FINANCE DEBATE.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 24 November 1937, Page 7

FINANCE DEBATE.

(By T<?*egraph—Press Association. ) WELLINGTON, Last Night.

Continuing the second reading debate on the Finance Bill, which was interrupted by the adjournment in the House of Representatives last night, Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (Opposition—Waitomo) appealed for a reduction of the taxation being imposed on racing duos. The Government in a time of prosperity like the present could give relief to these clubs to enable them to increase their stakes and make other necessary improvements. He instanced the fact that many of the big racehorse owners were taking their horses to Australia to take advantage of the better stakes offering there. Why not give clubs relief for only one year? he asked. He criticised the present system of granting relief in cases of hardship, which, he said, was liable to lead to patronage by ministers. He thought they were exacting too heavy a toll from the people who did bet on horses. Personally, he did not believe- in betting, which appeared stupid to him, but it seemed to be ingrained in tne British people. There could be a direct reduction in taxation if the problem were tackled correctly and the large amount of illicit betting going on to-day were brought within the proper taxation channels. Mr. Broadfoot criticised the Minister of Finance, Hon. W. Nash, because he had not before this presented returns for the final realisation on the guaranteed butterfat prices and also made public the price paid for Picot Bros.

Jean Batten’s Feats. Bt. Hon. G. W. Forbes (Opposition— Hurunui) said he would like to see the amount allowed local bodies for unauthorised expenditure increased. The sum allowmd at present was too small and the Government was always passing validating legislation to provide for excesses of local body unauthorised expenditure. He asked the Government what was being done to recognise the services to aviation of Miss Jean Batten. Other countries had thought she was worthy of recognition and she was also worthy of it in the country of her birth.

He drew r attention to the fact that it had been promised there should be an overhaul of the whole land and income tax position in the Dominion and the hardship clause under the graduated land tax in the Bill showed this necessary. He thought the present hardship clause would not satisfy very many. The aspect which had been overlooked, said Mr. Forbes, was thai a man might be able to pay his taxation only at the expense of the land he farmed. The land may be robbed of fertilisers and necessary improvements and neglected in order that the farmer could pay his taxes.

Minister as Arbiter,

Mr. Forbes added that he did, not think a Minister of the Crown should interfere with the confidential affairs of anyone as he would be forced to do under the hardship clause of the Bill, and it would place the Minister himself in a false position by acting as arbiter. Mr. C. H. Burnett (Government— Tauranga) referring to the borrowing powers which were conferred in the Bill for the railways, said the money was for the completion of old railways which the past Government had left uncompleted. He paid a tribute to the Minister of Public Works, Hon. E. Semple, for his energetic policy. With regard to the graduated land tax hardship clause, he agreed it was necessary to have a classification of the land throughout New Zealand, and he thought the Minister should consider the inequity of the tax in some cases.

Mr. W. J. Poison (Opposition —Stratford) said he ivas sorry the Rural Advances Department had gone. It

had been a fine co-operative organisation and now it was being replaced by a machine. It might have been of inestimable value to the producers of the country. He thought the hardship clause in the Bill was the worst that had been promulgated up till the present. •

Unprecedented Power It jnit unprecedented legislative •power into the hands of one man. namely, the Minister of Finance. He did not suggest that the present Minister would do anything improper. Labour interjection: He is responsible to Parliament. Mr. Poison: No; he is not. He is a i pure autocrat. When it comes to a j decision of the commission the dice ai<3 loaded against the appellant. The commission comprises three of the hardest of our civil servants. Even if they did say that a case ox hardship existed, the Minister might ! consider the case and say there was none, and there was no appeal against the Minister’s decision. The Minister had opposed such a course, but now he put it into his own Bill. Personally, he would not like to refer a case to the Minister. Mr. A. G. Osborne (Government — Manakau): Perhaps the honourable member would rather have the Commissioner of Police on the commission? “A Fanatic” Mr. Poison: I’d rather have the Commissioner of Police than the Minister because the Minister is a fanatic. Mr. Moneur (Government —Eotorua) rose to a point of order, asking if Mr. Poison was entitled to use the word

Hardship Clause In Tax Legislation. Mr. Poison s Spirited Attack.

fanatic. The Acting-Speaker, Mr. E. o. Howard: The Minister himself has not objected to the use of the word. Hon. P. Eraser: He accepted it, knowing the quarter from whicfl it came. (Laughter ).

