BUDGET DEBATE

Grey River Argus, 11 June 1943, Page 5

BUDGET DEBATE

SOLDIERS AND CAMPS

Are War too Big?

P.A. WELLINGTON, June 10. A request that men over military age be exempted from further Home Guard, week-end parades was contained in a notice of a question by Mr H. Atmore (Ind., Nelson) on behalf of Mr W. G. Barnard,__to the Minister of National Service' when the House met this afternoon. Mr Atmore stated many of the men concerned were returned soldiers of the last war, and had been attending Home Guard parades since the earliest days of the organisation. Complaints, he said, 'were general among these men of what was described as a useless waste of time involved in the existing parades. The time, it was felt, could be more profitably employed raising vegetables for home consumption. On the motion of the Minister of Finance, the House agreed in future to sit on Tuesdays from 10.30 a.m. until 10 p.m.. with the usual adjournments for imeals, hind to conclude sittings on Wednesday and Thursday evenings at 10 o’clock, instead of 10.30, thus avoiding the necessity of interfering with news broadcasts from New Zealand to servicemen stationed in the Pacific. Speaking on the subject of rehabilitation of returned servicejnen, in continuation of the budget debate, Mr C. G. E. Harker (Nat., Waipawa) said that they had heard a spate of words about what the Government was intending to do; but what the reurned servicemen, and the public generally, wanted was a little more action. T’his was the fourth,■ year of the war, he said, and why had there been, such a delay in starting? If the Ministep of Lands would put a little more vigour into a land settlement. policy for the servicemen, he would receive whole-hearted support from the Opposition. Mr Harker also that there should be stricter supervision so as to ensure the elimination of waste. The waste, he said, operated against' rehabilitation, and also against the morale of the people; _and anybody who had had experience of the operation of the camps in this war knew that, in the majority of them, substantial savings could be made. If, from the start of tne war, a competent and independent committee of business men had been in charge of the supervision of the war expenditure, the savings made would have amounted literally to millions.

A plea that something should be done to relieve the domestic service situation was made by Mrs Stewart (Govt., Wellington East), who referred to the burden borne by farmers’ wives, as well as city women, owing to shortage of domestic help, resutlihg from the war. Some organisations had done •. excellent work in providing help, but much remained to be done, and some ... inducement should be offered to make domestic service attractive to ftirls. SUPPLY QUESTIONS. Continuing the Budget debate, in the evening, the Minister of Supply, Hon. D. G. Sullivan, defended the work of the Department of Industries and Commerce. He refuted Opposition contentions that there was inefficiency, confusion and chaos in the department. There had been difficulties, he said, real difficulties, arising from.th e shortage of manpower, and as a result of tne: LendLease and of bulk purchase by the Government. The work of the department had enormously increased during the last two years. As its work had increased, the department had also lost many members of its staff to the Army. But now the position was rapidly being recovered. Mr. Sullivan stated that, during his speech in the present debate, the Leader 'Ofj the Opposition had asserted that Government mismanagement of tea purchases had cost housewives of the Dominnion half a million pounds. This was nonsense. The Government had taken every step to save the consumers’ pockets. NZ WAR COMMITMENTS TOO BIG?

Mr. J. A. Lee (Democratic Soldiers’ Labour Party) characterised _ the Budget as a bondholders budget. New Zealand, he said was selling all its produce at 1939 prices, and it was buying shells, aeroplanes, and war essentials at 1943 prices. New Zealand was entitled to have its war debts considered in the general process of settlement after the war. This country was making manpower sacrifices equal to those of any 'other nations Therefore, he asked, why should we attempt to pay every cent of the war debt on the, goods brought at 1943 prices, while we received only 1939 prices for our commodities? He contended that the Budget ignored the manpower problem Unless we faced up to this problem, we would find it necessary to reduce the minimum age on the one hand, and to extend the maximum age on the other hand. If we did not revise our commitments, we should have to revise our calling up age. He thought that the Government had over-reached itself in its pledges of tne Dominion’s manpower.’ Mr W. M. Denham (Govt. Invercar- ‘ gill)' said that New Zealand was the only country in the world that had announced ho taxation increase in a wartime budget. The debate was interrupted by the adiournment at 10 p.m. The House rose until 10.30 a.m. to-morrow. THE ESTIMATES. WELLINGTON, June 10. Last year the sum of £66,684 was spent on the New Zealand Government motor vessel Mauri Pomare after £49,650 had been voted ror working expenses, salaries, wages, and, new engines. The vote mis year is £38,000 and working receipts are estimated at £40,000. The erection of the memorial to me late Rt. Hon.'M. J. Savage for which £5OOO was voted cost £7,052, including preliminary expenses. The sum of £523 was voted and £609 was spent to provide' camping equipment for the Governor-General. An expenditure of £54 on the erection of memorials to Captain ~uok and £335 for the Tasman tercentennial celebrations and memorials. The total cost to New Zealand this year of being represented by a Minister at Washington and High Commissioners in London, Ottawa, and Canberra, is estimated at £144,872. Last year £97,821 was voted to the expenses at Washington, London, and Ottawa, and £91,078 was spent. The cost of maintaining the New Zealand Legation in Washington is estimated at £39,979, this ycat. year £33.849 was voted, and £35,.80 was spent. The principal item is the sum of. £11,635 for location allowances to the staff. The Ministers salary is £2OOO and the first secretary receives £lOOO. Salaries of 18 other members of the staff range from £196 to £715. and! account for £8,381. A new vote is £11,965 for the establishment of a High Commissioner’s Office in Canberra. lhe High

Commissioner’s salary is £1509, the salaries of a staff of five ranging from £234 to £665 account tor £lB9O, and location allowances are fixed at £l7OO. „ . . A vote of £18457 was made last year for the establishment of the High Commissioner’s Office in Ottawa, and £6,324 was spent This year the estimate is £14,512. the High Commissioner’s salary is ±l5Uu. This year the cost of maintaining the High Commissioner’s Office in London is estimated at £77,146. T.he sum of £55,965 was voted last year and £62,400 was spent. the salaries of 135 members of the staff rangmg from £65 to £765 account for £31,102 and the salaries of the High Commissioner, secretary, and the assistant secretary, and finance officer a're set down at £2OOO, £1055. and £950 respectively. Rent, rates, taxes and insurance, part of which are recoverable are estimated at £12.500. Last year £237 was spent on advertising, photographs, books, newspapers, other publications, and £250 has been allotted this year. ...