DEBATE IN COMMITTEE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19931, 27 April 1928, Page 11

DEBATE IN COMMITTEE.

PROPOSALS CRITICISED. VIEWS OF PARTY LEADERS. SARCASM OF LLOYD GEORGE. Australian Press Association —United Service (Received April 26. 9.37 p.ru.) LONDON, April 25. When the House of Commons went into committee on the Budget to-day, the former Labour Chancellor of the . Exchequer, Mr. Philip Snowden, said an analysis of the Estimates was disconceiting." Ho feared Mr. Churchill was repeating last year's mistake of relying on cheaper money, although there was every reason to anticipate a rise in the bank rate.

Mr. Churchill was insulting the intelligence of members when he claimed that he was not exceeding the Labour Government's expenditure. The cost of the civil and the fighting services for 1924-25 was £352,000,000, and for last year £359,000,000. The average for thd past three years had been £367,000.000. The total expenditure for 1924-25 was £730,000.000, and for last year £761.500,000.

In the past three years Mr. Churchill had never paid the statutory sum to the Sinking Fund. Since the Labour Government had been in office the 3Jf per cent, conversion loan had dropped from £BO 7s 6d to £77 10s, and Consols from £59 to £56 10s. Th&,t was the truest reflection of the national credit.

Regarding the petrol tax, Mr. Snowden said there was already proof that the consumer was paying more than tho Exchequer received. It was a violation of all sound financial principles for Mr. Churchill to levy taxation this year which would not be spent in the present financial year. During wartime the 6d per gallon tax on petrol was abandoned, owing to the loopholes for evasion. These loopholes were still not closed. A nonsensical part of tho Budget was the suggestion that the in tho lb. reduction in the sugar duty would go to the consumer. It was most disappointing that the rating relief was not to begin until October, 1929. Sir Alfred Mond, Conservative member for Carmarthen, said Mr. Snowden showed lamentable ignorance when he suggested that a fall in tho price of Consols meant that the national credit was diminishing. British national credit was good for thousands of millions of pounds, as the war had shown. The Budget would do something for industry, if tho Government had the courage to use its power and influence to promote not merely a reduction of its burdens, but to get industries together, and to rationalise their outlook. Then Britain would have a brighter industrial future. This was one of the most far-reaching and statesmanlike Budgets for many years.

Mr. Lloyd George said the proposed rating scheme was thoroughly vicious. It would only give relief to some highly rated areas at the expense of others. It was not merely robbing Peter to pay Paul, but was robbing the whole twelve Apostles. It would be more preferable to deal temporarily with the most necessitous cases, and take time to recast the whole rating system on a proper basis, or to place on the shoulders of the taxpayers the problem of the able-bodied poor. The rates subsidy to agriculture was a direct contribution to the landowners. Mr. Churchill had spoken of leaving sterile plains and entering promised lands, but ho was taking there only the Federation of British Industries, the mineowners and landowners, while the majority of the people were left on the arid side of Jordan. The President of the Board of Trade, Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister, said the rating relief would give a cumulative stimulus to all industries at the expense of none.