Mr. Poison, continuing, said the Minister had the power to over-ride the law itself. He had traduced members of the Opposition, saying they were saying things w T hich were not in the interests of the Dominion because they had dared to point to the danger of a depression. The Attorney-General, Hon. H. G. E. Mason, rose to a further point of order, contending Mr. Poison had no right to use the word “traduced.''

The Speaker, Hon. W. E. Barnard, ruled that “traduced' 7 was not an unparliamentary word. Mr. Poison said he would not have used the word if the Minister had not flung it across the floor in the form of an interjection that he (Mr. Poison) did not know 7 how to be honest.

The Speaker: Does the honourable member object to the Minister's expression? Will he raise a point of order? Mr, Poison did not raise a point of order, but merely contented himself with objecting to the Minister’s interjection.

Classification Urged Continuing' Ms speech., Mr. Poison said it was only the present boom times which enabled the farmers to pay me present heavy taxation. There should be a hardship clause introduced which would prevent the fanners being strip* ped of everything they possessed in the event of a depression. He urged the classification of land, which -would enable the land which could bear taxation to pay it and the -land which could not would be exempted. Some scandalous injustices had been perpetrate! under the present system of taxation. Mr. B, Boberts (Government —'TT airarapa) said they wanted a policy of expansion, not contraction. The present system of dairy produce marketing had resulted in cutting out speculation, which in one case in the past had been responsible for the loss of about £BO,OOO. Factories in the past had been sending their produce away without any reference to the requirements of the dairy markets. The present national policy made for a continuity of marketing.

Boom in Land Values The Minister of Lands, Hon. F. Langstone, referred to the boom in land values after the war consequent on the investment of huge sums in the settlement of discharged soldiers upon the land, and said that when the slump came much more damage could have been done but for the understanding and sympathetic administration of the Lands" Department. The total loss represented by ’ the writing down of land values was £6,820,000, and the amount did not include the losses which would result from the cases now under consideration. There was the closest co-operation betw r een the Lands Department and the Mortgage Corporation, and anything his department could do to safeguard the securities in interests of the Dominion would be done.

He proceeded to deal with the Government's difficulties in dealing with the butter box question, and said the provision of the present Saranac boxes meant a tremendous saving of timber and was an important factor in the conservation of the Dominion s white pine supplies. He did not know of any other timber which was such a wonderful container for butter as white pine.

When the House resumed at 7.80 the debate on the second reading of the Finance Bill was continued by Mr. S. G. Smith (Opp. —Taranaki) who contended that the provisions of the tenancy imposed on tenants of State houses should be much simpler than they were at present. There were a number of provisions in the Bill which the Minister might have made much clearer than he did. He asked the Minister to outline the provisions regarding the purchase of Picot Brothers, an assurance that he would do so being given by Mr. Nash. Mr. Smith continued by reminding the Minister that under the guaranteed price scheme the dairy farmers themselves were paying more for their butter than previously. Mr. J- Robertson (Govt. —Masterton) said if a proper analysis were made of the unemployment position it would be found that there rvas no more unemployment to-day than there had been in

1925-29, probably not so much. He considered the Opposition was placing too narrow an interpretation on the hardship clause to give relief from the graduated land tax. He congratulates the Minister on the success of the dairy produce marketing scheme and said the present Government had done more for the farmers than any other Government.

Et. Hon. J. G. Coates (Opp.— Kaipara) said the Minister of Finance was continuing his policy of confusing the issues so that the public to-day had no real indication of what the Government’s financial policy was. He classed as bad legislation the provision setting up a commissison containing the Commisioner of Taxes to adjudicate on cases of hardship under the graduated land tax. The commissison should have a 1 personnel which was quite impartial.

