would be,” he says. "We liken our economy to a road; the manner in which the taxes are collected to a truck on the road; and the taxes to the load on the truck. We have got a 10tonne load on a truck with only three wheels and it is digging up the road. So the first thing is to get more wheels on the truck." Mr Russell is cynical about promises by political parties for tax reduction, saying the promise usual!}boils down to a "tax shift."

“They are all so slippery — they will give you a 10 per cent cut in tax and then slap on a 20 per cent tax somewhere else."

Broader and lower

He argues that a turn-over tax system would encourage productivity. With lower taxes, people would be keen to work overtime and companies would be prepared to invest in expansion. Inflation, caused by deficit spending and not. as argued by politicians, by unreasonably high wage demands and profits, would be nearly “eliminated.” he savs.

With these improvements, Government spending would drop because there would be less need for spending on employment schemes and “fancy” projects like the Supplementary Minimum Price scheme.

■ The word “integrity” was added to T.R.I.M.’s title about July last year. The group took advantage of a visit by Alan Stang, a mem-

ber of the American John Birch Society, to launch the new name.

Mr Russell said then that the title was changed to emphasise that Government integrity started with voter, candidate and party integrity.

Mr Russell says the aims of T.R.I.M. are encompassed in the five pledges.

“If we get the principles established which are in those pledges the rest will take care of itself. We don't want to replace one bureaucracy with another one."

T.R.I.M. wants to see a shift from the public to the private sector. Its ideal is “something like" Switzerland, where people are more independent, have more individual and family responsibility and have a stronger work ethic.

Mr Russell does not see these aims as extreme, although he acknowledges that the group has been labelled as both extreme and rightwing.

Evidence for the rightwing label is found within the pledges, which read like an amalgam of philosophies from the League of Rights and Zenith Applied Philosophy. Mr Russell says there are “strong connections” between T.R.I.M. and these organisations and that the style of the campaign and the contents of the pledges were influenced by the ideas of these groups.

“We do believe in freedom and free enterprise. People who believe in that tend to end up going to Z.A.P.." he says.

Mr Russell does not believe that clauses such, as the one opposing compulsory association, which would hit at compulsory unionism as well as international associations, are extreme.

"We are not saying that there shouldn't be unions. We are saying there shouldn’t be compulsory unions. You don’t have a compulsory employers’ association," he says.

“I don’t believe in collective bargaining. I don’t want some guy in Wellington negotiating about my staff and me. I don’t think collective bargaining does improve the standard of living and working for the worker. I don’t think it enhances free enterprise. It is the lazy man’s way out."

Mr Russell says he would go as far as the League of Rights in opposing international associations, such as the New International Economic Order.

On the subject of Government spending. Mr Russell is less concerned about areas such as social welfare, health and education spending. His main bogy is schemes like the Supplementary Minimum Price scheme, which he says will be “a noose around our necks just like the National Superannuation scheme."

“I don’t think people living off the State are having a wonderful deal. The thing is to make it attractive for people to work,” he says. “We have to get the economy going to create the jobs. Government cannot create jobs — that is a myth. It can only transfer that is created by individuals."

'Power kick’ ruled out

Mr Russell says T.R.I.M. has considered “going political" but decided that it would be a disadvantage to be labelled as a party. As a pressure group. T.R.I.M. can promote ideas which can be picked up by politicians from different parties.

“We are not on a power kick. We are not here to rule the country. We just want to get five basic principles more firmly established than they are now.” ,

T.R.I.M. had little sympathy for politicians who had a genuine reason for not signing the pledges and yet who worried about the effect of the group’s advertising. During the last election campaign, Mr Russell said that'it was up to candidates to get it across to the voters if they had a genuine reason for not signing.

“We are not out to keep the candidates happy. We are a public service organisation designed to reveal to the voters where their candidates stand.” he says. A burning issue for many people who resented the T.R.I.M. campaign was where the group found its money. The group claims to have spent $150,000, yet" Mr Russell says it received no financial help from other groups such as Z.A.P. or the League of Rights.

He says that T.R.I.M. gradually built up its financial base during the two years since it was formed. About 25.000 people contributed to the group by buying car stickers, books and posters. About 1000 people gave donations ranging from 150 to $lOOO. One Christchurch resident gave $5OOO to the campaign.

Spending during the 1981 campaign has not emptied the coffers of the organisation, and it plans to continue its programme. Its future activity will depend on finance, but the minimum activity will be the production of the “Watchdog” newsletter, which will publicise the voting records of members of Parliament in some electorates.

The first “Watchdog” will probably be produced about September.

Mr Russell, who has attended Z.A.P. courses and runs a leather goods business in Christchurch, is the public spokesman for T.R.I.M. Only two other members of the organisation have been named. One is Mr lan Kerr, who owns Warners Private Hotel, which houses the Western Destiny bookshop and the regional headquarters for T.R.I.M.

People are

stirred up

The structure of T.R.I.M. is like an executive with a group of about 70 active supporters, says Mr Russell. But he maintains that there is a lot of public support for T.R.I.M.’s ideas. ’ “People are . a lot, more stirred up in this town than the media would have us believe. We have had a lot of support here in Christchurch. People are stirred-up about tax and the direction in which this country is heading. It all rubs off,” he says.