Budget Debate

Northern Advocate, 22 July 1938, Page 9

Budget Debate

(Continued from Page (in The Budget debate was resumed by IMr D. Barnes (Government —Wai- ! taki) when the House reassembled this morning. Mr Barnes stated that the Labour policy of redistributing the national income had increased the standard of life. Costs had increased, but low costs were useless if they were secured by reducing the income of individuals to a point where they could not buy. It was a delusion to think that reduction in prices meant prosperity. Costs were low during the depression, and there were bankruptcies and ruin. With a return, to prosperity, prices rose, but people had money to buy. The effect of reducing spending power had. been shown by the policy during the depression. when wage reductions caused a decline in production, declining prices and a rapid increase in the number of unemployed. The cost of living should not be confused with the standard of life, and Labour’s policy of redistributing the national income would lead to a better standard of life and improved public health. That policy had already brought increased prosperity, but some people were continually asking for reduced taxation. Evidently they did not realise that money redistributed through taxation was increasing the general standard of life, increasing employment and improving conditions generally. Mr Hardest On Defence. Mr J. Hargest (Opposition—Awarua) stated that there was no country in the world which could prosper under high taxation, and if the Government wont on the way it was going it would find that the people soon would not be able to pay the taxation imposed upon them. He drew attention to the fact that it was the previous Government which had reduced interest charges, despite the Government’s claims to the contrary, and stated that increased prices of commodities required by farmers were having a disastrous effect upon that section of the . community. He also chai’ged the Government with having broken its pledge to remove the sales tax. When the sales tax was put on the Statute Book he stated that members who placed it there knew they were committing political suicide, but they had passed the legislation nevertheless in the of the country. Dealing with matters of defence, Mr Hargest said the Minister of Defence claimed that a force of 9000 was sufficient for the needs of the Dominion. Personally, said Mr Hargest, he had seen a force of 9000 men in action, and he could say from practical experience that it was insufficient to defend the city of Wellington. A force of double that number would be required, In the front line, with 9000 men in reserve and several additional forces of 9000 men nearby. As far as the Air Force was concerned, he stated that he was amazed to see the enormous increase in the pay of officers and men of this branch of the service, compared with those of their colleagues in the land forces. The Air Force was receiving preference at the expense of men who did loot-slogging. The Minister of Defence, the Hon. F. Jones: You are being of assistance to the territorial forces.

Mr Hargest: I know the Minister has done a lot for the defence forces, I know that members of his Government are opposed to expenditure on defence, and the fact that the Minister has been .able to secure a defence vote of £2.000.000 says quite a lot for him personally. Mr Hargest criticised the Government’s expenditure on Public Works, and stated that he- resented the introduction of questions of religion into politics in order to return a political party into power. lyir P. Neilson (Government — Dunedin Central) congratulated the Minister of Finance on the Budget and stated that the Leader of the Opposition had not put up one constructive argument in his criticism of it. Continuing, Mr Neilson said that the Opposition was endeavouring to create the impression that the Dominion was on the verge of ruin, but he quoted returns which demonstrated the prosperity of the country during the past three years. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 1 p.m.