AUSTRALIA'S ACTION

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 79, 30 September 1933, Page 10

AUSTRALIA'S ACTION

GRADUAL REDUCTION

The opinion that New Zealand had been forced to raise the exchango rate because of the action taken by Australia was expressed by Mr. H. G. Dickie (Government, Patea) in the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon in the course of his speech in the Address-in-Reply debate. Mr. Dickie said that the British statesmen had been lacking in foresight in allowing Australia to adopt the Patei'son plan without taking retaliatory action. Australia had also raised her oxchangc rate, and New Zealand had been forced to take similar action. There was now an agitation to abandon the high rate of exchange, but the reduction could not be brought about suddenly. It would have to be done gradually^ The raising of the exchange rate, however, was not a fair way of granting Telief to'a section of the community, as it tended to give a greater benefit to the more flourishing section of the people than those who needed it most. "I would rather have seen a bonus system," said Mr. Dickie, "as under a bonus system it would have been possible to discriminate between the produce that was bringing a fair price and tho produce that was bringing a poor price." Mr. Dickie said that the Labour Party had talked about the rapacious bondholders overseas, but the people who held. New Zealand bonds were scattered 'all over tho United Kingdom, and it was impossible to negotiate with them until loans were maturing. Mr. AY. J. Jordan (Labour, Manukau): Australia has been able to convert heT loans. Mr. Dickie: That,is so, but the Australian loans were maturing. He said that when the New Zealand loans were raised it had been considered that the money had been borrowed on good terms, but unfortunately tho price of money had since fallen. Until loans matured they could not obtain new terms from the bondholders. Mr. Dickie said that there were anomalies at present in the land valuation legislation, and he considered that the Government should place the position on a more equitable basis. Under the present Act a landholder could demand a revaluation on the payment of a fee, and those who had followed this course had obtained reductions varying from 25 to 30 per cent. These reductions were being obtained by the wealthier people, aY they were the only ones who could afford the fee, and the result was that the poorer landholders had to pay increased rates to make up for the reductions which had. been granted to those who were more fortunately situated. It would be more equitable for the Government to reduce valuations on a pro rata basis, and thus bring relief all round. The .same principle could be applied to land taxation. /