FARMERS AND IAXATION PROPOSALS

Manawatu Times, Volume LV, Issue 7294, 2 August 1930, Page 8

FARMERS AND IAXATION PROPOSALS

'Resolutions Passed BY FEILDING MEETING A special meeting of the Feilding executive of the Farmers 'Union was held yesterday afternoon to consider the Government’s taxation, proposals. Mr W. L. Grice presided and . there were also present Messrs A. Campbell, G. Eliott, J. B. Bradley, D. L. Younger, G. Watt, J. H. Mason, Stanley, 0. Lucas and K. Carmen. The chairman stated that he had called the meeting at the request of Dominion headquarters in order that the Government’s taxation proposals might bo considered. His idea was that tho existing state of . affairs had been reached through many, years of continual excessive borrowing, more especially in the last few years. As far as he could gather the country’s interest bill had increased during the past two years by about one and aquarter millions anil before an improvement in the economic position could be expected, the most rigid economy would require to be practised in both private and public expenditure. The position in New Zealand was not a peculiar one, as practically tho whole world had been heading the same way, largely no doubt, through the years of war waste. It was high time New Zealand put its house in order. Apart from party politics lie felt tho Prime Minister deserved credit for having made the position clear. At present there was no lack of destructive criticism and if the farming community could render any assistance by constructive criticism, to the present or any future Government, during the time it will take to rectify the position, it would be doing better service than by joining in the general chorus. The problem to be faced included the loss on the railways and unemployment. • He realised the seriousness of the loss on tho. railways. As to unemployment he felt it. was largely due to the fact that a big percentage of tho people were developing into a “spoonfed dependent crowd.’’ One had only to take a casual glance at the average gang working on relief jobs and compare them with the average gang of 20 or 30 years ago, or even with a good honest worker of to-day, to realise the seriousness, of the position. And yet tho present policy is to pay award rates, whatever a man may be earning. Dealing with the provision of relief works Mr Grice went on to say that a man with any grit in him, married or single, would, go where he could get a job. Extra footpaths may be all right, but it was much more desirable that outback settlers have a road to save them having to carry their “tucker” on pack horse or on their own backs. Concluding his remarks, Mr Grice stressed the need for economy and felt that if the proposals advanced by Mr W. J. Poison, M.P.', .at the last interprovincial conference in Wanganui were carried, the farmor, and tho country generally, would not be far astray. Tho meeting considered the proposals from the point of view of their effect on the farmer and the speakers claimed that the petrol tax would not result in the farmer getting any relief from local rates. Mr Mason believed a great deal of the burden of new taxation was due to tho public service “army” which was altogether greater than the needs of the country. Mr Eliott claimed that the allocation of’public money for public , works was now subject to Ministerial control. It appeared to him that the cuttriw.- out of the local bodies from their, rigfit to obtain direct subsidies and the elimination of subsidies to Hospital Boards, would mean additional taxation for the farmer. He protested against tho Government’s action in stopping the payment of a quarter of a million from the Consolidated Fund to the Main Highways Board. The position could, ne understood if the additional taxation was being levied to enable to be made in other directions, but this was not the case. Actually, if the proposals went through, the present Government would bo responsible for increasing the taxation of the country by a matter of four millions, in spite of tho claim that.a saving in expenditure of over one million was being made, the speaker could only lind one real economy and that was of £300,000. He agreed that, the public service could be reduced and also claimed that tho railways icquired ovcrnauling and certainly tho stopping of any' further ex-,

pendituro on new lines. Ho criticised tho Government’s action in subsidising the Union Company to the extent of £36,000 a year for a passenger boat between Australia and the South Island and in spite of this subsidy the Union Company,made a loss of £IOOO on this service.! This proved that tho service was unnecessary. Mr Campbell, who had spoken on various' aspects of the taxation proposals.earlier in the meeting, then moved: “Thiit no further taxation be levied on the farming community until there has been a close investigation and substantial reductions made, in Government and Departmental administration costs;' and the building of railways should be stopped until investigation had justified tho expenditure. ” The motion was seconded by Mr Younger and carried. Discussing the Unemployment Bill Mr Eliott condemned the sustenance allowance, which he —as “the dole.” It struck a blow at initiative and individuality and reduced the people to a state of dependency. Tho “dole” had proved a curse in England and would do the same in New Zealand. Mr Mason was of the opinion that the proposals would rob th. 6 people of their manhood and their independence. Mr Campbell felt that unemployment was only a passing phase, although he did not like the proposal regarding a sustenance allowance. The following resolution was then carried on the motion of Messrs Bradley and Mason: — “That in the opinion of this meeting tho system of paying of full rates of pay on relief work is unsound , and tends to increase the numbers of unemployed workers.” , A further resolution was then moved by Mr Eliott and this was seconded by Mr Mason and carried. The resolution was as follows: “That this meeting protests against the proposal in the Unemployment Bill providing for a sustenance allowance which is nothing more nor less than a dole and the payment of something for nothing is detrimental to the wellbeing of the whole community.”