TE AWAMUTU COURIER Printed on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays FRIDAY, 7th NOVEMBER, 1947 PUBLIC FINANCE

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 75, Issue 6443, 7 November 1947, Page 4

TE AWAMUTU COURIER Printed on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays FRIDAY, 7th NOVEMBER, 1947 PUBLIC FINANCE

MR NASH has well justified his reputation as an exceedingly conspicuous Minister of Public Finance. His ability to quote millions is everywhere acknowledged, and he is able to present the Government’s case as probably no other Minister could do. But his recent handling of the public account has been brilliant, and for political strategy is outstanding. In stages he has developed a situation in which taxation has passed to the people and revenues accrued to the public accounts in a way that suggests remarkable financial generalship: to Mr Nash must go recognition for his mastery over finance and his astuteness in the political scheme. His first approach was to the withdrawal of subsidies, recognising as he must have done that this method of adjusting the costing index could not be continued indefinitely. Naturally, too, he must have realised how unpopular in public estimation would be the Government’s finance policy in its effect on already high commodity prices. But a ready means of diverting public attention was at his command, and he at the proper moment placed the spotlight on the Arbitration Court with its adjusting wage pronouncement. So busily did organised opinion centre on the Arbitration Court that the subsidy withdrawal passed almost unnoticed. For strategeiic handling of a difficult situation and for diplomatic treatment of public opinion Mr Nash was brilliant in this emergency. He gained for the public revenues what had been paid out in subsidies almost without question. Equally brilliant was his next step. When the time arrived for the effect of subsidy withdrawal to be revealed on commodity prices, and when there were signs to suggest public disquiet he very promptly remitted some items of sales tax—a gesture, at least, to allay public misgiving. But this could not remain as a concession to people or a loss to the public accounts. Again Mr Nash became the strategist—the dollar situation and the problem of world finance provided some grounds on which to explain an equalising tobacco duty. The net result is that public opinion has become confused in the network of who pays who and for what? Between the Arbitration Court here, the subsidy there, the sales tax remission somewhere else, and the new tobacco duty coming up most people are confused and muddled. But Mr Nash—when all is tallied—has surrendered nothing from his public .accounts, and the Government has gained in the final tally. If the economy of New Zealand depends on the volume or extent of the public revenues then, assuredly, Mr Nash is a most conspicuous Minister of Finance. According to the Government statistician the total of taxation revenue in 1935 was £24,000,000. Ten years later, in 1945, it was £101,000,000, of which £15,000,000 was under various headings of war taxation. If all of this war taxation had been remitted—and it has not—the domestic revenue would be £56,000.000. If, therefore, economic security lies in the volume or extent of taxation, Mr Nash has been exceedingly progressive in his ten years increase from £24,000,000 to at least £56 000,000. But it can happen that national stability is not indexed by such figures, and in that •case Mr Nash may yet have to account for those many economic factors which are much more important than public finance as stated in terms of public revenue and measured by national security.