DEBATE ON BUDGET

Greymouth Evening Star, 24 August 1939, Page 2

DEBATE ON BUDGET

MR FRASER ANSWERS CRITICISM “NO UNDUE OPPOSITION.” [per press association.! WEDDINGTON, August 23. In the House/ this evening, the Acting-Deader, Mr Eraser, made his reply to the financial debate. He thanked the Opposition, and all those who had expressed sympathy with the Prime Minister in his illness, and also extended the Government s sympathy to those who had suffered in the recent floods in the Manawa! 1 .! and elsewhere. . Speaking of the Budget jtsell. be expressed the opinion that it had been favourably received by the country. Nono had expected that increased taxation would be received with enthusiasm, but even to this there had not been undue opposition. The Opposition had criticised the Government as being unorthodox in its finance, said Mr Fraser, and at least one member had complained that it was too orthodo_x. Mr S. G. Holland (Nat., Christchurch North): That is the Member for Grey Dynu. Mr Fraser: No, it is .'tot.' There is no difference between the views of the Member for Grey Dynn and the rest of ns. Opposition Members said that tho Government had gone too far, but they would not. indicate in which direction. Mr Fraser said that, early in the debate, Mr A. H. Nordmeyer (Govt.. Oamaru) had challenged the Opposition to say what reserves the Government had raided; when, and by whom, such reserves were established; and when and in what manner, they had' been raided by the present. Government. That challenge had not been accepted. The present Government had balanced its budget each year since it had been in office, and capital I expenditure had been met, not by hor--1 rowing overseas, but by using departmental surpluses, the Post office savings, and also by calling on the credit of the country for the use of New Zealand, through the Reserve Bank. Referring to the question of raisingloans, Mr Fraser said that members of the Government in .the past had never contended that loans should not be raised. They recognised that, in a young country, borrowing was sometimes unavoidable; but the Government did say that overseas borrowing should he reduced to a minimum; and it had not borrowed overseas until the recent £17,000,000 conversion loan. The credit used by the present Government was the credit of the people of Now Zealand. and not credit from overseas.

He then went on to deal with the position of the farming community and he quoted the decrease in the number of sales of farms, which, he said, was proof conclusive that the farmers to-day were better off than they had ever been. GOVERNMENT’S DETERMINATION Mr Eraser said' that the Budget had faced up to realities, in that it showed the Government’s determination to maintain the progress made by the country. That, was one thing which the Government was absolutely definite about. The internal prosperity of the country was sound, he said. The people- were good, and the resources were great. The country was able to maintain its standard of living, and the Government would never be a party to cutting the incomes of the people, or to reducing their standards. Mr Fraser then referred to the question of foreign policy, defending the right, of members of the House io express their opinions concerning it. Mr F. Doidge (Nat., Tauranga): Do you, then, agree with the Government Member who says that Britain is adopting a “double crossing” policy in the Far East?

Mr Fraser replied that, it was the right of the individual member to express his own opinion, even.:’!' he (Mr Fraser), personally disagreed with it; and he did disagree with it. The Minister proceeded to stress the value of co-operation with the United States. This country had the greatest feeling of friendship towards this great democracy, he said, and also towards th© great man at its bead. Fie reiterated his earlier statement that he hoped that war would be averted in Europe, but said that, if it were not, everyone in the House and the people of the British Commonwealth of Nations -would stand shoulder to shoulder with the Mother Country in the fight. He added that no matter how many defeats were suffered, or how often retreats had to be made, the fight for democracy would be continued. DEFENCE EXPENDITURE. CONSIDERATION OF ESTIMATES. When Mr Fraser had concluded his speech, the House went into committee to discuss the first item of the Estimates. Mr J. Hargest (Nat., Awarua). while congratulating the Minister of Defence on the increased provision made for national defence, said he hoped he would not be accused of “jingoism” if lie urged the Minister to persuade his colleagues to divert part of the vast expenditure in other directions to defence. A territorial Forpe.nf 16,000 was not enough. A force of 40,000 would not be too great. He said he was not decrying the expenditure on social legislation, but every piece of legislation placed on the Statute Book for the past SO years would go for nothing unless we could keep the country inviolak* against an aggressor.

