DEBATE ON THE BUDGET

Manawatu Times, Volume 63, Issue 183, 5 August 1938, Page 8

DEBATE ON THE BUDGET

Sustenance Frauds MINISTER OF LABOUR ON UNEMPLOYMENT Per Frees Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night. Continuing the debate on the Budget in the House to day Mr. J. G. Barclay said all the leaders of the dairy industry had endorsed the Government's dairy marketing policy. With regard to the compensated price scheme he said it seemed that this was dying because there were two clear definitions as to what it was. One was that the payment for it should be found out ot the revenue of the country, and the other was that it should be financed through decreased costs. He denied allegations that the local price of butter had been below the London parity with the exception of a few race occasions and stated that the Opposition if returned to power would prevent the broadcasting of proceedings in the House. Mr. S. G. Holland: Who said that? Mr. Barclay: My opponent at the coming election, Mr. A. J. Murdoch, said it. Ho stated it was a waste of time and money. “A Humanitarian Document.” Mr. A. F. Moncur stated that the Budget was the most humanitarian document ever brought down by any Minister of Finance. He also congratulated Mr. Nash on his overseas marketing organisation for dairy produce and the trade treaties which he had negotiated. Thero had been a great deal of talk, said Mr. Moncur, regarding the effects of falling oversea prices on New Zealand's internal economy. Many people though that our money came from overseas but such was not the case. It never had and

never would. Every country with a monetary system had to arrango its internal finance within its own border* The Government was working on a

somewhat unorthodox system. It was a truism to-day that countries that confined themselves to the gold standard had stood still while those that had de-

parted from orthodoxy had progressed The Reserve Bank of New Zealand, he said, had been a wonderful success.

Last year the net profit of the bank was over £1:15,000 all of which had been paid into the Consolidated Fund owned by the people. This year the net profit was over £195,000. Taking Over the Banks.

Mr. Moncur said he believed at some future time the Government would

have to take over control of the banking system in its entirety but that

would not be done without the consent of the people. Mr. Moncur said that the Government had not only balanced the Budget without borrowing overseas but had shown a surplus of ap-

proximately £1,600,000, including £854,000 placed to reserve, and had reduced the national indebtedness by £4,318,000. Mr. W. T. Anderton said the Opposition stood for capitalism which repre tented rent, interest and profit as against the Government's objective of human life and happiness. The present

Government, he added, had provided tor the maintenance and establishment of industries and the reduction of unemployment. He would challenge the

Opposition, he said, to prove that anywhere in the world better legislation had been placed on the Statute Book for farmers than that brougnt down by the present Labour Government.

Sustenance Frauds. Mr. 1L G. Dickie criticised the high company taxation and stated that it wa3 a barrier which was preventing overseas firms from starting subsidiary companies in New Zealand. He thought the Minister of Finance would agree with, him when he said we must keep up production if we were to prosper, but he also contended that New Zealand could not possibly hope to control oversea prices for our produce. Mr. Dickie said that frauds on the unemployment funds this year numbered 3257 compared with 1961 last year. That position, he said, was far from healthy. Mr. Dickie stated that no blame was attached to the Minister for increasing the number of unemployment fund frauds and all agreed that the Minister was doing his best to bring the offenders to book. lie said that if there were one tax which was unpopular to-day it was the unemployment tax. When it had first been levied by the previous Government the Minister of Justice had suggested it should be graduated and Mr. Dickie had agreed because he believed it would be fairer to tax a man c»u his actual resources. He believed that the tax was to be increased to a shilling in the pound shortly and the bulk of it would be absorbed by the Government's social security scheme, but over £IOO,OOO would still be required for unemployment. That did not seem to square with the Government's statements. Speaking of the removal of the sales tax and exchange, Mr. Dickie said it would be interesting if the Minister of Finance would tell them just what the exchange rate should be. In view of the present adverse trade balance and the diminution in London funds if the exchange rate were allowed to find its own level he would not be surprised if it were placed at 25 per cent. Mr. Dickie concluded that we were lacking in a land policy as far as this Government was concerned. Farmers and Costs. The Minister of Labour (Hon. H. T. Armstrong) said that the bulk of the farmers were not complaining of increased costs. It was a brand of politician who claimed to represent the fanners who were doing so. He had always found the farmers very reasonable employers, he said, and he went on to outline the method by which the wages of farm labourers had been fixed in relation to the guarantee! price. The agreements which had been reached with farmers relating to wages . had always been strictly kept. In fact if all other employers had adhered as strictly to their agreements as had the farmers there would not be any need for such a large staff in the Labour Department as there was to-day. He claimed that it was the substantial increase in the price being paid for farm |

