THE TIMARU HERALD, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1930. The Timaru Herald. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1930. FORGOTTEN PROMISES.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18555, 30 April 1930, Page 8

THE TIMARU HERALD, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1930.

The Timaru Herald. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1930. FORGOTTEN PROMISES.

Maintaining its reputation as the Ministry of Forgotten Promises, the United Party now proposes to take a line of action which will constitute a definite breach of faith with the House and the country. The statement regently issued by the Prime Minister, purporting to explain the results of the year’s financial operations, though significant in many respects for what is left unsaid, makes perfectly clear the Government’s intentions in relation to the primage tax. Discussing this question the Prime Minister said: The additional impost on individual classes of goods from a retail point of view is practically negligible, but even so the Government did not desire the tax to remain upon food any longer than was absolutely necessary. Accordingly, it was provided in the empowering legislation that the additional primage duty on food-stuffs and also on manures was to be lifted automatically on March 31, 1930. Accordingly all such goods are now subject to the normal 1 per cent, primage only. I.n regard to the additional primage duty on other classes of goods, it is prescribed in the Customs Amendment Act, 1929, that this may be terminated at any time now by Order-in-Council.

It is not usual, however, between Parliamentary sessions to make any forecast’ as to what wall be done regarding Customs taxation, and I do not intend to make any pronouncement concerning it at this juncture. The matter will be dealt with when the whole of the, financial proposals for the current year are finally under review. It is just as well that the Prime Minister should be reminded that not only is provision made in the amended Act that the additional primage duty may be terminated at any time by Order-in-Council, but one of the little baits the Government used to entice the unwary Labour Party into the United Party’s parlour, was the definite undertaking given by the Prime Minister, and clearly understood by the House, '.that the additional impost would be lifted the moment funds, stated to be urgently required, had been brought into the public purse. The Minister of Customs gave the House to understand that the extra duty “is purely temporary in its application.” " During the first debate, the Prime Minister said, “my idea in imposing a 1 per cent, primage duty is because at the end of the coming year I am hopeful that we will be in a position to do without it, and it will be the easiest thing in the world to remove it.” The Government’s intentions were expressed very definitely, as is shown in the following extract from the Hansard report of the no-confidence debate on August

The Right Hon. Sir Joseph Ward: .... I took the course that appeared to be the easiest of accomplishment, as this is only for a short time.

Mr Semple: Is the right honourable gentleman sure of that? The Right Hon. Sir Joseph Ward; I will put in the bill imposing the primage duty a clause giving power, by Governor-General in Council—

An Hon. Member: More Order-in-Council.

The Right Hon. Sir Joseph Ward: No; it is not an Order-in-Council— I said by Governor-General in Council. I will put a clause in the bill to repeal the duty at the end of March if the financial position of the country permits of its being repealed. That is a fair proposal to make. We require the revenue at the moment.

The Prime Minister now blandly informs the country that the Government has no intention of making any pronouncement until the “whole of the financial proposals for the current year are finally under review.” That will be months ahead. Hence the country is now asked to carry this heavy impost until the Government ceases its reckless spending. Obviously the Labour Party must bear its full share of responsibility for this iniquitous taxation on the people with small incomes. Moreover, it is interesting to note the intrepid manner in which the Prime Minister sidesteps the controversial aspects of the country’s finance, more particularly in view of the fact that it may yet be shown, when fuller details afford closer examination of the United Party’s finance, that the revenue the Minister of Finance estimated would come into the Treasury through the customs —the receipts were £950,000 more than the previous year—would have been secured without imposing such penal taxation on all classes of the community by increasing the primary duty by one hundred per cent.