THE BUDGET DEBATE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 18821, 11 July 1923, Page 5

THE BUDGET DEBATE

OPENED LAST NIGHT MR. WILFORD’S ATTACK AND THE HON. STEWART’S REPLY. (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON. July 10. When the House resumed at 7.30 the debate on the Budget was opened by Mr. Wilford, who said he proposed to discuss some of the proposals contained in the Budget and also to mention some of the changes essential to good Government in this country, which are absent from the Budget. In 1912 the Re.form party started their policy of “window dressing” and he proposed to show how great were the differences between the promises and performances of that party. He thought the fact that no one Minister controlled any one Department for any length of time contributed to this result. Then in this Budget there were contradictions in figures and statements due probably to the same want of permanence of Ministers. The Premier, whose accession la- power might be described as a "political accident,” had ridiculed his (Mr. W.ilford’s) suggestion that there must be a reduction in company taxation. but now in his Budget he declared a reduction in company taxation must take place. The Premier had stated at Oamaru that amongst the interest earning assets which could be set against the national debt were the railways, but as the railways last year earned only 2.16 per cent, instead of 3S per cent., the statement made by the Premier was one scarcely worthy of a Minister in his position. The Reform party stood for the present banking system, and that constituted a fundamental difference between that party and the Liberal-Labour party led by himself. The bank rate of interest was oppressive and the bad times all over the world were being taken advantage of by the banking rings. The Reform papers were claiming that the Reform party must remain in office because there were some sixty millions of loans falling due in the next six years, but why were the papers not frank and tell the people about half that sum was due to the Post Office alone, the renewal of which was only a matter of arrangement between the Minister of Finance and the Post-mater-General. So that the claim that the wizard of finance must remain at the head of affairs was only a political cry raised to mystify the people. Other public departments had also lent money to the State, one of which -was the Public Trust. The Premier was in charge, of that Department, and also Minister of Finance, and he wondered if Mr. Massey would have much trouble in persuading the head of the Public Trust to renew the loan to the Ministry of Finance. Dealing with the proposed reduction of taxation, he declared that the Customs duties were too high. As Minister of Finance the Premier had indulged in a policy of borrowing and spending. Anything he could mortgage he mortgaged, and he wondered how long this career of borrowing and spending was going on. He wanted to kno.w why the Government had put nothing in the Budget which would offer some relief in connection with the currency and exchange questions. We send out of the Dominion some sixteen millions of pounds worth. of dairy produce annually, and when the costs and charges made on that amount were considered it was time the Government did something to relieve the farmers oil those charges. On the subject of loan redemption, he quoted the Budget of 1922, an.’ accused the Premier of a breach of faith in not carrying out the promises made in that Budget, which breach of faith he claimed confirmed his opening statement that the Reform Budgets were only "window dressing” intended to meet the necessities of the moment. There was the much-debated question as to whether in bad times the country should reduce the national debt or reduce taxation. He favoured the latter view, and declared that every million borrowed by the Premier was a further burden on the taxpayers. We must set our faces against large borrowings, and an heroic effort must be made to reduce taxation on companies and through the customs. Coming to the annual appropriations, he declared that the expenditure on the Departments exceeded last year’s expenditure by a million and a-half, yet in face of this the Premier boasted in his Budget of economy. There were other discrepancies in the Budget which did not square. So far as soldier settlements were concerned, the Government was only hiding the true position in the Budget. Why did they not tell the House frankly what the country’s losses were in oonnetion with these settlements'.’ While the Premier proposed penny postage he raised the telephone charges What he gave with one hand he took away with the other. One page ot the Budget told the House that the public works expenditure was to be a million and ahalf more than lacr year, yet on the next page he warned the people that they must economise. So far as land settlement was concerned, the proposals ot :iie Budget were hopeless. Tins cTuufry could only be got out -t .lifficqiiies by progressive land policy, which wc.Jd immeu.ateiw -edii.- t.le unemployed problem. We were now paying £138,583 subsidy to the public servants’ superannuation fund, and that woiiid have to go on; Out the time sv.-o coming wber others beside public servants would be claiming superannuation, a.; i that posi-

tion would require careful attention by future Governments. THE HON. DOWNIE STEWART. The Hon. Downie Stewart said he did not propose to s;»end much time in replying to Mr Wilford, tor his speech reminded him of a statement once made by that gentleman. “Where the Liberal party is it would be hard for us to explain.” Mr Wilford had complained that the railways were not earning sufficient interest on capital invested, but as a matter of fact they were earning a higher rate of interest than the standard set by the Liberal party, so that he thought there was little to complain of. Mr Wilford had declared in favour of a State Bank. How then could he support Sir J. Ward at Tauranga, one of whose chief planks was against the State Bank? Further, the action of the banks doing business in NewZealand was nothing like so disastrous to customers as Mr Wilford pictured. The fact was that a State Bank could not do better for its customers than the present banks were doing. He (Mr Wilford) complained of the exchange rates, but offered no remedy. Mr Wilford also complained that the Customs duties were too high, but all through the debates on the latest customs tariff the continual cry from the ILiberals was that sufficient protection was not being given New Zealand industries. The revision of the tariff had resulted in collection of less duty on British goods than would have been collected had the tariff not been revised, so that people who bought British goods were lighter taxed than previously. The Government had been blamed for borrowing, but the pages of Hansard were full of applications made by Mr Wilford for large expenditure on hydro-electric and other schemes all necessitating heavy borrowing. Regarding the alleged breach of faith on the part of the Government, he claimed that the monies were being appropriated to the purpose stated by the Premier as fast as they were available, and no one could do it more speedily. Discrepencies in departmental appropriations were common enough, but were easily explained by the fact that the books of the Department didn’t always close on the same date on which the treasury made up its figures. Speaking of the Budget generally, he claimed that it was a remarkable demonstration of the recovery that had been made in the financial position. The economies effected had imposed an enormous burden on the Premier, and what he had accomplished was a truly wonderful feat. The returns show that our trade with the Mother Country was gradually improving under the preferential tariff. The railways were now doing well, and the repatriation scheme Had been remarkably successful. Every department showed the effects of a progressive policy, even departments such as the State Fire, with which the Government was not supposed to be sympathetic. Their returns were improving every year. Our possession and interests in the Pacific were doing exceedingly well, and New Zealand was the first country after tne war to come back to a four per cent, loan. In conclusion, he said the legislative virtue of the Government had been so thoroughly manifest during the recent debates on the no-confidence motions that the Leader of the Opposition had to go outside the Budget to find something on which to criticise the administration. The fact was. however, that the people would welcome the Budget as one that contained many proposals for the benefit of the Dominion as a whole.

The adjournment of the debate was moved by Mr Sidey and the House rose at 9.15 till 2.30 to-morrow.