WOOLSTON TANNERIES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22356, 1 September 1934, Page 16

WOOLSTON TANNERIES

PETITION TO PARLIAMENT REFUND OF INCOME TAX SOUGHT UNFAVOURABLE RECOMMENDATION (Fbosl Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, August 31. The Government investigation into the war period operations of the Woolston Tanneries, wish a view to a refund of £25,000 said to have been overpaid in income tax, has again been sought by Mr C. C. M. Ollivier, of Christchurch, in a petition to Parliament. This petition, and the unfavourable recommendation of the Public Petitions M to Z Committtee, presented to the House of Representatives this morning, was the subject of a long discussion in which members •urged the Government to give the assistance asked for to the tanneries which, it was said, were working under very difficult conditions. The same committee reported favourably on tbe petition m 1023. The committee’s report was as follows:- . , “ The committee, having heard exhaustive evidence from the petitioner and Mr C. H. Taylor, Crown solicitor, of the Crown Law Office, representing the Government departments concerned, and having also carefully considered and investigated tbe evidence before three select committees of the House, a joint committee, and two royal commissions, alter due deliberation has no recommendation to make.” , , , Mrs M'Combs (Lyttelton) expressed her keen disappointment with the finding of the committee. She said tbe sympathies of members, which were apparent during the war, had disappeared, and because of this the promoters of the petition would suffer. During the war the Woolston Tanneries had been controlled by the Government, while the other 11 tanneries in New Zealand had not been subjected to any control whatever. The excuse offered w that Woolston, being responsible lor halt the total production of New Zealand, would influence the prices, but the other tanneries had fixed their own prices. Thus the Woolston Tanneries suffered through not being able to take part In the war inflation while they also had lost later through the post-war deflation. During that period, added > Mrs M'Combs, the tanneries also paid income tax on stock, and it could be shown that the stock did not realise the value placed on it. The result was that £25,000_ was paid in income tax. That was not justified. , Mr A. D. M'Leod: Dozens of other firms and individuals have had the same experience. ~ , , Mrs M'Combs: I can think of no other firm in New Zealand which has received the treatment meted out to the Woolston Tanneries. , , ~ , Towards the end of the war, she added, the tanneries decided not_ to continue owing to the increasing costs, and it was only at the urgent request of the Government that the works were kept in operation. A little later the Government released the embargo on the importation of skins and Australian skins were dumped into the Dominion. This meant further losses for the Woolston Tanneries, a los s which had been estimated at between £60,000 and £IOO,OOO. The company had decided to forego all these losses, but it did ask for a refund of the income tax that had been overpaid. The claims of the company were supported by Messrs D. G. Sullivan, R. M'Keen, W. J. Poison, W. A. Veitch, G. Langstone, H. F. Armstrong, M. J. Savage, and E. J. Howard. Messr a J. Linklater, H. S. S. Kyle, R. W. Hawke, and F. Lye (chairman of the committee) defended the committee, and declared that no other finding could have been brought in with the evidence available. Mr Kyle said there was a good deal to be said for the Crown. During the war rumours had been given wide currency to the effect that the Woolston Tanneries were linked up with a big American trust. Mrs M'Combs; Was it disprovedT

Mr Kyle: Yea. Mra M'Comba; Absolutely. Mr Kyle: But nevertheless the rumours were going about, and must have done some harm. He added that the difliculties of the company had been investigated several times —on one occasion by three judges. They had reported that the comi'any did not suffer sufficient injury or damage entitling it to compensation from the public fund. There was a danger now that the company would close down. Mr Kyle suggested that the Unemployment Board, which had announced its intention of giving some assissance to secondary industries, might be able to help the Woolston Tanneries, which were the largest and most important in New Zealand. If the company had been treated unjustly in the past here was an opportunity for redress. Mr Armstrong accused Mr Kyle of inconsistency in defending the committee, and in urging assistance for the company. Every company operating in New Zealand, he said, had been able to make all the profits it desired during the war period with the exception of the Woolston Tanneries, which had been confined to a profit of 6 per cent. There was absolutely no truth in the rumour that the company was part of an American trust. Mr Poison: Yet that statement was made bv Government officers. Mr Armstrong: Yes, and restrictions were enforced because of this. When I advocated that the restriction of profits should be applied to all companies during the war I found myself in the “ cooler. Mr Armstrong added that the Woolston Tanneries formed a splendid example to the other concerns. Mr Ollivicr was a good employer, and no shoddy goods was turned out of the factory. When the report was laid on the table Mr Sullivan asked the Speaker if any significance could be attached to the recommendations, or whether the Government was not bound to accept them. The Speaker explained that the report did not commit the House in any way.