PARLIAMENTARY.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIC, Issue 13394, 18 September 1907, Page 6

PARLIAMENTARY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, l'er Press Association. "WELLINGTON, September 17. The House met at 2.30 p.m. LEAVE OF ABSENCE. Four days' leave of absence were granted to Mr T. Mackenzie on account of urgent public business-; and six days to Mr Davey on. account of ill-health. ! THE ROTORUA ACCIDENT. The report of District Judge Kettle on the Rotoraa railway accident was laid on tha tafeie. THE TARIFF BILL. The Hon. Mr Millar in moving the third Treading of the Tariff "Bill, said that there were two governing principles guiding the Government in framing this tariff; first and foremost, the taking off of the duties oa the necessaries of life and on articles that, could not bj manufactured in tho colony; and there was tha encouragement of our industries. This was ef little account, but be thought they would agree that in such a country a3 this with the amount of agricultural land available, that they most take these industries hand in hand with their agricultural pursuits. They were aware of exactly how many men. could be settled on the lands of the colony. They, were met with the statement that this colony wanted population, and it had been advocated by many that we ought to go in for an immigration policy, bat what was the good of doing that unless they had work for them when they came here. If it was true that ■every adult was worth £250 to the State, then every man driven out- to look for work elsewhere meant a loss to the State, and increased the national indebtedness on others. He - said that- under the tariff assistance had been granted to 40 industries. He claimed that in a few years they would see a large increase of employment in there industries. He contended that in the fntaro this country would be a large manufacturing country, as they had the raw materials, copper, tin, iron, stone and unlimited water power running to waste. It was stated that they were placing a tax on the farming community, but he maintained that not one penny of the increased taxation had been placed on the farming industry. Every effort- should ba made to provide work for other portions of the population, and the tariff submitted had that end in view. In continuing his remarks on the farming industry the Minister read a statement showing the duties on farming implements "m force in the Commonwealth and Canada, by which he showed that- implements in these two countries were taxed tea times as much as they" were in New Zealand. He also read a" tabulated statement cf the farm products of the colony, which were protected by a tax on similar commodities imported from other countries. These figures. h: L contended, were a direct reply t»» the statements which had b:en mad- that th<? Government were unduly taxing the farming industry. In regard to mining, he contended that only two article °wcr« taxed, and that at the saiali figure- cf 5 per cent. Under the Act of 1300 it wn* provided th.it machinery f,. r mining purr'*t» b- admitted fn.o. but ncdrr this headhig th* mining compart had c-Ltitn-rf the right to imp..rt tv-ything r>d in ;l mine, even if vad for " i: .-r d n-ir-pOMrs. free of d::ry : f„ f:tl t ' ',,. added they had gone .so f:ir as to c.'aiiii ri:c right to import brnom* for swi-e'iii:«r Purposes free, whilst all other industries-'had to pay 5 per rent. _ Mr Jam-vs Allen said that thev were all in favor of assisting local industries, but differed in the manner of granting assistance. He contended that aJblow had been struck at the mining and farming industrie-.-. which were indigenous to the country, in an attempt to assist other industries which were not indigenous to the country. He granted that reduction.- had been made in foodstuffs. Referring to the Hon. MiMillar's remarks he contended that no one would -say how many they were able to settle r.n the land, tie looked forward to huge settlement on the hind. He did not. think the time had arrived yet when they siioutd go in for helping the country from tfn» town instead of from the country itself. H- contended that the Canadian duty on farming implements meant notbimr evcypt on paper. ;is they manufactured :iil '■lasses- of farming imnlemenfx in Canada. Farming implements had been free in ihi:; country fine:- 1900 if not before and the motion in 1900 whs made by Mr Massey. also one for i>!ac:r.T fewinc wire on flic free Ifst. In fa.- „f thi" !■-Vor.trndcd lha» the present Governnr.nt had not placed

fanning implements on the free list. He agreed that .it was right to assist local industries so long as they did not injure any other industry. He regretted that the Ministry was found in. the wrong lobby when the question of granting free flour was considered.

