PARLIAMENT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1209, 18 August 1911, Page 9

PARLIAMENT.

THE HOUSE. RACING COMMISSION'S REPORT FOOD TAXATION. Tho House met at 2.30 p.m. Jli\ T. H. DAVEY (Christchurch East) gave notice that he would ask leave to introduce the City of Christchurch Empowering Bill. The following Bills , were read a first time:—Sir Donald M'Lean Memorial Park Bill (Jlr. Brown); Wellington City Empowering and Amendment Bill (Mr. AVilford). Sir James CARROLL assented to a proposal of Jlr. T. 11. Davey (Christchurch East) that the order of reference defining the scope of the Racing Commission when it.was set up should be laid before the House when tho report of the Commission came up for discussion. The same course, Jlr. Davey mentioned, had been followed in the case of the Timber Commission's report. ABOLITION OF DUTIES ON FOOD BILL. MR. HOGG ATTACKS FOOD TAXATION. \ Mr. A. W. HOGG (Jlasterton) moved the second reading of tho Abolition of Duties on Food Bill. He said ho would lave been glad if nn occupant of tho Treasury benches had introduced this Bill. He believed there was a universal demand for it throughout the country. In previous attempts to have the duty on flour removed ho had been defeated by a somewhat singular combination. He had been opposed by the Prime Jlinister and the Leader of the Opposition, and by almost all the occupants pf the Treasury benches. But on almost every diviuion he 'had secured a majority of the ordinary members of the house and lie considered that the ordinaiy members represented the country, ior ihe benefit of tho community duties on necessaries of life should be removed. The present Bill was intended not only to get rid of. the "bread tax", but to remove the duty on butter, oatmeal, potatoes, and a number of similar commodities. Ho had previously indicated the danger of a butter-ring being formed t'o eend prices up. : He knew that circulars had been sent, to members pointing out that the dntios on the commodities mentioned in the Bill were heavier in Australia than, in New Zealtnd. But there was no reason why New Zealand should copy tho unwisdom of Australia. Duties of this kind were eminently unwise. Their removal would not injure but would benefit farmers. There might be opposition to the Bill froui tho leaders of the Farmers' Union who were using the working farmers 'for their own purposes. Tho tactics of those who controlled local supplies of butter Mr. Hogg characterised os "sheer hypocrisy of the. most audacious character,"- There was' no shortage of butter if ono had the money to pay for it. New Zealand was in the hands of a commercial ring which was locking up the food supplies of the immunity. The average cost of living was about onethird more in New Zealand than in any part of Australia. People wore afraid to invest money in manufactures in this country because the artisan demanded a higher price for his labour. For this he could not bo blamed in view of the huge cost of the necessaries of life. Royal Commission Advocated. •" Mr. T, M, WILFORD (Hutt) said tho Bill was quite inadequate to remedy tho trouble outlined by the last speaker, but lio would support it with a view to pressing .on the attention of the Government tho problem that arose from men getting constant increases, of.wages and yet deriving no benefit, on account of the huge increase in the cost of their food supplies. This should bo -made a subject . of inquiry • s,by a Royal Commission so that experts, might tell those who desired to know what i °f this great problem was. Apart from the question of the price of flour, there was the. question of developing national resources. -His might be the voice of one crying: in' the wildorness. A member: That is the best joke I have heard this session. s • ■ Mr. Wilford said the state of affairs among tho_ working people to-day was'not t.obe set right by half-remedial measures; The matter must be dealt with on nonpar ty lines. Mr. J. P. LtTICE (Wellington Suburbs) claimed that the iron-works of tho Dominion wore not being protected to anything like the extent that , farming industries were. If thd farmers would agree to take off all the tariff he would be content to see all duties removed from manufactured articles. This they knew was impossible, but he wanted to arrive at a fair basis. He could not consistently support the Bill. He'had always fought for the < industries of the Dominion, and would join any membtt in 'loing *o, but they must seek .the general benefit and not that of any particular class. Difficulties were mounting up for thoso who laboured hard. to make ends meet in the cities, but it was not fair that attempts should be mad© to benefit oho particular class. ' A member: You .have a try at farming. Jlr. Luke said ho would stick to things ho know something about. An Opponent of the Bill. Mr. T. BUXTON (Geraldine) asked •vrhy the duty, if it should be removed from flour in- the interests of the worker, should not bo removed from wheat? The hon. gentleman (Jlr. Hogg) could not understand why New Zealand wheat should be somewhat cheaper than. Australian and yet New Zealand flour be dearer. This was due simply to the fact that Australian wheat produced a larger percentage of flour. As to what had been Raid about a combination of millers, fully one half tho' millers were outsisle the association, and competing freely witli one another