Budget Debate Continued

Northern Advocate, 25 July 1938, Page 6

Budget Debate Continued

The Budget debate was continued when the House resumed at 2.30 p.m. on Friday by Mr P. Neilson (Government—Dunedin Central), who said one heard references to the contention that some of the railway lines which the Government was completing today were uneconomic, and would not pay when finished. Completed Railway Lines He would like to state, however, that these lines, when completed, would give some return, on the money which had been expended upon them, and this was infinitely better and more sensible than leaving them halffinished products, as the previous Government had done. The Government, he said, had also been accused of increasing taxation, but he pointed out that in 1935 the taxation percentage of the national revenue was 24 per cent., whereas under the present Government the rate was only 22 per cent. Dairy Industries Account Mr. H. M. Rushworth (Independent— Bay of Islands), referring to the Budget statement that the financial operations of the Dairy Industry Account for the export season ended July 31, 1937. showed a deficit of £272,109, said that the statement concluded with the following sentence: “In terms of the undertaking given to the dairy industry the deficit is the responsibility of the Government.” He wanted to know why the Government had not said “was.” and not “is,” the Government’s responsibility. He had in mind the clause in the Primary Products Marketing Amendment Act which provided that interest should be paid on overdraft, and the longer the overdraft was carried the more would be the interest that had to be met. and the greater would become the charge against the people of the Dominion. The Budget sentence he had quoted loft one with the impression that the overdraft was still being carried on. and that it might moan a permanent charge. He would like a statement from the Minister assuring the House that the deficit had been discharged. and that it “was” the responsibility of the Government, not “is" the responsibility. Mr. Rushworth added that the Budget got out that the extra payment for the season, at £815,349, to dairy farmers, left a credit balance cut of the total surplus of £113,217. but the Minister did not stale what was to be done with the balance. Did he mean to distribute it to the industry in terms of the undertaking given, or did ho proposes to use it as a set-off against last year’s deficit? It was left to conjecture what the Minister intended One would be grateful to knew what was intended by the Government. Mr. J. G. Barclay (Government — Marsden): The Minister told you at New Plymouth. Mr. Rushworth said that the information should be given to the House officially. Continuing, Mr. Rushworth entered a plea for the backblocks dairy farmer, who. he said, was having a tragically hard struggle. With regard to taxation he suggested the whole incidence of taxation should be thoroughly investigated. not only in its immediate effects, but also its consequential effects. Sir A. Ransom Twits P.M. Sir Alfred Ransom described the speech of the Prime Minister as one of the poorest he had made. It was evident that the Prime Minister was relying entirely on the Minister of Finance to deliver the goods, and he was not prepared to make a speech worthy of the occasion. Sir A. Ransom said that prior to the last election the Prime Minister had been very emphatic that he was going (o remove the sales tax and exchange rate. Mr Savage: I never made any such statement. Sir A. Ransom: What, not in the Wellington town hall? Was the Prime Minister misreported then” Mr. Savage: No. Sir A. Ransom: The report of the meeting says that the statement was made. Mr. Savage; The statement was not made, and I defy you to produce it.

Sir A. Ransom continued that it was the first time ho had heard the Prime Minister deny he made the statement. Taxation Burden on Workers. Sir Alfred Ransom (Oppsn., Paihatua) said that a large portion of the increased taxation was due to the altered incidence of taxation. The bulk of taxation revenue came from the pockets of the workers, and only an infinitesimal portion from the wealthy classes, which the Government said it was taxing so heavily. He asked if the Prime Minister could point to a single country in the world that had made such progress as this country, or where the standard of living was so high*.’ Yet the Prime Minister had stated that the Government could not undo in three years the mistakes of the past 70 years. If the Opposition were returned at the next election it would take them 10 years to undo the bad work done in three years by the Labour Government. The Government, he contended, lacked the courage to reduce taxation. The Speaker: Order! Order! The Hon. Gentleman must withdraw that remark. Sir A. Ransom: I withdraw it, sir, but I do not know what word to use to replace it. (Laughter.)