PARLIAMENT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18687, 17 October 1922, Page 5

PARLIAMENT.

YESTERDAY’S PROCEEDINGS (Abridged from Press Association telegrams) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WELLINGTON, October 16. The House met at 7,30 p.m. CHRISTCHURCH EXHIBITION. Replying to Mr T. M. Wiltord, Mr MASSEY said that no application had yet been made for financial assistance towards the industrial exhibition shortly to be held in Christchurch, but his sympathies were entirely with this and similar exhibitions, and if he could assist it in any way he would bo pleased to do so, NAURU PHOSPHATES. Replying to Mr G. W. Forbes, the Hon. W. NOSWORTHY said the first shipment of Nauru phosphates subject to the reduced price had only just arrived in Auckland, and had not yet been placed on the market. That would account for the fact that the fanners were still being asked to pay the old price. ATLANTIC SALMON. In reply to Mr W. S. Glenn, the Hon. G. J. ANDERSON said an effort would be made next spawning season to stock rivers on the west coast of the North Island with Atlantic salmon. RECIPROCAL TARIFF. Replying to Mr D. Jones, the Hon. W. DOWNIE STEWART said the matter of the agreement between New Zealand and Australia in reference to oats was in abeyance for the present. Australia’s offer was not, sufficiently attractive, and ho felt compelled to decline it. 'The matter might be reopened next year. THE RAILWAYS. An amendment of the Government Railways Act was brought down by GovernorGeneral’s Message. The Hon. D. H, GUTHRIE explained that the Bill referred to the carriage of lime, the Government having been “got at” by farmers ordering more than they require and then handing the balance over to merchants, who were able to dispose of it on better terms than if they had ordered it themselves. Tho Bill also gave to an arrangement made between the E.F.C. Association and tho department. There was also a provision for appointing scrutineers in connection with the superannuation fund. The Bill was road a first time. HARBOURS AMENDMENT BILL. The Harbours Amendment Bill was also introduced by Governor-General’s Message. The Hon. G. J. ANDERSON explomed that with one exception the amendments wore those recommended by the Harbours Conference. One departmental amendment dealt with mud flats under tho control of Harbour Boards. LAND AND INCOME TAX. The House went into committee to consider clause 4 of the Land and Income Tax Amendment Bill, which had been referred to the Native Affairs Committee, as it dealt with taxation of native land. The Hon. A. T. NGATA expressed the hope that the Prime Minister would soon be able to make further concessions to the Natives, Mr MASSEY said he -would be glad to do so, but it was impossible at present. As a, matter of fact the whole Land and Income Tax Act required overhauling, but it could not all be done at once. They had made a good start this year, and he hoped to continue the good work. Mr W. D. LYSNA-R protested against any concession being made to tho Natives, Their trusts were holding large areas of undeveloped land, and the very means that would compel them to use their land was (being taken away.’ The clause was passed. , T In the schedule Mr G. MITCHELL moved that in no case should the taxation ,on companies exceed 5s in the £. Mr MASSEY resisted ihe amendment. He could not possibly accept it, he said. It would double the taxation on all incomes between £SOO and £2OOO, and if it were earned'he could not carry on, and must drop the Bill. ' , Mr WILFORD said he believed in a thorough readjustment of company taxation. It must come, but he doubted if it could bo done by a simple resolution such as that moved by Mr Mitchell. It must be accompanied by some alternative, and in the absence of that alternative he regretted that he was unable to support the amendment. . . Tho Hon. O, J. PARR said the Minister of Finance had based his finance on receiving a given amount of revenue from the companies, and to suddenly take that revenue away would mean that the individual taxation must be heavily increased, or the country be plunged into difficulty. Tho Hon. J. A. HANAN pointed out that the Taxation Committee recommended a reduction in the company taxation to 5s in the pound. Tho PRIME MINISTER said this was impossible. If this were, the fact the Taxation Committee did not know what they were talking about. They did not understand the finances of the country. He protested against tho great powers vestea in tho Commissioner of Taxes, and suggested that a taxation board should be set up. . . Mr T. K. SIDEY asked the Prime Minister if ho could say .what sum in the revenue would be lost if tho amendment wero carried. Mr MASSEY said he could not say exactly what sum would be lost, blithe did know that- no one seemed so well able to pav the income tax as the companies. They passed the tax on, and that was one’ reason why he wanted to see c roduction in taxation, so that the public might get the teifefit. Mr HOLLAND said that while in sympathy with the spirit of the amendment ho could not vote for it until the taxation on tho higher incomes was increased. As the amendment -stood it simply meant a concession lo the banks and rich companies, which, after paying the income tax, were able to build up immense reserve funds. Mr G. MITCHELL said he felt the Prime Minister could not give effect to his amendment this year. Ho brought it forward so as to force on tho question of the readjustment of taxation, especially with regard to those companies capable of employing labour and increasing industry.^ The amendment was negatived on tho voices and the Bill reported without amendment. On the third reading the Hon, A. T. NGATA and Mr W. I). LYSNAR dealt at length with tho effect of taxation on tho Maori blocks on the East Coast. Mr \V. H. FIELD protested against the taxation of flay as land. Mr HOLLAND justified his position on company taxation, which ho considered utterly unscientific, but could not he dispensed with until they had something to put in its place Mr MASSEY, in reply, characterised as unscientific the amendments moved in committee by Mr Holland and Mr M’Callum to limit the reduction in super tax to taxpayers with land of less value than £IO,OOO and £20,000. He reviewed the recommendation of the Taxation Committee to show that the Government was doing a great deal to give effect to them. lie favoured a reduction in taxation at the earliest moment, but he could not afford to lose revenue, and if ha had to look in other directions for money it would have to come from reductions in exemptions. That ho did not wish to do* The prospects, however, were.looking tetter, and ho believed that a reduction would come, and with it a reduction in the cost of living. The Bill was read a third time and passed. The House rose at 11.30 p.m.