and with those who were ill the association. If it was a right thing to have a cheap loaf by the removal of tho duty it was also right that there should be cheap boots, clothing, and houses. The hon. gentleman did not say anything about, this. It was impossiblo that men should be asked to go on the land, and that the markets of the country should then b3 thrown open. Tho measure introduced by tho member for Jlasterlon would seriously injure the whole of tho South Island anil a' large part of the North Island. No Butter Ring. Jlr, H. J. H. OKEY (Taranaki) said that ho had supported this Bill on previous occasions, and .intended to support it now. The farmer did not require this duty on butter. He did not agree with the statement nf Jlr. Hogg that a butter ring existed. The last season had been an exceptional one. . Factories had entered into contracts to supply on contract up to April. The drought so restricted supplies that a lot of April butter had to be shipped Home. No ring had been at work. He finite agreed with, the hon.'member for Hutt that, tho House would do well to take .into consideration the extra cost of living. The rise in Tents and other things, that affected poor people deserved attention. Jtr. C. H. POOLE (Auckland West) remarked that tho price of butter in this country of -late bad been outrageous," and yet very often , the producer did. not get the return to which ho was entitled. There was a leakage somewhere. He endorsed tho suggestion that a Royal Commission should be set up to inquire into tho cost of living. Up'would vote for the second reading of the Bill as a protect against Die existing state of affairs, intent on quickening the Government, into doing something to better the living conditions of the people. A Labour Member's Viov;. Jtr. D. M'LAREN (Wellington East) declared that setting up a Royal Commission was something like looking through an empty drain-pipe. . Tho workers of the country were beginning to realise that neither Arbitration Court nor Conciliation Council could give them an improvement in living conditions which was so vitally netessary.- He agreed' that no section should have exclusive benefit from imports or non-imports. But he . was in this difficulty: the duty, if it remained,

benefited 0110 class; its removal would benefit another class. The great mass of tho people were not greatly affected either way. Tho Government must seriously consider tho living conditions of the country soon, no! bj setting up a Royal Commission, but by taking notion as :i responsible Executive, lie hoped that tho Bill would pass' it' only as an indication to tho Government that this matter must be taken up very seriously indeed. There must, in his judgment, be an extension of State organisation and State control that would enable the people to get, supplies at something approximating to tho cost of production. Mr. J. STALLAVORTHY (Kaipara) said ho was opposed to the abolition of the duty on flour, but: would support the second reading of the Bill, as lie considered that nn import duty on butter was n t n Tc?'' THOMSON (Wallace, invited the lion, member for Jlasterton to prove his statement that the small duty of ifil per ton on flour had put ,£IOO,OOI into tho pockets of a ring. Ho agreed that it would be wise to refer this whole matter to a Royal Commission. It would also be wise to find oTit what Australia would be prepared to do in the event of certain duties being taken off in tins country.

Increasing Cost of Food. Mr. R. A. WRIGHT (Wellington South) remarked that the general tendency to more or less favour protection wctold not serve when tho food supplies of the people were in question. It was mecessaij in this case to look at the problem from a .wider standpoint. H VT Iw tho this Bill, if only as a protest, against the continual increase in the price of >°" • The problem of compelling, a man to sell an article at a certain price had jet to be solved, but ho hoped tho would do something towards tho cause of the continued increase in the cost of food supplies. . Mr. G. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) said it was an open question whether the cost of living had increased. A parching examination might show that tho standard of living had improved. Thirty years ago meat aiud potatoes were cheaper. Hi summer butter was cheaper, but in willtor, thirty years ago, butter was. as dear as it was now-. This did not applj to the present famine pneo ol butter. One present cause of increased prices was that prosperity in this country induced an enormous inflation ot land values. Anyone who ignored this factor would ignore a fundamental factor in tho problem which the Houso had discussed that day. Two practical steps towards cheapening the cost of the people s food would be the institution of municipal milk depots, and of municipal depots for salo of fish. A Tariff Board. Jlr. F. Jr. B. jISHER (Wellington Central) said he did not think a solution of the problem to' which the Bill applied would ever ,be found until a Tariff Board had bsen set up. Some such independent authority was necessary to reconcile the differences of contending sections when a .tariff was being framed. Only iif this ivay could a tariff be framed on national lines. The member for Lyttelton had denied that the cost of living had increased. Oil soino other day he would get up awl say that in the old days tho