BUDGET DEBATE

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 99, 28 April 1928, Page 9

BUDGET DEBATE

OPPOSITION CRITICS CHEAPER MONEY FIRST BRITAIN'S CEEDIT Cnlted Tress Association—By Eleciric Telf eraph—CopyriKh t. Australian Press Association—United Service. LONDON,. 26th April. The debate on tho Budget in the Committee stage was continued in tho House of Commons. Mr. W. Eunciman (L.) said that cheaper money would have a more farreaching benefit on industry than the' rate relief scheme, the money for which would have to come from householders, shopkeepers, and general taxpayers. Mr. Churchill had had the power to provide iheaper money, but failed owhig to past policy, which showed deiicits in the first, second, and *lhird years. Mr. Churchill in the first year had a surplus, in the second a deficit owing to the coal subsidy, and in tho third a deficit due to the strike. Mr. Runeiman said that he did not agree that there was a surplus in the first year. The Government was responsible for the coal subsidy. Mr. Churchill remarked: "Without a subsidy tho strike would have come a year earlier." Mr. Eunciman, continuing, said that strikes were not inevitable. Even if the strike had come a yenr earlier it would have saved tho subsidy, which cost 23 millions. Mr. Churchill's Chancellorship had adversely affected the national credit. With the exception of China, Chile, and New South Wales, improvement in credit had been slower in Britain than in any country in the world. Unless the sinking fund was made effective, Britain's credit would continue to wane. NO BENEFIT TO WORKERS. Mr. E. Shinwcll (Lab.) said that there was not, a single lino in the Budget that would benefit tho workers, except tho farthing off sugar. A working class household consumed four pounds of sugar a week, so the Budget would bo styled tho "penny a week Budget.'' Mr. A. Neville Chamberlain, Minister of Health, said that critics mostly misunderstood the scope of tho rate relief scheme. Taking the country as a whole, the trade recovery had been disappointing. It came only in fits and starts. The prospects were now brighter; therefore, it was just the moment to restore hope, vigour, and courage. The Government was proposing radically to change.the system now regulating national expenditure. Instead of municipalities receiving grants proportionate to their own expenditure, the money would bo distributed in proportion to the needs of the population. He believed that tho scheme would go down in history as a landmark of our civilisation. Mr. W. Graham (Lab.) said that tho rate relief scheme would involvo great technical and administrative difficulties, while its benefits did not distinguish between successful and admittedly bankrupt industries. Progress was reported.