BUDGET DEBATE.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume VII, Issue 252, 17 August 1917, Page 3

BUDGET DEBATE.

MEMBERS CRITICISMS

The debate on the Budget was resumed in the House yesterday.

Mr. C. E. Statham said the National Cabinet suffered to some extent from the want of active opposition and the consequent criticism. He proposed to make amends for this by criticising the Government. One of his chief complaints was that they were too slow to grasp opportunities. As a result they found in the Budget measures which members had been advocating some considerable time, such as the amusement tax, white the orofits tax was eight months late. On the other hand, they sometimes showed firmness

which amounted to stubbornness, as evidenced by the Minister of Railways’ refusal to restore suburban trains, the withdrawal of which was unwise and unwarranted. He recognised that finance must be founded on a win-the-war basis, but he was afraid a great deal of our new taxation would have the effect of driving away capital, while the exemption of War Loan interest from income tax would have an effect in the future, casting the whole of the burden on those not fortunate enough to hold War Loan bonds. In his opinion, the only hope for the country was to intensively develop its productiveness, but upon tins question the number of men sent to the front had an important bearing. In this connection he thought the zeal of the Minister of Defence out-

ran his reason. To promote produc-l tion he advocated a more liberal tenure of the two million acres of national endowment, which at present only brings in .£32,394 per annum. Much mignt be done in a similar direction for the North Auckland lands, where enormous potentialities were awaiting development. He did not agree wth the Minister of Finance, v. ho declined to put a dutyon motor cars. Jn a like manner he was disappointed that a stiff duty was not put on spirits and beer. The Government were only playing with the question, and in the end they would fall between two stools. They pleased neither party. Where there was any entertainment of an educational character, such as choral societies, he hoped the amusement tax would not apply, while so far as the income tax was concerned, he thought the single man should pay more than the man with a family. Concluding, he gave the Government credit for the promise to increase pensions, but they might well have done it last year, though better late than never.

Mr. J.. V. Brown opposed the amusement and tea taxes. It was better to raise money on imports and bring in additional duty on beer and spirits. He complained that the Minister of Defence did not take the House into his confidence, but acted as the autocrat of New Zealand in sending more reinforcements than the population warranted. He contended we should cry a halt and let America fill the gap, since we had been fighting for three years as much in America’s interests as our own.

Dr. Newman said the greatest weakness of the National Cabinet was timidity and vacillation. What was wanted was a policy. There was no consistency in the Government. One day reinforcements are to be kept up to full strength, and the next day they are to be reduced. One day we were going to have a profits tax, the next flay it was repealed. This sort of vacillation destroyed confidence?. This country was about to feel the financial pinch. So far we had not felt it, but unless the war ended soon stringency would quickly be apparent. Unfortunately there was no sign of the war ending, not even'in 191 b, but so far the Government had never raised its voice in favour of economy. He deprecated the constant changes in the forms of taxation. It was better to have settled forms and increase them as the necessity arose, rather than change them if the results were not satisfactory. The huttertax was an unprofitable and unconstitutional in-

terference with the hights of Parliament. No taxation should be raised except by vote of Parliament, and he hoped the Government would not attempt the experiment again. He favoured a differential rate on earned and unearned incomes and strongly opposed the tea tax while every luxury was let off so lightly. Mr. A. E. Glover generally supported the proposals in the Budget, but strongly objected to the tax on tea, and indicated that he was as strongly opposed to any proposal to send to the front boys of nineteen.

The adjournment of the debate was moved by Mr. C. J- Parr, and the House rose at 10.35 p.m.