Mr J. O’Brien (Govt.., Westland) strongly deprecated the suggestion, which, he contended, Mr 1 largest had made, that an increased provision for defence should ho made at the expense of the pensioners, the widows, and the orphans. New Zea'and was worth defending, but it would not he at. the expense of those who wore in need of State assistance.

Mr Fraser said that there would be no difficulty ahom finance for defence. This year £ 5,()()(),mm was being provided for the purpose, and it was unthinkable, if New Zealand were to do its duty, that, the question of finance 1 ! for defence should stand in the way, and it would not stand in (he way. Further, it must be apparent to everybody that if this country were threatened with invasion, not only human beings, but. every perny in the Dominion, and every ounce of property, became part of the defence system of the country. Mr J. A. .Lee (Govt.. Grty Lynn.) said that he hoped that if the country were confronted with a grave situation, we would not be found to be more qualified to be in a fowl-run

than in running tho country. Lot people refrain from spreading the leap of invasion. That was not justified, he said. If the necessity arose, they would have as many men available as were required. Mr F. Doidge (Nat., Tauranga) said Mr Lee had stated that, the Government would' determine what to do when it. knew the nature of the crisis, but lie would issue a warning that war would come overnight, and preparations could not. lie made as quickly ns that. It had been a struggle to get 1(1,000 men, and we would not have had these to-day if veterans of .1914-18 had not come to the rescue. MINISTER’S REPLY. The Minister of Defence, Mr Jonmi, said that honourable members of the Opposition seemed to have mixed up I lie Reserve with the Territorials. We had 10,000 men to-day. all of whom bad’ passed the doctors. The Government. had thought it would take three months to get them, and they had done it in six weeks. We had doubled up on our defence expenditure, he said; although he did not. know if all of the money provided lor would come to charge, because of the difficulty in getting equipment from the manufacturers. The Government had placed' large contracts in New Zealand for clothing and food, etc,, and also large contracts overseas for ammunition and stores. Even if we increased the estimate by £1,000,000, how could i(. be spent when one of our geatest difficulties was to gel (he supplies we required? Progress was reported at 10.30, and the House rose.

On the motion for the adournment, Mr Fraser said it was intended tomorrow to take the Finance Bill and Income Tax Amendment BillPROPERTY LAW AMENDMENTThe House during the afternoon went into committee on the Property Law Amendment Bill and' the Land Transfer Amendment B’H. Several amendments made by the Statu!es Revision Committee to the Property Law Amendment Bill were approved. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr Hamilton, contended that .he number of laws being introduced from time to time had a. tendency to make land mortgages less attractive, and this should be obviated wherever possible. Mr W. A. Bodkin (Nat., Central Otago) said’ he did not think it could be argued that the present Bill would impose any undue hardship on a mortgagee. The legislative provision which it made was genera 1 ly desirable, and brought New Zealand legislation into line with that in England. Mr Mason concurred with Mr Hamilton that it was necessary to protect, the validity of land securities, and he was of opinion that the Bill would do this. 'Phe Bill passed through the committee stages, and was rend a third time, with little further discussion. Several amendments by the Statutes Revision Committee to the Land Transfer Amendment Bill were also approved by the House in committee. Tlie principal amendment was the addition of a new clanse restricting the licensing of land brokers to the extent. that no person shall bo qualified to hold a land broker’s license who is the holder of a license as a. land agent. Mr Hamilton stated that this clause would' materially affect land brokers, and he thought they should have been consulted before the Bill was put through the House.

Mr Bodkin explained that the clause only provided that a person should not be both a land agent, and a land broker. If the Bill were put through, the people who held both occupations would have the right to elect whether they should continue as land brokers or as land agents. Mr Hamilton asked if the interested parties would be given an opportunity of being heard before lhe Statutes Revision Committee of the Upper House, when the measure was before it. The Attorney-General, AL- Mason: “I can give an undertaking that that will be done.”

The Bill then passed the committee stages and was given the third reading and passed. Mr Mason also moved the second reading o£ the Legitimation Bill proforma, to enable it to be referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. This was agreed to. QUESTIONS ANSWERED. After Bills were read in the House, the remainder of the affotnoon was occupied by the consideration of written replies to questions. Arbitration Act Amcn-iment. —A question was addressed to the Minister of Labour, Mr Webb, by Mr F. Doidge (Nat., Tauranga), who asked whether the Minister had noted that the 1 first result of the amendment to the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act had been that a union on strike in Auckland made use of its provisions to obtain an increase in pay, so that the measure 'was likely to act, not, as a deterrent, but as an incentive 'to strike.

