OPPOSITION MISREPRESENTED.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1233, 15 September 1911, Page 4

OPPOSITION MISREPRESENTED.

MR. MASSEY EXPLAINS. 11l the Houso of Representatives yesix> day afternoon, the leader of the Opposition sought to make a personal explantvtion regarding a misleading paragraph that had appeared in the "Now Zealand Times" of the some morning. Mr. Mnssey eventually was allowed to niako it quito clear that he had been inisroprosouUd, but an unusual amount of opposition was offered, notably by the Prime Minister. The paragraph to which Mr. Mns>oy took exception was headed "A Taxation Roundabout," and was as follows:— "Strangely elastic ideas on taxation aro hold by Aslibiirlon's representative, Mr. Noswortliy. ,llis weakness in this respect was'clc-verly exposed by Mr. C. H. Poole in the Ilouw of Representatives lust night. Mr. Nosivorthy made complaint about the graduated tax being increased upon largo holdings 'while rich city business concerns' holding valuable landa wero li\ off. Mr. Poole had a busy five minutes with the 1010 Hansard, and then demonstrated to an amused House tlnit Mr. Nosworthy had mada a most complete 'volto fncc.' Last session, according to tlio infallible record, Mr. Xosworlhy's leader moved an amendment to the Land and Income Tax Assessment Bill for the purpose of exempting these 'rich business ooncerns' about which Mr. Nosworthy, this session, displayed a fine 6Corn. The wholo Opposition voted for tho proposal, and who was the teller in its favour? Mr. Nosivorthy!"

Mr. Massey read the paragraph, and was proceeding to refer to the report of Mr. Nosworthy's speech, when Tho Prime Minister interrupted him by asking the Speaker: Is this a personal explanation? ' Jfr. Massey: I am concerned in tho paragraph; my name is mentioned. Sir Joseph AVard: Well, I rise to a point of order. Mr. Massey: Then I raiso tho question as a breach of privilege. Tho Speaker: I understand the usual practice is for the member who is misrepresented to set himself right. If other mombers have been misrepresented, every such member may also set himself right. Mr. Massey'explained that tho statements overlapped, and it was not possible to refer to one without the other. Of course ho could get over the difficulty by moving a breach of 'privilege, when ho could by speaking to the motion show tho misrepresentations, but he did not desire to take that course Ho wanted to show what Mr. Nosworthy did say, by way of showing that there was no connection between Mr. Nosworthy's speech and his (Mr. Massoy's) amendment. They dealt with widely different subjects. What Mr. Nosworthy in fact said was "You nro trying to break up land monopoly, but why do you not bring down a proposal in the Budget to burst up largo wholesale and retail firms in tho cities of over ,£100,000? Why do you not propose an extra tax of 25 per cent, on them—?" Mr. Nosworthy was followed by Mr. Poole, who evidently misunderstood what had been said by him, and referred to an amendment which ho (Mr. Massey) moved on tho Land and Income Tax Bill of last year. The amendment was as follows:—"Section 11 of tho Land and Incomo Assessment Act, 1907, is hereby amended by adding the following proviso—'Provided that tho section does not apply to any commercial, financial, or industrial institution which holds land for tho purpose of its business and for no other purpose.'" Tho object of Mr. Poole was to prove inconsistency against Mr. Nosworthy, in that he had advocated the bursting of city monopolies, and had supported Mr. Massey in a motion protecting investors in certain big companies, but the proposal of Mr. Nosworthy was widely different from tho amendment referred to. Mr. Massey wont on to explain, and to show tho effect of the present law ho quoted a simple illustration: Take the caso of a man paying tho graduated land tax. Supposing ono of tliom had some surplus capital and ho desired to invest his surplus capital in a freezing company; he might invest .€3OO or .£4OO in such a company, and then for the purposes of calculating his' graduated- tax- his share of the land held by tho' freezing company counted, though the company paid taxes on tho land also, and very often the shareholder was put. up an extra stop in tho., scale. This was detrimental to the interests of tho industries of the Dominion as a whole. So it was that Mr. Massey made his explanation. Mr. Nosworthy made- his also, but there was quito an extraordinary amount of interjection and opposition from tlio Government side of tho Houso whilo they did so.