THE FINANCIAL DEBATE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXV, Issue 227, 24 August 1945, Page 3

THE FINANCIAL DEBATE

FAMILY ALLOWANCES

LABOUR MEMBER’S PLEA. HIGH TAXATION CRITICISED. (Press Assn.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 23 Resuming the .Budget debate in the House of Representatives today, Air C. At. Williams (Rub., Kaiapoi) said that L\lr Uroadloot had claimed that the

Government, by exporting timber to Australia, bad reduced the number of houses which could be built in New Zealand, uhe tact was, said Mr Williams, that owing to the war New Zealand s supply position tor hardwoods for railway sleepers, electric reticulation, and lor many industries had become critical. Australia was the chief source of supply, and by what was vir-

tually a barter agreement Australia undertook to suppiy New Zealand's essential needs in return for supplies of softwoods from New Zealand. Mr Williams urged tlie adoption of a universal iamily allowance. As long as the present system continued, he said, there would be anomalies. No matter

to what point tlie present system went it would get to the stage wnere a man would he discouraged from earning more because it would interfere with his tamily benefit. The present position penalised those who were earning bebetweon £4OO and £SOO a year, ana they were mostly wage-earners. All the benelit they received was in the income tax allowance, and that to a man on £4OO meant 3s (id a week and to a man _on £SOO 4s a week. A man on £2500 received exemption amounting to 10s a week, while a man who earned £4OOO received a benefit equal to 15s a week. The Government was being generous at the wrong end. A universal family allowance would mean a great deal of expenditure, but it would be merely a redistribution of the national income and should be adopted to replace all income tax exemptions. Mr C. -VI. Bowden (Nat., Wellington

West) said the Minister of finance obviously wanted to finish the present financial year with the largest possible surplus so that lie could make the biggest possible reduction in taxation next year. What the people wanted was a reduction in taxation this year so that business could be rehabilitated. Jhe only real wealth was the production oi goods, hut there was no indication in the Budget as to how that production was to be increased. There was need lor a strong and definite policy regarding fanning production and tncre was also need for a policy for industry. Industry was being hampered by taxation and lack of manpower, while the Government was clinging to its policy of control and was holding enormous staffs to carry out that policy. Ah' Bowden said lie wanted to make it clear that he was not including rationing in his comments on controls, liecause when goods were. >n short sup-

ply rationing was necessary and just. 'I lie Budget showed no real plan lor reliahilitation. The Minister of Rehabilitation should be Ircod from his other portfolios and allowed to devote his whole time to the men and women

Peine discharged from the I'orecs, with power to co-ordinate, the resources of other departments necessary to complete the rehabilitation plan. He •should a'lso have charge ol the financial aspect of rehabilitation because, while

the State Advances Corporation was a most efficient organisation, it did not possess the elasticity necessary to a successful rehabilitation scheme. THli WHALING INDUSTRY. . Mr W. M. Denham (Lab., Invercargill) said New Zealand was losing a good deal by not developing ici whaling industry in this country. The average yield of the blue whale was 18 tons, "of the tin whale nine tons, and of the humpback seven tons. Sperm oil for 'lubricating purposes and liver

oils containing vitamin A were among the many valuable products derived from whales. Now Zealand siiuuid consider this matter seriously and quickly.

Air C. Carr (Lab., Timaru) : Could they get a more humane way of dealing wilji whales f Mr Denham said in 1937-38 4(1,QU0 whales were taken in Antarctica, yielding 3,000,000 barrels of oil. The Norwegians took 15,000. 3he industry employed 11,000 men in the Antarctic area. In tiie recent season about 150 wlmles were taken in Tory Channel, 'hut the operators there lacked the equipment necessary to take full value from the whales they captured. The meat was thrown overboard, whereas Britain’s new food Minister had it—cent!v announced that it was hoped to restore the fats ration later in this year and whale steak was worth a shil-

ling per pound in Britain. It was a tender, edible meat with a taste like veal. The British Government was giving its support to the resuscitation of the whaling industry, which before the war was worth £50,000,000 a year. New