The question was replied to by the Minister as follows: The amendment did not deprive a union of the right to negotiate with the employers regarding the conditions of employment. The agreement arrived at in th? case referred to was purely a voluntary one, and the result disclosed that, instead of the measure being an incentive to strike, the opposite was achieved. Freight on Petrol: A question by Mr A. G. Hultquist (G.')vL, Bay of Plenty) was whether a committee would be set up to investigate the question of a. universal freight-paid price for petrol. The Minister of Industries and Commerce, Mr D. G. Sul-1 livan, replied to the effect, that such a scheme would mean an increase in the price of petrol in the main centres of something in the vicinity of twopence a. gallon. The Government had given careful consideration to that finest ion, but it did not intend to take action.

Newspaper Zoning: Tin- proposal to ■/.one the areas in which (lie daily newspapers in New Zealand may circulate had not been given consideration by the Government, but the question would be examined, said the Minister of industries and Commerce, Mr Sullivan, in reply to the question put l;y Mr J. O’Brien (Govt.. Westland). Mr O'Brien had referred in his question to the unfair competition that is caused by tin- targe city newspapers invading the territory of the provincial publications. Fairy Account Deficit: In reply to a question addressed to (in? ActingMinister of Marketing (Mr \V. Lee Marlin). liy Mr A. N. Grigg (.Nat., MidCanterbury), who asketd whether any deficit, in the dairy industry account was Io be debited against ,!)<> dairy industry, or was to he met. by the taxpayers generally, the Minister said that any consideration of a possible deficit in the Dairy Industry Account must take account of the fact that the 1

guaranteed price scheme was a longterm plan. When all of the 1938-39 season’s produce had been shipped and sold overseas, and the final results were known, the Government would give consideration to the treatment of any deficit then standing U the debt of the Dairy Industry Account. Germany and New Zealand Butler: In answer io a question by Mr W. C. Kidd (Nat., Wniraki), as to whether there was any provision in the Trade Agreement hot ween New Zealand and Germany, making it possible for the latter to re-sell New Zealand produce on the London market in order to receive foreign credits there, Mr Fraser said that, there was no specific provision rendering it impossible for Germany to do this. He added, however, ihat no instance of Germany selling on the London market any New Zealand produce imported into Germany under lhe agreement, had come under the Government’s notice, and such sales were considered most unlikely. Price of Fertiliser: Replying to a question by Mr W. S. Bosnian (Nat., Waikato), who asked the Minister of Industries and Commerce whether he had consented, or intended to consent to an increase in fertiliser prices to farmers due to increased costs to manufacturers, Mr Sullivan said that the manufacturers would be given an opportunity of stating their case before the Price Fixing Tribunal. New Dairy Produce Price: Mr Goosman, in an urgent question to the Acting-Minister of Marketing, inquired when it was intended to announce file new guaranteed price for dairy produce, and whether recommendations of the expert advisory committee on the guaranteed' price were again to be rejected Mr Lee Martin, in reply, quoted an extract from the report of she Dairy Industry Conference’s Executive, which was published throughout New Zealand on August 4, and in which it was stated that tho decision as to the price for the 1939-40 season should not be made until the Executive had had an opportunity of discussing the position with Mr Nash on his return, and to this he (Mr Lee Martin) had agreed.

Rights of Deserted Wives: Mr J. O’Brien has been informed by Mr Parry (Acting-Minister of Social Security)’ that there is no necessity to amend' the Social Security Act to allow a deserted wife to draw the deserted wife’s benefit for herself and her children under the age of sixteen years as ample provision already exists to meet cases of this kind. The Minister added that the measure of assistance that may be granted would depend, of course, upon the family responsibilities and resources of the applicant. The Minister’s statement was made in reply to the question recently asked by Mr O’Brien, who, in asking if the Act would be amended this session, said that, at present, if a man deserted his wife and family, and was imprisoned for failure to maintain, no allowance was paid to the family until one month had elapsed, and then only an inadequate payment of 208 per week was made. Thus a deserted family had to wait from six weeks to two months before payment was received, and as tho sentences for failure to maintain were short, little or no assistance might, he obtained through a deserting husband being imprisoned.