The Timaru Herald THURSDAY, AUGUST 21, 1930. THEN AND NOW.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18651, 21 August 1930, Page 8

The Timaru Herald THURSDAY, AUGUST 21, 1930. THEN AND NOW.

Notwithstanding the efforts of the various units of the UnitedLabour alliance to silence the opposition, in the hope that the real nature of the new taxation proposals will not be made known to the general taxpayer, Mr Coates and the members of the Reform Party are determined to do their obvious duty, as the official Opposition. The Leader of the Labour Party waxed indignant tlie other day over the alleged sins of rank and iile of the Reform Party, but it is just as well that Mr Holland and his thoroughly subdued’ party should realise that Mr Coates and his colleagues know how to conduct themselves in the House, and are not likely to follow the lead of a Party which has so completely abandoned its principles for the sake ,of political expediency. Similar attacks were directed at the .Reform Party last session, when the stoutest; opposition was offered to the Government's taxation proposals, as affecting the farmers. One Minister went so far as to allege that the late leader's illness was caused through the Opposition’s hold-up of proposed legislation, although it was subsequently pointed out i that the leader of the Party was not in the House on the occasion, but had actually been compelled to relinquish attendance in the House some days before. The justification of the Reform Party’s stout opposition to the United Party’s special land tax is actually found in the first Budget speech delivered by Mr Forbes, as Minister of Finance. On July 24, 1930, Mr Forbes said: “Experience has shown, however, that the special land tax was too rigid in its incidence and was inequitable in some instances.” It remained for the Leader of the Opposition •to remind Parliament and the country that the Budget proposals which provided for the repeal of the tax, and the Prime Minister’s own statement, completely vindicated the Reform Party’s action last year. The protest made by the Reform Party last session against certain sections of the Land and Income Tax Amendment Act, was recalled by Mr Ooates in a speech iu the House of Representatives on July 29th this year. The Leader of the Opposition said the Government had done the right thing by proposing now to repeal those sections. He had suggested last year that the income-tax was the fairer method of obtaining the necessary money. “The Government now realised,” added Mr Coates, “that it was wrong in passing last year’s legislation.” It is well to recall, in justification of the part the Opposition continues to play in the House of Representatives, namely the right to subject the Government’s legislative proposals to the closest scrutiny, that on August 21, 1929, Mr Coates proposed the following amendment to the Government’s taxing legislation: “That the proposed increase in land-tax amounts in some cases to a confiscatory single-tax absorbing the whole annual income of the property without regard to whether such property is capable of subdivision or not; moreover that the reduction in the mortgage exemption will impose grave hardship on many farmers; and that if any change is to be made in the taxation of farmers it should be based on the principle of capacity to pay—namely, income-tax, with adequate provisions for preventing aggregation.” This amendment after prolonged discussion was defeated by 48 votes to 24. Thus we see that this special land tax (supertax) was forced through the House in 1929 by a combination of United and Socialist-Labour Parties iu face of vigorous and prolonged opposition by the Reform Party. The tax yielded £240,000, and for months the Government ruthlessly pursued the farmer through this iniquitous form of taxation, prompted no doubt by the applause of the Socialists, only to confess, less than twelve months later, to quote the Prime Minister, that “experience has shown that the special land tax was too rigid in its incidence and was inequitable in some instances,” and now the United Party proposes to repeal a method of taxation which, if the interests of the farming community has been considered by the Government, and the Reform opposition had triumphed when the Bill was under consideration in 1929, would never have been imposed on the farmer.