WAGE-TAX INCREASE

Greymouth Evening Star, 8 April 1932, Page 7

WAGE-TAX INCREASE

DEBATE CONTINUED NO CONCESSION FROM GOVT. [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.]

WELLINGTON, April 7. ■ The House of Representatives met i at 2.30 p.m. Mr Clinkard asked whether attention had been drawn to a report that Mr Thompson, water diviner, had claimed to have located a large body ■ of subterrannean water at right angles to the Waikato river, and passing under, or near the Arapuni power station. Mr Coates replied that the matter had been fully investigated. The ground in question had previously been explored by bore holes, some to great depths, even belc > sea level, and by tunnels, and witL ihe services of other water diviners. The Government considered that all necessary steps had been taken, and there was no cause for alarm. The Engineer-in-Chief of the Public Works Department had reported that he had gone over the ground with Mr Thompson, and almost all the demonstrations made by Mr Thompson had been either directly ovei* or in close proximity to drives and pipes carrying water. • Mr Fraser asked whether a conference had been held between the Government and editors of Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin newspapers, and whether the conference had been addressed by Messrs Forbes, Stewart and Coates, also ! whether the editors had been inform- ; ed regarding financial proposals, which were not yet before Parliament, ' with a view to obtaining the support of the Press, and whether there was any connection between this confer- , ence, and the leakage of information j concerning which Mr Forbes had com- ] plained. 1 Mr Forbes said that he had received ( notice of the question just prior to i entering the House, and suggested it j should be put on the order paper.

Mr Black was granted two days’ leave of absence on account of illness. Urgency was by 47 to 24 votes accorded the passage of the Unemployment Amendment Bill, through all stages.

Resuming, the second reading debate, Mr J. A. Nash said he considered that 1/- in the £ emergency charge was too much. He believed that 9d in the £ would be sufficient to provide the sum the Minister desired. Mr McCombs said he estimated that

under the present system, women were paying £450,000 in taxation, but the benefits they were obtaining amounted only to about £lO,OOO. He did not object to women being taxed, but they should not be taxed if they did not receive benefits.

Mr Clinkard urged the Government to foster the flax, coal and other industries, with a view to absorbing the unemployed. The division on the amendment to the second reading of the Unemployment Amendment Bill, moved last night by Mr Fraser, resulted in its rejection by 43 to 19. Replying to the debate on the second reading, Mr Coates said he anticipated that the proposed 1/- in the £ wages taxes unemployment levy, would yield somewhere between three and a-half and four millions. The Bill was read a second time. The Committee stage is in progress.

' ALL NIGHT SITTING.

BILL FORCED THROUGH

[PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.]

WELLINGTON, April 8

The Unemployment Amendment Bill was passed in the House of Representatives at half-past seven this morning, after an all night sitting. Labour and Independent members moved an array of amendments, all of which were rejected. The closure was applied only once, and in most cases the clauses and amendments went to a division after comparatively brief discussion. The Bill was read a second time at 11 p.m., and the committee stage was then commenced. After about four hours’ discussion on the short title, the closure was applied at 3.5 a.m. by 44 to 23 votes, and the clause was adopted on the voices. Mr. Barnard moved to make mandatory, instead of permissive, the provision whereby unemployed persons, settled on land, who are unable to provide adequate sustenance for themselves and families, can receive sustenance allowances out of the Unemployment Fund. This was defeated by 44 to 22, and the clause was adopted unamended.

The House agreed to minor amendments submitted by the Minister to

two other clauses. When -the clause was reached repealing provisions for payment of a subsidy from the Consolidated Fund to the Unemployment Fund, Mr. Fraser expressed the opinion that it would be a mistake to withdraw the. present right, especially as the Government did not know what it will be faced with during the coming winter.

Mr. Coates said that the Consolidated Fund could not stand the strain of a subsidy on the 1/- in the £ tax. Cabinet had power, if necessary, to draw on the Consolidated Fund and obtain Parliamentary sanction subsequently. The clause was challenged by Labour and retained by 42 to 23. The provision for increased rate of the unemployment charge on wages and salaries and other income, to 1/in the £, was discussed at length. Mr. Fraser moved that, consideration of the clause be postponed to enable the Government to substitute a graduated for the flat rate tax. He said that he did not think newsboys and those earning a like amount should be asked to contribute to the Unemployment Fund. Mr. Wright said it was unreasonable

:o ask people earning £2 a week, or

less, to pay 1/- in the £ in unemployment tax. The amendment was reasonable. Mr. Barnard asked what justification there was for imposing a tax on youths fdr whom the Board could not find work. He mentioned also the similar case of girls and women. Mr. Clinkard asked the Minister to consider relieving from payment of the tax those receiving less than £1 per week. Mr. Semple urged that there should be a graduated instead of flat rate tax. Mr. Fraser’s motion was defeated by 35 to 26.