The Premier: "Where was the leader of the Opposition." Mr Allen: "He was there too." Continuing Mr Allen said that there, were other means of helping flour-milling without keeping the heavy duty on. They could have granted a subsidy or given them the amount realised by the duty. He deprecated the heavy tax on cheap boots as this i>laced a very heavy burden on poorer people who used" cheap boots. Under the present tariff a 5s boot cost 7s 3d against 6s lid nnder the old tariff, but the mam who imported 3Cs boots got them for 36s or 9d cheaper than under the old tariff. He -understood that~as a result of the. Imperial Conference it was intended to encourage trade between England and the colony, but he added that the duty had been increased an xilmost every article imported from the Old Country. He contended that because the colony could not <ret preference in the Old Country thev had clapped- a duty on almoso a.l articles from the United Kingdom. The Premier had stated at the Imperial Conference that New Zealand admitted a large number of British manufactures free of duty. He (Mr Allen) had counted the items and found that there were only ten which were admitted free. Referring to the preferential tariff he said that a huge increase had been made in this tariff from 38 to 215 articles, and consequently he contonded that this was a revenue-tariff and ; would poduce large sums in future. He stated that while at Home the Premier said that he would if a; resident of 1 England be found fighting on the side I of free food, but here he was fighting for dear food and would not take the duty off flour. The Hon. Mr McGowan contended that Mr Allen had adopted the tactics of his leader in <b.ming credit for everything ! " good " that had been done in the House. j He (Mr McGowan) claimed that all the Government asked was that the tariff I should bs compared with the tariff of | any other countiy, and if considered from i that point of view it would be granted j that it was the most reasonable tariff ! ever introduced in New Zealand.

Sir W. J. Steward claimed that to him not to Mr Massey was due the credit of initiating the proceedings to place fencing wire on the frea list. Mr Gray complained that assistance had not been granted to the manufacturers of hydrous ammonia. In 1905 some. 5466 tons were imported, of which 5C83 tons were from New South "Wales. He was informed by a New Zealand manu l facte rer that he was prepared to supply 50 per cent, more than was imported in 1906. On thwv? grounds ho (Mr Gray) contended that assistance should have been given to the industry. Mr Wilford, in referring to the flour duty, f.idd he regretted that it had not been carried as if it had b.-en it would liav> been of great benefit to the con.'inmer.'-. artd lie bolieved that in taking off thv duty from necejsaries of life the first it; m to h::v? been considered should have been the first staple of life—bread. H? considered th=it the Government had d'sp-.r much . for tin- people in takirg the o-!ty off t=<> nii-.-.y necessaries, but he urged th.' Mini-;U-r of Customs not to rt-vt on his .-■:.;.s-. Mr \Vi:f;<rd arfd.'d that he felt th. ccns-tai:: 'it mind for increased wages by th.' worker.-; was ore- to the high j.rk'c; of f.:o(ls.u:fT-\ and h- contended that ■':.- Government had miss-ed a- grand chance of ■i-:d ting the workers- when ih-ey failed

to take; tli!. 1 duty off flour. He urged on the: Minister that he should keep an -eye 'in tha commodities from which duty had been removed in order to see that /consumers received the benefit. He particularly urged on the Minister to watch the operations of the Colonial Sugar Company if he desired the consumers to get the benefit of the remission.

The House adjourned at 5.30 p.m. The Hou>.e resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr Hogg complimented the Minister on the; Tariff Bid, and acknowledged that it was a great improvement on the old tariff. He regretted, however, when tho -irs-ar duty was abolished that the Government did not go further and take tho opportunity of sweeping away the duties '■n wheal, flour, potatoes, and fruit. He iried to gat the duty removed from fruit, but- was defeated. Wiih regard to flour and wheat, he found that during the las!, six years the colony hail exported these* ai'tir-l-s to the va'nr- of £625.574. They had )Kip»;i.-d tio:;r .••i;.l \; !.-.a: to the \::b2.>

of £74.909 on w-liicli t.he duly ptiid was £B6CO.' In 1901 tti: Villus of wheat exported wns £276.111. unci in 1926 £9915. Did (hat, show that wheat growing was |n'<>gressjng under taxation of wheat and Hour? Did the farmer get the benefit of the: duty on wheal and (lour? Al'LeV harvest he'received the same price for his wheat a* was paid in Australia, Who wns holding the wheat and regulating the prices now? Xo! ihe farmer, but the grain merchant. The grain-m:reliant and \he tlirtir-ir.iller were the- middle-men dividing the. spoil between lllem. The farmer"wiis *>t in the swim. lie often sold bis wheat to th; merchant before it was grown. TTo got 3s last harvest- for his wheat, and now the grain merchant was requiring 4s 6d to 4s 9d per bushel from the flour-miller. Kvery year New Zealand consumers paid £150.000 more for the flour they used than they would pay i' chey lived in Australia. The difference on" Hour was 30s to 35s- per ton. He wanted the £IOO,OOO. the amount that went into the millers' banking account, to remain in the pockets of rlis people. Abolish the duty on flour and the price would immediately fall 20s per ton; tho miller and grain merchant would naturally suffer, but the farmer in company with the artisan and especially the man with a big family, would be the gainer. He assured the Government that come what might the people would insist on the removal of taxes now placed on the main articles of food. Mr Hornsby said that Mr James Allen's remarks regarding his desire to see the development of land and cloter settlement were meet remarkable, as ha had most consistently opposed every purchase of land by the Government for closer settlement. Replying to Mr Allen's statement that Canada's tax on agricultural inipkr ments was meaninglets, he twitted the .member for Bruce with having forgotten the existence next door to Canada of the United States, and added that Canada's prosperity commenced with the inauguration of the protective policy by Sir John Maedonald.

