DOINGS IN PARLIAMENT.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18637, 5 August 1930, Page 11

DOINGS IN PARLIAMENT.

POLITICAL NOTES AND NEWS. (From Our Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON. August 2. The main feature of the week in Parliament was the discussion on the Budget, and the defeat of the Reform censure motion by a majority of 14 (four Independents, Messrs Poison, Wilkinson, Fletcher and Captain Rushworth voting with the Reform Party). Points on Defence. Mr W. D. Lysnar (Reform, Gisborne), deplored the curtailment of the Defence vote more than any other. It was a serious thing to disorganise the defence force of the Dominion. New Zealand was a long way from England, and for that reason alone the Dominion should have land forces. Mr G. C. Munns United, Roskill): “Doesn’t the hon. member think that the volunteer system would fill the position?” Mr Lysnar: “No. I was brought up under that system, and I know that it had a great difficulty in carrying on.” In any case it only got the industrious man who was always available. It did not get the man who wished to avoid training, and with the tendency of the age discipline was necessary. There was also a physical culture that benefited the young men of the country, and in this direction the camps did a great deal of good. The Government would be wise to make a temporary curtailment of the cadets only. The saving of expenditure was only 2d per week per head. A Political Bull. “The Government puts me in mind of a young Shorthorn bull,” declared Mr H. S. S. Kyle (Reform, Riccarton) in the House of Representatives on Thursday. “They are hanging on to the Labour Party as a young Shorthorn bull would hang on when it was being weaned from its foster mother.” Just as a young bull squealed and bellowed when it was being taken away from its foster mother, we would shortly find the Government squealing. Mr A. M. Samuel (Reform, Thames): “I have not found the cow yet.” Mr Kyle: “The cow is most certainly the public, because they are the ones that are being milked at present.” Confession of Failure. Mr A. Wilkinson (Independent, Egmont), said that on every page the Budget showed the hands of the departmental heads, and he wished to protest against this policy. He did not think any previous Budget he could remember had been so freely discussed. It was practically a confession of failure on the part of the United Government to carry out its presessional promises. Probably circumstances had altered cases. In the case of the land tax Parliament was called upon to repeal the Act of last session. That was surely a confession of failure. Labour’s Lost Opportunity. Turning to deal with the Leader of the Labour Party, Mr Poison (Independent, Stratford), said in the course of his Budget speech, that he did not know what Mr Holland was going to say to justify himself with the electors when he was asking to be allowed to supersede the present Government. Where was he going to stand on the question? He was obviously dissatisfied with the Government, but he was not prepared to put them out for fear of putting the Reform Party in. Mr Poison said he was inclined to think that the people would take him to task for not seizing the opportunity to put the Government out. Mr Holland: “How will the hon. gentleman vote if we move a motion?” Mr Poison: “That remains to be seen.” (Laughter).

Luxury Taxes. Mr W. J. Poison (Independent, Stratford), said there would be a considerable revenue from taxation on beer sold over the bars. There were other luxury taxes which could have been imposed, and these would have enabled reductions to have been made in Customs taxation, which would have to be lowered before the country went ahead economically. The Government was entitled to the credit for the economies it had effected, but it had not gone far enough. The Budget was a justification of extravagance and fell far short of what the community expected. There was not a suggestion of a curtailment in expenditure in main trunk railway construction. How could the expenditure of £3,000,000 on a railway through the Prime Minister’s own territory be justified? Colonel T. W. M’Donald (United, Wairarapa): “What about the Stratford line?” Mr Poison: “That is nearly completed.” (Laughter).

New Burdens for Farmers. Expressing regret that it was necessary for him to vote for the no-con-fidence amendment Mr W. J. Poison (Independent. Stratford), said that the farmers could not possibly be satisfied with the proposals in the Budget, for the Government was taking back through other sources all the relief it was giving through the petrol tax. This year was one of low prices, and that fact had undoubtedly contributed to the serious financial position of the country. The Budget was doing nothing to lighten the burden; in fact, it was doing the very opposite. One of the first things the Government should have done was to search through the departments and see where economies could be effected. There could have been a greater tax on beer. He could not understand why there should be a tax of 3d on petrol and only a penny on beer.

