Contradictions among Labour

Press, 26 April 1988, Page 2

Contradictions among Labour

Special correspondent ; 11 I .] . .. j! ' Auckland Auckland Labour Party leaders conceded yesterday that the regional conference at Waitangi had contradicted itself in the financial debates. ■ )i

Through the efforts, of the Minister of Finance.! Mr Douglas, and his supporters, the controversial flat tax rate proposal sur-l vived an attempt to declare it "incompatible with Labour Party prin-; ciples." The decision Was by! 64 votes to 60. ; But a further remit; “That no flat tax sysienj be introduced until people on lower incomes gain substantial beneifit." was approved, by; 71 to 37.]’ L The conference therej fore left the pbrty door open to a flat tax riddL However a few minUtejs later, the same delegates passed a remit calling for a "genuinely progressive income tax system." ! ji The remit had been put forward by the Left-wing Princes Street b -anch and explicitly sougt t higher taxes for those on higher incomes. The chairwoman of me finance remit Committed, Maryann Street;, said c>f the conflict: "Tljie Labour Party conferences always .reserve the right to contradict themselves.” ! ...j . The Auckland region chairman, Mr Peter Hoyte, who confrolled the debate, blamed'the confusion on a lack [ of understanding amongst delegates. That in turn resulted from Government policies not being properly'-explained. The debate tn the flat

tax rate was! dominated by a. pushed Mr Douglas challenging those who opposed ,it to tell him why they I did not support single-income families getting increases of between 30 to 40 per cent in their income. “What in Labour Party policy]is opposed to helping these people?" he asked[ The| Minister then stood at the rear of the hall, interjecting at times, and pacing up an aisle as the delegates prepared to vote: ] i -j! ' ! Ms [Street ipld the conference the remit committee fdlt a system mat increased the. gap between] rich and poor could not be supported. The; Minister for StateOwned Enterprises. Mr Prebble. led his Auckland Central electorate members in a vigorous defence against remits labelling the sale of assets •‘shortsighted and. misguided" and insisting on an end to privatisation. Mr Prebble said. “I am not advocating selling every business. I am saying look at each, one case by case." ! He was not prepared to have funds for education and health cut because of the-cost of financing the debt built up by National Party Governments. To [those who claimed there were alternatives to

selling off State assets, the Minister said increasing taxjes was the only option. "Ma.Ybe the Labour Party favours higher taxes. If it does. :hen tell us. ‘ITh s Government has chosen to repay overseas debt because it is a threat to ot r sovereignty. If we ha.-e [to sell some businetsei. then so be it." The conference — with the member of Parliament ! for Eden, Mr Richaril .Northey, prominent in the dissenters — threw ou’ Hje critical remits. Apparent [contradictions aplpeared iaier in the ses]Ur,ion delegates called for card votes, to defeat a number of remit proposed by t;he Auckland Central CboH['‘lslands Branch and congratulating the Government. [Otle proposal, for the conference to call on the Government to take every step I; including the selling oi asseLs, to reduce the dangerous level of debt, was [defeated by 81 to 46. I Another remit blaming the i National Party for rnucih of the debt and urging the Government to tdkej["all practical step" to reduce me burden was defeated on a first vote, but then carried when Mr Prebble asked for it to be reconsidered because of a ■emit paper mix-up.