Mr. Wilkinson moved to exempt from payment of the tax those receiv-

ing less than £1 per week. Ha said that impost would be utterly unfair, and he was astonished to find a newsboy was to be taxed. Mr. Coates said that if they exempted married men receiving below £2 per week, and single men earning 25/per week, they would lose £400,000 per annum. He said that they

SHOULD NOT TAX SCHOOL BOYS,

and said he was'prepared to consider this aspect. The Unemployment Board had power to make exemptions. . Mr. Semple: Why not accept the amendment? k

Mr. Coates said he was not prepared to accept the amendment, but would look into the points raised. Later, ho said that ho would try to draft a clause excluding children under 17 years of age, who were earning certain wages. Mr. Wilkinson said he was not satisfied with the Minister's assurances. He thought that members of the Coalition Party would find it very difficult to support the Minister in this matter. Mr. Coates: Then it will be taken definitely as a no-confidence vote, because you are forcing the situation. I gave my word to the House that I would do a certain thing, and I expected it to be accepted. The amendment was defeated by 38 to 24. The ’ Labour members, and Messrs. Atmore, Samuel, Wilkinson and Wright voted for the amendment.

Mr. Jordan moved to exempt every person earning £2OO per year or less from payment of the tax. This was defeated .by 40 to 24. Mr. McCombs moved that no woman should be liable to pay unemployment tax, unless definite provision made for work or sustenance. This was rejected by 39 to 24, and the clause passed. Mr. Schramm moved that no blind woman employed at the Jubilee Insti-

tute should be liable to pay wages tax. Mr. Coates said .he'thought the hardship clause would make the necessary provision in this respect, but if that were not satisfactory, it might be possible to deal with the matter by Order-in-Council. The motion was withdrawn.

Replying to Mr. Barnard, Mr. Coates said he was quite sure the clause, enabling moneys of the Unemployed Fund to be used for the purchase of food, clothing or other necessities was drafted in such a way that provision was made for payment of rent where necessary.

Mr. Parry moved a new clause, providing for payment of sustenance to unemployed women. This was defeated by 39 to 23. Mr. Atmore moved that women and girls should not bo called upon to pay the unemployment levy or wage tax, unless some definite scheme for the re-

lief of unemployed women and girls was established. This was defeated by 36 to 24. ,

The Leader of the Opposition moved that all workers under unemployment schemes should receive payment for each day worked.

The motion was defeated by 38 to 24. The Bill was reported as amended, read a third time and passed. The House rose at 7.37 a.m. till 2.30 this afternoon. IN THE COUNCIL. WELLINGTON, April 7. The Legislative Council met at 2.30 p.m.

Sir J. Parr congratulated Mr Mitchellson and Sir F. Bell on the attainment of their 87th and 81st birthdays respectively. Resuming the debate on the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill, Sir T. Sidey confessed that he did not feel much enthusiasm for the measure. He believed that compensation cases should be removed from the Arbitration Court, and that a second Court should be established. Compensation cases should be handed over to the Supreme Court judges. The present was not the time to introduce experimental legislation. The Bill should be referred to the Statutes Revision Committee.

Mr McCallum said the bill was demanded by the abnormal times through which they were passing. Mi* Mclntyre said that the Government did not sense the feeling which existed in the country against the measure. There was a growing feeling that the country was passing class legislation. Members of the Cabinet were out of touch with the people. The present Bill went too far altogether. The Minister of Education (MiMasters) said the Government was not in the least concerned about its popularity, but was only concerned about placing the country on a sound basis. The Government found no pleasure in cutting wages and effecting economies, but it was compelled to do so, in view of the general conditions. Sacrifice was being spread to the fullest extent. Certain members did not appear to realise the necessity for such legislation as was being introduced. They did not realise that the costs of production must be reduced. What was needed in New Zealand was greater confidence in industry. The industries to-day were suffering from harassing conditions and until these were removed there would be no confidence. He did not believe that there was any need for another Court, and was hopeful that under the present Bill, it would be possible to arrive at agreements.

Mr Gow said the Act had been too rigid. <The Government ,at the general election, had made no secret of its intentions to amend the Act, which

had done a tremendous lot of harm, and had ranged employers and employees into two sections. What was wanted to-day was a spirit of unity. Mr Witty said the Bill was a step in the right direction, and would prove of inestimable value to the farming community. The debate was adjourned. The Council rose, at 9 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. to-morrow.

SIR T. SIDEY OPPOSES GOVT. WELLINGTON, April 8. The Legislative Council met at 10.30 a.m. An amendment, moved by the Hon. Mark Fagan, that the Bill be read a second time, six months hence, was defeated by 30 votes to three. Those who supported Mr Fagan were Sir T. Sidey and the Hon. W. H. Mclntyre. Sir James Parr, Leader of the Council, in replying to the second reading debate, said that the debate had worthily upheld the traditions of the Chamber, and had been of a very high level. The speakers one and all had admitted that industry was suffering from irksome conditions, which the state of the Dominion could not allow to continue any longer. The sooner awards were revised the better for everybody. The Bill was an honest and earnest attempt to face the position, without further delay. The financial position demanded that man

and master should get together to reduce costs all round. Sir James Parr contended that there were ample safeguards in the existing legislation against ninetenths of the mischief popularly called “sweating.” He agreed to refer the Bill to the Statutes Revision Committee, with the stipulation that there should be no delay or evidence taken, and that the Committee should report back that afternoon.. The Bill was read a second time, and referred to the Committee.

The Council adjourned till the ringing of the bells.