NOTES AND COMMENTS

Dominion, Volume 36, Issue 139, 9 March 1943, Page 4

NOTES AND COMMENTS

From time to time various R.S.A. and other representative groups in the community have raised questions as to the civil rights of conscientious objectors and military defaulters. It has been urged repeatedly that men who have refused to serve their 'country in the forces should, as part of the penal tj' for their anti-social attitude, be deprived of the right to vote, not only for the period of the war but also for a stated number of years after. So far the Government has avoided committing itself on the matter, but some decision will require to be made before the General Election, and there seems no good reason for delaying further. The public, therefore, will look to the Minister in Charge of the Electoral Department (Mr. Fraser) for a definite answer to the question (notice of which has been given in the House of Representatives) as to whether “those who have refused to fight for their country” will be permitted to vote either this year or for the next decade. Actually the question concerns two groups—defaulters, who number some 659, and those men whose conscientious objection has been allowed by the tribunals. In each case the issue is the same: whether a man who has renounced his highest obligation as a citizen is to be permitted to exercise a foremost privilege of citizenship. The majority of the people, when they consider that an objector or defaulter if given access to the ballot-box could nullify the vote of the most selfsacrificing serviceman, will feci strongly that such a situation would be wholly wrong in principle and grossly unjust in practice.

While Parliament is in session opportunity should be taken to inquire about the position of aliens and refugees in this country as regards taxation. In Australia, apparently, according to a message from Canberra, a special investigation lias been held necessary as a check-up on the liquid funds of aliens and refugees who have been astute enough to conceal their real financial position by operating on a cash basis, thus dispensing with the use of documents. The combing-out by the investigators has, it is stated, resulted in “a rich harvest for the Commonwealth.” The question prompted by this report is whether similar evasions, as yet undetected, have been attempted here. It is fairly common knowledge that some, if not many, refugees who have arrived in New Zealand prior to and after the war have apparently had ample resources. They may have recognized, and duly mot, their taxation obligations to the country of their adoption. On the other hand, ignorance of these obligations, or deliberate evasion, may have resulted in a considerable amount being lost to the national exchequer. What is reported to have happened in Australia will raise doubts in the minds of the public here. These doubts should be cleared up. The proper place for the question to be raised is lu Parliament, and it should be raised.