MINISTER REPLIES,

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2579, 29 September 1915, Page 8

MINISTER REPLIES,

. RAISING- OF SIDE ISSUES. , Sir Joseph Ward (Minister of Finance), sjieaking to the amendment, said he proposed to reply to the speeches of those members who had preceded him. in the hopo that tlie Bill might be put through that night. The object of the formation of (lie National Government was to get difficult legislation through, and the legislation brought down bristled with difficulties, but now they were met 011 all hands with a disquisition on all sorts of side-issues which had no bearing on the main question of the raising of money. -He had first proposed to 'inpose taxation on a few articles, and he .was told that was all wrong. After further consideration the Government nowproposed a general tax, and the demand promptly, was for taxation 011 a few things. The member for Lyttelton had made some suggestions which, if they meant anything, meant iTui. introduction of single, tax. in this country. Mr. M'Combs denied that lie had meant anything of the kind.. Sir Joseph Ward'said that tho honourable gontloman professed to represent .v section of peonle in this country who had been more leniently treated than similar people in any oiher part of tho Empire in regard to taxation. These people were sadly misled by the member for lyttelton.- The honourable member for Lyttelton represented the section of labour, which no one. coulft please, not even the honourable member for Lyttclion himself. , That gentleman had spoken at large of taxing people with incomes of JSOOO a year. Did he and his friends know how many people, earned incomes of .£SOOO a year ? ■ There, were only 6G of them, and if we took all their incomes from all of them the difficulties of the Government would not, bo overcome. A glance at tho English Budget would _ show ' how well, the workers in New Zealand fared,'and the honourable member would do Himself or his friends little good in his attempt to, gain a little notoriety by his captious criticisms. He claimed that the Government ivas entitled to ask members to pass the amended proposals without fficroducing side issues; Be argued that the primage duties would-be less oppressive than taxes ..on a few .of tho necessaries ' of life. -The member for Stratford' was opposed to the primage tax but instead of it he proposed an increase of some \£50,000 additional on beer. This was to make up a shortage of £200,000! Or rather the member for Stratford had suggested that.some of the .£200,000 should be raised by beer duty, and that .£150,000 of the primage duty should be left 011. Surely that was an illogical attitude! He app'ealgu'to honourable members again to forget their pet theories. The taxing proposals were brought down after full conOTeration with one idea only, to raise ■money, every penny of which was re(iuircd. It'was upon that basis that he asked hanonrable, members to deal with the proposals in ;the taxing Bills. The Government irero not introducing in their proposals any new taxation schemes or policies.' It would have been impossible lor any party Government to have passed in the present House any practicable taxing programme. In view; of this lie asked honourable members to i defer their differences upon things about which they could hot agree, and to unite to pass legislation which was so urgently neces- * (Left sitting.)