produce that necessitated the increase in the purchasing power of the bulk oi the people to enable them to buy that farm produce. When it came to the increased price of commodities and increased costs the farmer was receiving by no means the worst of the deal. The Minister deprecated the unemployment fund frauds, stating that the reason for the increase was that more odd jobs were available to-day than during the slump period and this tempted people to break the conditions of their unemployment payments. He also stated that the Minister of Finance had been responsible for the payment of income tax by thousands of people who had avoided payment in the past. Personally he thought that unemployment fund frauds should be a crimina* offence. Reduction in Unemployment. The unemployment funds, said Mr. Armstrong, had naturally increased during the last few years as a result of the increase in the income of the people of the Dominion. For the year ended March 31, 1938, the unemployment tax amounted to £3,942,000, whereas in 1938 it totalled £5,124,000. The actual amount of tax had not been increased, be said, and those who were paying it still had 19s 4d left in the pound after paying the tax. Referring to the reduction in the number of unemployed, the Minister continued that work had been offered to every physically fit single and married man in the country and his attitude was that if the work offered were retused the men refusing it should not be eligiblo for sustenance payments, if they were physically fit to do so. The Minister went on to draw attention to the increases in both the unemployment and sustenanco payments to both Maori and pakeha under the present Government. Speaking of the present unemployment position, Mr. Armstrong said tho latest return showed that the number of unemployed fit men on July 22 was 2057 and the number of jobs awaiting them was 2182. It had been stated by the Opposition that every Australian State was dealing with the unemployment position better than the New Zealand Government was doing, but he would remind the House that there were more unemployed at present in Sydney than there had ever been in the history of New Zealand. There was no country in tho world, he added, where the unemployed were receiving better treatment than they were in this Dominion. National Propaganda Attacked r . Schramm said the Opposition speakers were going round the country saying that the Government was on the road to Socialism. We have been on the road to Socialism for many years,” he said. To-day there was a trend towards socialistic legislation in all advanced countries. Referring to the Pukeora Sanatorium incident (over which Hon. B. Semple made an attack in the House) he said there had been no contradiction of the remarks of the Minister of Public Works by the lady in question. She was a National Party organiser and the leader of the Opposition must take the responsibility for her utterances. The speaker thought the lady owed an apology to the Labour Party. Mr. Schramm went on to refer to a meeting in Taranaki addressed by a woman speaker who iu the course of er address said: “I take it we are all farmers' wives. I take it we are all Nationalists.” She went on to say that she did not like the Prime Minister because he was not sincere. Another statement she made was that if Labour got in again it would be just like Russia because women would be just goods and chattels and the men would do as they liked. She also said Labour members were not Christians as they tried to profess to be, as 25 per cent of them would not take the oath of the Bible, but for many years the right to make an affirmation instead of the oath had been recognised in New Zealand. The people of New Zealand were entitled to be warned that paid or~anisers were going round putting over that sort of propaganda. The case he mentioned was not an isolated one. It had been going on from one end of the country to the other. It started in a circular to National candidates telling them to brand Labour members as fools and hypocrites. He appealed to the leader of the Opposition to put a stop to it in the interests of the people of this country. Breaking From Orthodoxy. Mr. J. A. Lee (Under secretary of Housing) claimed that the Budget evealed the Government's intention to break away from orthodoxy—tho orthodoxy that the only purpose of produc tion was the production of profit. The whole intention of the Budget was that human society produced for one purpose and that was to enable people to enjoy the highest standard of living. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 10.30.