FAILURE ALLEGED

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20008, 5 August 1939, Page 5

FAILURE ALLEGED

SOCIAL SECURITY PLAN FINANCIAL BURDEN MR. HOLLAND’S CLAIM DENIAL BY LABOUR (Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. That the social security scheme had broken down under its own weight, was ithe opinion expressed by Mr. S. G Holland (Nat., Christchurch North) to the accompaniment of considerable dissent from the Labour benches in the House of Repiesentatives yesterday, Mr. Holland proceeded; to support this assertion. Last year, he said, £6,500,000 was devoted to the relief of unemployment. This year the vote was £3,000,000. The Government had thus withheld £3,500,000 worth of benefits from this class. It had fallen down on the job. If it was not in a position to give all the, 'promised benefits under the Social Security Act, why should it maintain the tax? he asked. It could not give''fret medical treatment, so why did it not exempt domestics and women generally, as well as school children from the wage tax? The main method employed l in cutting down the benefits was the “means best,” which the Minister of Railways, the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, on another occasion had termed “the meanest test of all.” Mr. Holland said he was sure that the originator of social security would be a very furious Minister of Finance when he returned to find What had happened. Costs had been cut because it was found impossible to give all the benefits promised before the elections.Would Involve 2/- Tax Dr. D. G. McMillan had Stated during the Christchurch: by-election that to pay alt the benefits would involve a tax on wages of 2s in the £. Mr. T. H. McCombs (Lab., Lyttelton): That is not true. Called to order by the Speaker, the interrupting member withdrew his statement, but added: “It is incorrect and he knows it.” Mr. Holland: I will prove it.

He quoted from a speech by Dr McMillan to the effect that if the “means test” were not applied, there would not be sufficient money and that the payment of all benefits, without this precaution, would mean a tax of at least 2s in the £. So, continued Mr. Holland, he could tepeat that the scheme had broken down to the extent of £7,000,000. The Ministerial estimates of its cost, had originally been £17,750,000, but a more recent statement by the Minister of Railways showed the cost of the benefits, including administration, to toe £12,000,000, a difference of £5,750,000.

“One is left to come to the conclusion,” added Mr. Holland, “that the leaders of the Right Wing went away and the leaders of the Left Wing got to .work and said’ they would' not standi for .the extra taxation) to carry out the whole proposals.” Mr. J. A. Lee (Lab., Grey Lynn): Is not a 'lot due to the people having work?

Mr. Holland: He knows what I have said is correct. He does not believe in this extra taxation and would wipe it out, making all the benefits available to the people ’through printed money.