Mr Fisher expressed a hope that the Minister would bring down a Bill this session to deal with shoddy goods as by doing so he would confer a boon on the people.

Mr W. Fraser replying to the statement made by Mr Hornsby, said it was true that highly-protected countries were able to sell their manufactures at cheap rates, but that was only to outside countries. He contended that German manufacturers had two prices!—the cheaper one being for the sale of manufactures to foreign countries. *

Mr Pool© said that the United 'States were the most striking example of prosperity that this country could set eyeson. He urged that they were going in the right direction in fostering local industries. Mr Flatman contended that if Mr Hogg's suggestion to take the duty off Hour had been carried it would not benefit the producer nor damage the Millers' Association.

Mr Hardy acknowledged that the country had never had' a Minister who filled the position- of Customs and Labour so well as Mr Millar.; and added that the ■tariff was a great improvement on the old tariff.

. Mr Laurenson said that this tariff would relieve every person on an average of 8s per head per annum, and the increased taxation under the tariff would be equal to 3s per head. On this basis he pointed out that instead of a man with a large family suffering, the larger family hs had. tho more he would benefit. A protective tariff i would not only benefit! tna workers in towns, but would also be advantageaus to every farmer and! sittler in tho country.

Mr 'Herries, referring to the inoreasss in the tariff, said the only .increases in machinery -were connected with land in some way or other. Mr Massey considered that the Hon. Mr Millar's remarks were more apologetic than otherwise. He (Mr Massey) believed that the new tariff would remove anomalies in one direction, but hs believed it would create anomalies in another direction. His principal objection to the tariff was that it was a departure from the principle laid down by Mr Seddon—that all agricultural and mining, machinery should be free of duty. The Minister had referred to the tariff in Australia, but he (Mr Massey) pointed out that that tariff had not yet b=en carried and from what could be learned it appeared that the people of Australia were opposed to it. He contended that comparison should not be made between this tariff and that of any other country, but between • this and the old tariff. The increased number of items on the preferential list meant increased revenue and increased taxation to the producer of the- colony. He maintained that setting aside, the remission on sugar the increases that were being made in other directions were equal to the remissions. He claimed that the duties on butter, grain, ■etc., were of no benefit to the farming community, and would not be for many years. They produced much more than they could consume, consequently as long as they were an exporting country they could not derive as producers any bsnefit from these duties. He urged that all raw products should be admitted free, and that the duty should be taken off all necessaries of life. It seemed to him that the tariff was like the Government's policy a mass of shreds and patches. He voted for the retention of the flour duty, but he did not think if it had been removed it would make much difference either to millers or consumers, as latterly wheat had been dearer in Australia than in New Zealand. The Premier said that Mr Massev considered the remissions of the tariff were £150,000, but against this he quoted the figures of the Customs officers who stated that the remissions amounted to over £400,000, and that the net remissions were £237,151. The preferential tariff all told was £117,000. It had been contended that the tariff was in the interests of the rich and against the workers. If they turned to the tariff of 1905 they would find that agricultural, dairying and mining interests were on the 5 per cent. list. The reduction': made in the tariff were unprecedented; they were giving away about oneseventh of customs revenue. * He read a statement to show that concession!; were being made in wearing apparel .etc., largelv used by the workers. Much had been said of the increased duty on boots, but the fact was the Government had taken a step to prevent the importation of rubbish : it was not intended to prevent, higher class boots being imported. Referring to ti:o dairying industry he said th-™ biggest ciisionitTK were the people in the towns and country and they must not be ignored. In flaming the tariff they mi'si, not undervalue the home trade. Tt had been reckoned that f<.r :■■■ nv;n. hi- wife and three children Hie tariff in ;\r>!, I£V; per In-ad ]>> - annum. Ar> fn Mm- jar l- '^ - . lit: pr.iiit.vd (in;, that Messrs Ma'.-;y and -Tame* Alli".i bo-h voted again:!, the Advances to S-v.tlkTs Act. and he? want- d to know how l.hey rc-jonciled that- with their newiyfornu'd advocacy of the farms.'.! - . Referring to Mr .James Allen's remarks icgarding his utterances on prcf. tviiol" at the Imp-rial Conference, iii? Premier 'aid thaiMr Allen sin.-a'd if he de-irel to Ivv fair have referred to th - lain;.? addition made to the preferential I'.vt. ""The (-!oveni,7iw had i->: ::; to grin pn-pyla* ilv. but hj» ;:s!i«.l 111-., p'.-ii[ile to :.ei.;.'iii' - .- iifal i<-

had done what it believed to be right, and that it had given concessions the great*ipart of which affected the food and clothing of the mass of the people. Mr Millar having replied, the Bill was read a. third time and passed. The House adjourned at 1.52 a.m.