DEBATE ON THE BUDGET

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20333, 14 August 1929, Page 13

DEBATE ON THE BUDGET

PLACING THE UNEMPLOYED,

EFFORTS OF GOVERNMENT. INQUIRY BY COMMITTEE. [B* TELEGRAPH.—- PKES-5 ASSOCIATION. ] ■\YEI>LI2>GTO:<, Tuesday. Tho debate on tho Budget was continued in tlic House to-day. The Minister of Public Works, the Hon. E. A. Hansom, said it. was not desirables that large sums should continue io bo expended on relief works. Tho Government was making every possible endeavour to piaco men 0:1 more productive works than they had been engaged on during the prut 12 mouths. A special committee had been set up to inquire into tho causes of unemployment. Tho Government had decided to consider the recommendations of the committee as they were brought forward and to put them into operation immediately if they were acceptable. One of ihe first acts of tho present administration had been to raise the standard rates of pay to relief workers, and the opinion had been expressed that many would give up positions to tako reliet work. The Government had got over the difficulty by employing men on the cooperative system, and the result was that tho work being done at the present time was costing the country less than it did under the lower rates of pay. Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Labour—Avon) said tho Prime Minister was justified in seeking additional revenue, but ho did not agree with somo of the methods employed. He thought it was wrong to increase the primage duty. It had been stated that the cost per head would be oniy three shillings. This, added to the Original tax, would make six shillings, and over period of a full year (the amount estimated was for only six months) it would amount to twelve shillings. Ihe primace duty would, thereiore, cost a working man's family ol live a total ci £3 a Year.

Mr. A. Hamilton {llciorm —Wallace) said it had been stated the Government was not going to embark on 3 programme of reckless expenditure, but the expenditure for the first quarter of the present year had shown an advance of £600,000. He was inclined to think the South Inland railway extension might prove an extravagant undertaking. The Government had claimed it had a mandate to carry out this work. How could a party that had obtained only 50 per cent, of the votes throughout the Dominion claim that it had a mandate ? Mr. Hamilton said the Budget indicated a policy of borrow, tax

and spend. Mr. IL 31. Rath worth (Country—Bay of Islands) protested against, raising the cost of living by increasing tho primago duty. lie agreed with certain aspect:* of the increase in the land fas. It was desirable that certain kinds of estates should he broken up. but the proposals might involve ton;e hardship, ft was not pleasant tor a man to pay a tax on h:r> debts, which seemed a possible outcome of the proposals relating to jßoitgagc exemption. Mr. J. S. Fletcher (Government —(Jrry Lynn j said he wished to ask the Hon. W. Downic Stewart some questions. Was he negotiating at the end of his term of office for a loan of £5.000.000 ? Was ho coins to take the money at a higher <>r a lower rate of interest than it was eventually borrowed at by the Prime Minister? The Reform Government had estimated over £7,000.000 for public works. How was it. goinc to carry on these works with a Joan of £5,000.000 ? Hie debate was adjourned until tomoiTow.

MENTION OF THE KJNfJ. A MEMBER'S RIGHTS. INCIDENT IN THE HOUSE. [by TELEGRAPH. —SPECIAL KErOETET..] WELLINGTON. Tuesday. How far a member may introduce the name of the Kin? into a Parliamentary discussion formed tlio subject of au interest nig passage in the House of Representative! this afternoon, when Mr. F. Langstone (Labour —Waimarino) was replying to comments made on his speech in introducing the Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill. Claiming that the bank was not paving nearly the amount of taxation it should, Mr- Langstone said that of the dividends one-seventh went to His Majesty the King and sis-sevenths to the ordinary shareholders. although the Government had £2,240.000 worth of shares in the bank. "One-seventh to the King and sis-sevenths to themselves," mused Mr. Langstune. "How they love the King." The Speaker: Order! The honourable member is net in order in referring to the King. Mr. Langstone: It is in the Act. The Speaker: There is nothing in the Act about love for the King, though. (Laughter.) It seems to me the honourable member is now introducing matter that should have been introduced on the original motion.