Government Scores Two-to-One Victory

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 749, 23 August 1929, Page 9

Government Scores Two-to-One Victory

NO-CONFIDENCE VOTE LABOUR’S SUPPORT (THE SUN'S Parliamentary Reporter.) PARLIAMENT BLDGS., Thurs. For the second time this session the division bells rang this evening, when the House voted upon the amendment to the Budget proposals' moved by the Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates. After crowded galleries had listened to the debate, there being only three speakers during the day, the amendment was put at 9.15 p.m., and was lost by 4S votes to 24. The Prime Minister, Sir Joseph Ward, had a few trenchant words to say about the Leader of the Opposition, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates's amendment. He followed these up with a defence of the primage duty and said that it was hoped to remove the imposition by the end of March next The no-conftdence motion, he said, was an extraordinary production, and he could not compliment the framer on his "budget.” It took up 25 lines of printed matter, and Mr. Coates must have thought that he was preparing a financial budget. Discussing the primage duties, which were the first ground of objection in the amendment. Sir Joseph Ward said that as far as ordinary people were concerned the cost for a family of four over 12 months would work out at sid only. The primage duty was the most economical way of getting revenue that was absolutely necessary, and he had expected the Opposition to take a practical view of the proposals. Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) had suggested a surtax instead of primage duty increase, but that would mean, throwing the whole Customs tariff question open, and Parliament would be pestered by requests from one end of the country to another. The increase was only temporary, and there was a proposal in the Bill, by Gover-nor-General-in-Council, to repeal the Increase at the end of March if the financial circumstances of the country warranted it. A Reform Member: Yes; if! Sir Joseph Ward said, in answer to a question, that he had examined every way of getting the revenue. Answering Mr. A. M. Samuel (Thames) as to an extra duty on American motor-cars. Sir Joseph Ward said that such a duty would stop cars coming into the country and revenue would not be obtained. Regarding the substitution of income-tax for land-tax, he said that such a tax would defeat its own ends. He did not believe that revenue would be obtained if there was income-tax only. Mr. D. Jones (Mid-Canterbury): Doesn't that show that the land-tax must be too heavy now? Sir Joseph Ward: No. The position is that those who are.not paying their fair share of the taxation will have to join with those who are. Ha continued that it was absurd to suggest that land aggregation could bo prevented unless there were a system of land taxation. No penal tax was being imposed. “The Budget is the plank on which the Government bases its existence, and it is prepared to stand or fall by it,” said Sir Joseph Ward toward the end of his long speech. He claimed that the proposals were what the Government went to the country on. "We are not going to have these proposals chopped about,” he said. “They were prepared with the object of meeting the requirements of the country. There are differences of opinion about some of the items. A different set of men might submit a different set of proposals, but we have submitted the proposals on the lines that were urged when we stood for Parliament, and on the lines that the majority of the people want. I repeat that we stand or fall by our proposals. We ask tne House to give them fair consideration, and if they are passed, I have no doubt as to what the results will be.” The division list was as follows: FOR THE AMENDMENT —24 Ansell • Kyle Kitchener Linklater Campbell Lysnar Coatea .Macmillan Dickie Maskey Field Nash Hall Samuel Harris Stewart Henara Sykes H. Holland Waite Hunter Williams Jones Young AGAINST THE AMENDMENT—4B Armstrong McDonald Atmorc McDougall Barnard McKeen Black Macpherson Bodkin Makitanara Broadfoot Martin Carr Mason Chapman limns Clinkard Munro Cobbe Murdoch De la Perrelle O'Brien Donald Parry Fletcher Poison Forbes Ransom Hawke Rushwortb Healy Savage Hogan Smith H. E. Holland Stallworthy Howard Sullivan Jenkins Taverner Jordan Veitch Langstone M ard Lye Wllford McCombs Wilkinson PAIRS For: Burnett, Wright, Pomare. Against: Fraser, Ngata, Semple. When the House reassembled there was a motion by Sir Joseph Ward that the debate should adjourn. Surprised voices inquired the reason why, and finally the Leader of the Opposition rose and put the question formally to the Prime Minister. Sir Joseph Ward explained that it was customary after a motion of want of confidence for an adjournment of the debate to be moved. Mr. Coates: And go to another place. (Laughter.) Mr. W. L. Martin, loudly: Were wasting too much time. Other Labour Voices: Let's get on with the business of the House. Let’3 get on with the job. The Prime Minister, however, was obdurate and maintained that the House should adjourn. Accordingly he moved in that direction, and the House adjourned at 9.30. The Government once more has asserted its superiority, but the next vote should offer a more interesting position.