FATE OF AMENDMENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20921, 10 July 1931, Page 13

FATE OF AMENDMENTS.

LABOUR NOT SUCCESSFUL.

TAX ON LOWER INCOMES.

EXEMPTION PROPOSALS LOST.

[by telegraph.—press association.] WELLINGTON, Thursday.

Urgency was again accorded the passing of tho Unemployment Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives today and the House went into Committee to deal with the individual clauses of the bill.

Mr. M. J. Savago (Labour —Auckland West) moved an amendment to clause 4 that tho annual flat rate of 20s a year should be deleted. This was supported by several Labour members on the ground that a flat tax was an unjust form of taxation.

The amendment was defeated by 43 votes to 23, Messrs. G. C. Black (Independent—Motueka), H. M. Rushworth (Country—Bay of Islands), G. R. Sykes (Reform —Masterton) and J. A. Young (Reform —Hamilton) voting with Labour in favour of the amendment.

•Mr F. Langstone (Labour —Waimarino) moved an amendment providing for a graduated levy starting from £1 a year on incomes of £4 a week to threepence in the pound where incomes exceeded £6 a week. Loss of £400,000. The Hon. S. G. Smith, Minister of Labour, said if the amendment were carried. it would mean the loss of £400,000. The amendment was lost by 46 votes to 20.

Mr. E. J. Howard (Labour—Christchurch South) moved that the charge of threepence in the pound should not apply to any person receiving £l5O or under per annum, and that the charge should not reduce any income below £l5O. In doing so Mr. Howard said the member for Thames would have difficulty in wriggling out of supporting the amendment. Mr. A. M. Samuelreplying, said he would not do the working people an injustice by voting for the amendment. Mr. P. Fraser (Labour —Wellington Central) 1 then rose and said the member for Thames would wriggle out of anything.

The Chairman: Order, order! The Hon. A. J. Stallworthy, Minister of Health, said he could not understand how any person receiving £3 a week could object to contributing ninepence toward the sustenance of 50,000 men who were out of work.

Mr. Fraser suggested that married people receiving less than £l5O a year should be exempted from the tax. even if it was levied on single wage-earners. Mr. J. S. Fletcher (Independent—Grey Lynn) also appealed to the Government to protect the married man who was receiving £3 a week. The amendment was lost by 48 votes to 22. Succession ol Defeats. Amendments providing for the exemption of those in receipt of incomes not exceeding £lO4 and £52 a year were also defeated. The next amendments referred to the exemption of married people in receipt of incomes not exceeding £l5O and £lO4 a year and these were defeated. Mr. J. McCombs (Labour —Lyttelton) moved that the minimum income on which the tax should be levied for married people should be £52 a year. In answer to a question by the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Smith stated there was a hardship clause exempting people from payment of the tax. The Prime Minister stated if the people mentioned in the amendment were only getting £1 a week they would merely have to pay threepence a week levy, and they comprised the class which would derive the greatest benefit as a result of the tax. Mr. H. E. Holland, Leader of the Labour Party, said the Prime Minister was taking up an amazing attitude. Would people getting £1 a week get another £1 a week benefit from the sum raised by the tax. The amendment was lost by 35 votes to 28. Proposal Ruled Out. An amendment by Mr. McCombs providing for a levy of threepence in the pound on undistributed company profits was disallowed by the Chairman on the ground that it would tend to increase taxation and would therefore have to be introduced by the Governor-General's Message. _ After a division on clause 10, clauses were put through rapidly on the voices until clause 25 was reached, when an amendment was moved by Mr. Fraser. This was to the effect that instead of three members of the board being appointed by the Government, two members .should be elected by the individual members of registered organisations of employers and two by the individual members of registered organisations of employees. The amendment was defeated by 44 to 20. ' Clause 25 was then passed and 26 was put through on the voices. The House was considering the final clauses of the bill at a late hour.