Mr G. C. Munns (United, Roskill): “Because you can’t drink petrol.” (Laughter.) Mr Poison said the man who had mortgaged his land was worthy of every encouragement, but under the proposals of the Budget his head was being forced down into the mud. He wondered how much sympathy there was for the farmer ; Land tax was a capital tax, as the farmer was asked to pay whether his property was paying interest or not. It was uneconomic to tax farmers when their competitors abroad were lifting all taxes off the shoulders of the farmers.

The Daniel of Politics. The Minister of Finance, said Mr Daniel Sullivan (Labour, Avon), had gone fishing—in fact, had gone trawling—and brought into the net not only big fish, but also good and bad fish.

There was a criticism of the Budget in the lack of discrimination shown in the new proposals, continued Mr Sullivan. Not only was the Minister of Finance levying taxes on large income earners, but also on amusements, so that the tax reached boys and girls who paid 1/- for admission to the pictures.

Mr D. Jones (mid-Canterbury): You voted for it. Mr Sullivan: I am much more entitled to be a prophet than the hon. gentleman because I am named after a prophet. Mr W. J. Jordan (Manukau): He’s in a lion’s den as well. Mr Sullivan: And Daniel’s not afraid of the lions, either.

Into Heavy Weather. Explaining his reasons for supporting the Reform Leader’s censure motion, Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Independent, Egmont), said: “I take the greatest exception to the Government's present taxation proposals. We are rushing headlong into heavy weather, and the idea that taxation should be gathered up without stint and that there is an unlimited field for the levy of taxes I dispute strongly. Taxation should be as light as possible. The people should never be taxed to a greater extent than is absolutely necessary. One thing is certain, that we are going to have a very large surplus on the Government’s estimates. Reform voices: “Hear, hear.” “I want to urge the Government if possible to reduce taxation somewhat and not go on piling it up year by year,” pleaded Mr Wilkinson. He went on to show that New Zealand was already a very heavily taxed country. In 1929 we paid £l2/4/2 per head of the population of £l6/11/2, including local taxes; in Australia the general taxes amounted to £l4/1/7; and in Great Britain the taxation was £ls/1/7 per head. Apparently the Government had adopted the easy method of raising revenue by means of taxing the people. It was effecting savings of hundreds of thousands and seeking to bring in millions by extra taxation. Gallery Jottings. Mr Speaker: “If any statements are made anywhere that impugn the honour of a member of the House, the fullest latitude should be given that member to clear up the charges.” “Heaven save the farming community from any more relief such as this,” was the prayer of the Independent member for Stratford (Mr W. J. Poison), when dealing with the United Budget. The Rev. Clyde Carr (Labour, Tima ru) proposes to ask the Minister of Internal Affairs whether in the interests of public safety sufficient inspection and supervision is provided in the matter of protection against film fires. “The Prime Minister is like a boy with a buttarfly net let loose in the taxation garden.”—Mr W. J. Poison (Stratford). In reply to an interjection, Mr Poison said the State-guarantee idea was recommended in every line of the report of the Commission on Rural Credits, but this had not been spotted by Mr Stewart, in spite of the latter's reputation for sagacity. However, the passing of the report into law made the bonds State bonds. “We deliberately laid a trap for Mr Stewart to walk into,” he added. “That sounds well,” commented Mr Coates. Mr A. M. Samuel (Reform, Thames): “Loyal servants of the Government.” Mr Speaker: “Order! Order!” Discussing what Mr Coates has described as the “Black” Budget, the Hon. W. Downie Stewart, Finance Minister in the Reform Administration said: “It is like an official assignee at a meeting where the creditors ask: ‘ls there nothing else to produce?’ and the assignee replies: ‘There is a broken bicycle and a section at the Hutt covered with gorse.” Mr Stewart said he thought the House was entitled to ask for more details as to what the Prime Minister estimated each of the items of taxation—direct and indirect —would yield. Mr Forbes: “That will be done.”