IS ECONOMY FORGOTTEN?

Taranaki Daily News, 16 August 1929, Page 9

IS ECONOMY FORGOTTEN?

NO MENTION IN THE DEBATE MR. W. J. POLSON ON BUDGET GENERAL SUPPORT GIVEN (By Wire —Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. General support for the Budget was given by Mr. W. J. Polson (Stratford) in the course of his speech in the House to-night. His views were not very acceptable to the Reform Party, and he had to withstand a fair amount of interjections from the Opposition benches. Mr. Polson said the Budget was skilfully drawn—they had to admit that whether they agreed with what was in it or not. It showed that the man who had drafted it had a thorough grasp of the finances and knew how to get' what he wanted. A large percentage of the extra taxation would be borne by the farmer in a big way, not the small man, who would not feel any additional impost through the Customs. So far as borrowing was concerned, Mr. Polson did not think there was much difference between one Government and another in the matter of piling up the Public Debt. The last Reform Budget was “a facing-both-ways” Budget, and reminded one of the boy with the home-made pants —you could not ,tell which way he was going. Mr. A. M. Samuel: I biippoee that-is how you feel at present. (Reform laughter).

Mr. Polson: The member for Thames is the licensed jester of this House and one can forgive him a good deal. He has often told us he is a member of the lost tribes. The only regret I have is that his particular tribe did not remain lost. (Laughter.) • Mr. Polson eaid it appeared that the word ‘•'economy” had been forgotten. It did not seem to- be in the lexicon of the modern politician. There had been no mention of economy in the debate. He disagreed with the view that economy would lead to further unemployment, and he did not believe that retrenchment of civil servants was necessary, but economies could be effected in administration. COUNTRY STILL ' CALM. " When the Budget ivas read to the House there had been all sorts of gloomy prophecies, but he discovered next aay that the country wag still calm. Some Reform newspapers had endorsed what Sir Joseph Ward was proposing in regard to the breaking up of large estates. If the farmer was suffering from the burden of taxation he could blame the Reform Party, which had toadied to the vested interests in town and country and had done nothing in sixteen years to go in for increased land settlement. The fact that there had been juggling with the rural credit bonds convinced him that the 'vested, had been at work and that it was time there was a change of Government.

The Reform Government had been warned by some of its own Ministers as to what should be done in the way of collecting more taxation from large landowners, but nothing was done and the writing had therefore appeared on the wall. Land aggregation was going on in the country, and he could prove it. They knew that land settlement had practically ceased. The late Minister of Lands and the ex-Minister of Agriculture had admitted that.

Dealing with the land tax proposals, Mr. Polson said he was not going to defend the taxing of a man's debts. The farmers of the country relied on the bona tides of the Government and had gone in for land investment. It was not reasonable, therefore, to allow the farmers to wake up and find that the exemption had been reduced and that the mortgage tax was going to hit them heavily on top of the land tax, and with the possibility that they would have to pay income tax instead of land tax. He suggested the provision -of a hardship clause to give relief in eases where the proposals affected the man on the land unduly; otherwise an enormous number of people would be seriously embarrassed.

MOST CONVENIENT WAY.

Mr. Polson regretted the necessity for the extra primage tax, but he thought it was the most convenient way of raising the extra revenue as a temporary expedient. The tax was so slight that’ in many cases he did not think it' would be passed on. It would do less harm than would be an effort to adjust the general taxation. Labour’s remedy would be to place taxation on the land. (Labour dissent). Mr. Polson urged that further assistance should be given for back-country roads. He suggested that the rural bonds system should be more clastic and that the primary producer should have some say in his own concern. He criticised the proposed additional expenditure on the railways, particularly the South Island Main Trunk. They knew that the Government could not keep its promise in regard to the provision of money at 4J per cent., so why make so much about keeping the promise to go on with the South Island Main Trunk railway? The Public Debt was now £329,500,000, so why hang more railway debt round their necks? To go on building costly railway lines would lead to disaster.

Mr. Polson was glad to find such a strong point made in the Budget of land settlement, but it must be accompanied by a reading policy. Apart from whatever criticism he, made in regard to details, on the broad lines he regarded the Budget as sound, concluded Mr. Polson. It made for closer land settlement, and he believed it would go a long way to enable the small man to go on the land and see some daylight in the future.