Zealand should have at least one factory ship, which would enable us to take a share in the industry and make I'uil use ol the whales which at a certain season frequented New Zealand waters, following a well-defined course. By the new quick-freezing process it would be possible to process whale meat «o that it would be ready for handling by retail butchers. . ] Then there were large quantities ol , eels in New Zealand streams, and they provided valuable food. Between 5000 and 10,000 tons could _be trapped annually without interfering with the source of supply. There was room lor the establishment of an industry there. Air G. H. Maeldey (Nat., Masterton): I suggest we try it out in our own dining-room. Air Denham said eels were a valuable food and in good supply. Air J. D. A eland (Nat., Temuka): Do you like eels? Mr Denham: I do. I have tried them once or twice. He added that 5000 tons of cels had a potential oil content, of 800 tons, worth £312,000, plus 2000 tons of fertiliser, worth £IO,OOO. Another asset in New Zealand waters was the seals around the coast. It was possible that there were 10,000 seals in the coastal waters, and .if they consumed only 201 h of fish a day they were taking 200,0001 b of fish daily from our supplies. They had been protected lor many years, and he considered it was time in the interests of our fisheries alone that they be utilised. Their skins and oil both were valuable and their flesh and bones could be converted into valuable fertiliser.

“THE WORST FRIEND.” Mr D. C. Kidd (Nat., Waitaki) said the Labour Government lmd claimed that it would help the small farmers, but it had proved the worst friend the small farmer had ever had. There had been more land aggregation under Labour than ever before, and that was cue of the problems the Minister of Lands would have to grapple with today. In the rural districts of the South Island there were empty houses everywhere. The Minister for Agriculture (Mr Roberts): Not up our way. Mr T. H. McCombs (Lab., Lyttelton): There are plenty down our way. Air Kidd said that people had gone off farms into the towns because of the Government’s policy of higher wages and shorter hours. If primary production was the key to the country’s prosperity that drift had not only

to be stopped, it would have to be reversed, or the - time would come when we wou.d not be able to grow enough to feed our own population. Farmers could not get good labourers because of Labour's policy, which taxed the farmer so that he could not pay them and they were offered better conditions in the towns. Farmers’ sons were leav-

ing the land, hut they should be encouraged to go on their own farms. They should be provided with cheap

•money and all the amenities of the i city at city prices. Labour had proj niised to put hydro-electric, power into every home in the country, but there ! were thousands of farmers’ homes still I without electricity and power. Houses i were set up and the power was taken jto the cities' away from tiie farms i around where it was produced. When

the National Party became the Government they would give the farmers electric power and would supply them with vlectrical equipment free of sales tax and duty. Mr R. M. MacFarlane (Lab., Christchurch South) said the Leader of the Opposition had complained that the mufti allowance of £25 was inadequate, but hud failed to mention that after the lust war

the allowance was only £5. The main concern of the Government this year was to see that the obligations to returning servicemen were met. The fact that we had won the war did not mean that there would not be heavy financial responsibilities during the next iinancial year. It was (lie job of any Government in office at present to see that necessary financial sacrifices were made to enable the obligations to the men who had fought overseas to be met fully. The Opposition in talking about taxation overlooked the fact that a huge amount of money was tied up in New Zealand today. Many people who were clamouring for a reduction in taxation had plenty of money at their disposal. Recently a building had been purchased in Christchurch for the National Club at a cost of £15.000 and it was estimated that £SOOO to £6OOO would have to be spent on it. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Holland) : We must have somewhere to house

our increasing membership. Mr MacFarlane said lie did not mind the Opposition doing that, but it was inconsistent for them to clamour for a reduction in taxation in order to provide money for the expansion of industry when many of their supporters had sufficient money available to pay for such buildings and to maintain numerous National Shirty organisers. Mr MacFarlane advocated the remission of fines impo ed on soldiers for minor offences when the record of such soldiers was otherwise good. Fines had been remitted alter the last war, he said, and he could see no reason why the same should not apply to the men who bad

served so well this time. Mr T. L. MacDonald (Nut., Mataura): Do you know why it was done after tiie | last war ? i Mr MacFarlane: No, hut perhaps we could find the reason. j Mr MacDonald: It was because there were irregularities in their infliction. Mr MacFarlane said if that, was the case lie hoped the Minister of Defence would be able to find some irregularities j this time also. > The Minister of Agriculture (Mrf

Roberts) said the Opposition members had attacked bis department because the price' of wheat was only 6s 6d a bushel. The wheatgrowers had agreed to 6s 6d a bushel for 200 000 acres. Then the (Minister hail offered a bonus rising to 7s Id a bushel for 250.000 acres and that acreage had been dropped to 235 000. Farmers had experienced a very difficult season nnd sowings had been interfered with. | but he could not understand the logic of j arguing that the price offered for the maximum acreage should now be regarded as the minimum for all wheat grown. | The House adjourned at 10.30 p.m.