He contended, referring to the clauses in the Bill relating to the taxation of dividends of mining companies, that no law passed should be retrospective. If any company, such as the Waihi Gold Mining Company, which had been mentioned by Hon. Walter Nash the previous evening, had broken the law then the Courts should deal wfith the case. He expressed doubt whether dairy farmers, in view 7 of increasing costs, were any better off to-day than they were in 1925. If the Government wished to be consistent it would guarantee the farmer a minimum price for butterfat. He asked the Minister if the Dairy Industry Account for the year ended on July 31. If it ended on that date, Mr. Coates asked did the Minister take into account only the butter shipped up to that time or did a certain portion of it go into the next year. He thought the Minister could have told them what the deficit in the Dairy Account was.

The Minister of Education (Hon. P. Fraser) said Mr. Coates plainly had not understood the Government’s legislation regarding guaranteed prices, which was at least constructive. What had Mr. Coates offered the dairy farmers, he asked. He had offered them a minimum price the amount of which he had not mentioned and wished to abolish tl#e guaranteed price. ’ Mr. Coates: It is not a guaranteed price. It is a fixed price. Mr. Fraser continued that the Opposition was facing itself four-square against guaranteed prices. It did not say what its minimum price would amount to or who would get it. Perhaps it might be tenpence per pound, as had been suggested by the member for Stratford. The effort of the Labour Government, said Mr. Fraser, w r as to give the farmer stability and security. An Opposition interjection: Would you give the wool farmer stability, too? Mr. Fraser: If the wool farmer wishes stability let him come along to us and w 7 e will talk about it.

The most extraordinary part of Mr. Coates ’ speech, said Mr. Fraser, was his defence of trickery by the Waihi Goldmining Company in tax evasion. He had practically said it was wrong for the Government to try to track down taxation which had been evaded. He knew the right honourable gentleman did not himself believe in the ethics which he had advocated. They knew him over many years and knew him too well for that. He had practically said in effect that if they were tricky enough to get away from the law axd they could not be caught by it then good luck to them. Mr. Coates’ policy regarding dairying was weak and involved and was aimed at the overthrow of the guaranteed price and stability for farmers.

Mr. W. P. Endean (Opp.—Parnell) said the Minister of Finance hr/d accused him of lack of patriotism in making a statement for publication on his recent visit to Sydney. He outlined the statements which had been made and said they all had been true. He had always endeavoured to serve his country and had served it during the strike in Auckland when certain gentlemen on the other side of the House /ad been trying to prevent farmers getting their produce loaded. He was called to order by the Speaker, who ruled that he could not proceed along that line.

Mr. Endean continued that he had •always been a loyal citizen of the country and Empire and had always brought up his family co be loyal, also.

Mr. Coulter (Waikato —Government) said there was no doubt about it the farmers had benefited tremendously as a result of the guaranteed price. Never beiore had the average worrang farmer been in such an assured position and they would not thank the Opposition for interfering with the guaranteed price. Mr. Endean had said that h;s statements made in Sydney had been correct. One of the things he had said was that the various schemes instituted by the Labour Government would not be a success, but they had proved to be an amazing success. Was that correct? he asked. The farmers of New Zealand had nothing for which to thank the previous Government. Obviously their policy was wrong and it was left for the present Government to'correct the position created by its predecessors. That that position had been cormTeJ there could be no shadow of donut. He agreed with 7 :r. Forbes that something might be done for the New Zealand aviatrix, Miss Jean Batten, and thought perhaps some position might be offered her in the Dominion.

Mr. S. G. Holland (Christchurch North —Opposition) associ-ted Jumseii with the previous speaker that something might be done for Miss Batten. He asked if the Minister would consider making the provision for the hardship clause permanent. Mr. Nash: The laws for land and income tax to be consolidated next year. Mr. Holland: Probably that would be the best time to do it. He asked if the relief provisions would apply to the tax levied in 1935-6. . 1 vi Mr. Nash, replying, said the;/ won hi apply for the two years during which the tax was levied and would apply to 1935-6. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 10.30.