poorworking man got only 3s. 6d. a day. As a matter of fact people who lived on a low average income at the present time were just as badly off as they would have been twenty years ago. He would vote for the second reading of the Bill. Jlr. G. W. RUSSELL (Avon), said he would vote for the sicomd reading of the Bill. He did not anticipate that any practical result would follow, because legislation of this character could only emanate with effect from the Government of the day. But he hoped that, after the general election, tho Government would be compelled to recognise the necessity of doing something in the matter.. A Minister on the Position, The Hon. J. A. MILLAR, Jlinister for Labour, disapproved the proposal to set up a Royal Commission. The difficulty was not to get information about ther. problem of cost of production; but to "find but how to deal with it. There was/ in his opinion, only onenwayi'totifeal.feftectually' with this problem, and tha't'was' t'o limit; by Act of Parliament, the profit that any man could make on his product, jtr; Frasor: What'about the losses? 1 Jlr. Jlillar: Will the hon. member tell me how many drapers have, gone through tho Bankruptcy Court in this country? What is tho average rate of profit on soft goods? Jlr. Jlassev: One hundred per cent! Jlr. Frafeer: Take butchers! Mr. Massey: Tako the farmer! Mr. Jlillar said that in his humble opinion, the farmer had had all tho best of it in this country for the past ten years. He hoped they lyould continue to have a good time. Jlr. Millar reiterated it was absolutely necessary to fix profit. Otherwise it was impossible to fix wages. Unless profit were limited, the more wages were increased tho more would cost of production and cost of living increase. This was an economic law which could not be ignored. There was. ona other way in which sonie control might be obtained over cost of production—namely, by co-operation—but co-operation had not proved popular in this country. Nothing would bo effected by tariff alterations. The way in which butter was being sold at present by producers, at about Is., and retailed-at Is. Gd„ was nothing short of robbery. An important factor to be considered in dealing with this problem was tho price of money. If any attempt wero made to deal with v the continued increase in cost of living ifi this country money would have to be dealt with at tho same time. This could not be done in a satisfactory way while currency was allowed to be expanded or contracted at tho will'of financial institutions. The only man who seemed to get along well all the time was the land-owner. He was talking about city properties, for lie did not profess to know a great deal about country properties. He could not support the Bill! The best thing to do would be to include the articles dealt, with in the schedule of the JlonOpolies' Prevention .Act. Then if prices rose inordinately the duty would l)e automatically removed. To Temove the duties entirely would be unwise. If this were done at any time when there was not a good market in the' Old Country, New 1 Zealand would be made a dumping-ground for Australia. He was not going to tax any one section of the community so as to protect another. Was this Bill 'going to increase the wages of agricultural labourers? A member: No! i Jlr. Jlillar: Or of men employed in flour mills? A member: No! Jlr. Jlillar: These men are entitled to the same protection as any other body of workers in this country. Jlr. .T. T. HOGAN (Wanganutt supported the Bill. The member for Jlasterton was one of tbe most earnest mem in the House., and was always to be found o,n tho side of the working people. Views of Hon. T. Mackenzie. Tho Hon T. JIACIiENZIE, Jlinister for Agriculture, said that the principal reason for the support given to the Bill was the Tecaat rise in the price of butter, which was due to reasons which he thought had not been properly analysed. There 'might bave been consolation for the supporters of tho Bill in the forecast by the president of the Bank of NewZealand that New Zealand was on the evo of low prices of products, but already that, statement had been falsified, and, in fact, shown to be absolutely erroneous. While not desiring that consumers should pay an undue price, it Seemed to him most singular that members who had expressed approval of 'the proposals were determined to do so because the prices of tho staple products were good. The essence of their contention, was that those prices were too high, and it was surprising that the representatives of towns should express such opinions when they must know that.the success of the country was so inseparably associated with the prosperity of agricultural and pastoral industries. It was contended that duty o:i wheat were removed tho production would be reduced, but he was sure that tho farmers would consent to the removal of duty from \all articles which were produced by their industry, if a similar course was followed in regard to all the other industries of the Dominion Jlr. H. G. ELL (Christchurch South) maintained that direct competition by the State or municipalities would h.vve a marked effect i.u keeping down the cost of living. It would be an excellent thing to establish municipal mills and bakeries. Jlr. JENNINGS moved the adjournment of the debate at 11.30 p.m. Oil a division the motion was carried by 37 votes to 19. The House rose at 11.40 p.nx.