More Expenditure In War Expenses Account

Northern Advocate, 22 August 1945, Page 2

More Expenditure In War Expenses Account

(Special.) WELLINGTON, This Day. “No other country can show healthier finances after six years of war than those which have been revealed in New Zealand’s Budget," said the Minister for Supply (lion. D. G. Sullivan), who followed Mr Holland ift the Budget debate last night. The Minister said that the whole argument put forward by Mr Holland bad been for a reduction in taxation, but the Leader of the Opposition knew that nearly every item of additional expenditure in the total of £34,000.000 of the estimated increased expenditure in the War Expenses Account would necessarily go into the pockets of servicemen. These items included £18.000,000 for the payment of gratuities and £5,000,000 for deferred pay. while the amount for rehabilitation and pay and allowances also had been increased. The Leader of the Opposition had devoted scarcely a minute to these important matters, and had failed to indicate which of these items he would like eliminated from the Bridget provision.

Complete “Clean Up.”

“How Jong will this expenditure be spread over?" interjected Mr G. H. Macldey (Opposition—Masterton). The Minister said that the revised estimates of war expenditure did not extend to the end of the financial year only. They represented a complete “clean-up" of war expenditure as far as it was reasonably possible to see it at the present time. “Then why tax for it all in this financial year.” asked Mr W. S. Goosman (Opposition —Waikato). “Because most of it will fall within this financial year, although there will be substantial amounts that will extend beyond the end of this financial year by two or three months.” said the Minister. “Does that apply to gratuities?” asked Mr Macklev. Mr. Sullivan said that the Opposition was in a,cleft stick. The Government had made provision for gratuities, deferred pay, rehabilitation and other as* ristanc' to men who were to be demobilised. The cost of all that added up to a certain rum and the Leader of the Opposition objected to that In spite of Ihe Opposition's pretests the Government would go on with its programme, and would honour in its entirety its pledges to the returning men. Discussing controls. Mr. Sullivan said they would' be abolished when they were no‘longer needed. There was no intention of carrying wartime controls into peacetime. However, the Opposition surely did not advocate the abolition of price e’cntrol and stabilisation at the present, time. If those particular controls were abolished there would be an immediate clamour for their restitution. The Sales Tax Mr. Sullivan said that the sales tax had been questioned, but it was the Opposition that had first put it on food and the Government had taken it off. So far us the Government was concerned the sales tax had been used for war purposes only, anti of the £14.500.000 collected by sales tax, £9,500,000 had been used for war purposes,* so that it. was purely a war tax. The Government had done a magnificent job in maintaining the country’s economy on a satisfactory basis, said Mr. Sullivan. The cost of the war up to the end of the last financial year was £507,01)0.000. but the amount owing was only £239.000.000. or less than half the expenditure.

deferring to the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, which had been under his control. Mr. Sullivan said that all the resource.? of the department, including those developed during the war, would he made available to industry during the days of peace. Speaking of the immediate future, the Minister said that tPod rationing would have to be continued until the food situation in Britain and Europe had improved, and it would, also be necessary to maintain tyre and rubber control until the rubber supply became more plentiful.

The House rose at 10.30 p in., when tin debate was adjourned until tonight.