MISUNDERSTANDINGS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 72, Issue 199, 22 August 1929, Page 7

MISUNDERSTANDINGS

TAXATION OPINIONS MR. POLSON CLEARS THE AIR In the House of Representatives yesterday, Mr W. J. Polson (Stratford) rising 'o a point or order, said that statements had been made that he had claimed to be expressing the views of the Farmers’ Union in regard to the Budget taxation proposals. He denied having made any such claim. ( Special “Chronicle” Service ] WELLINGTON, Aug. 21. Three points of misrepresentation by the member for Raglan, Mr W. Lee Martin in his speech in the financial debate, were made in the House today by Air W. J. Polson. In the first place, he said, he had been misrepresented by Mr Martin, who had de lared not only that he (Air Polson) had said that Labour desired to put all taxation on land but that he had persistently said so in spite of remonstrances. “I was referring,” said Mr Polson, “when I spoke in the debate, to the taxation in the Budget, which I understood the member for Wellington Central to urge should be placed upon the land. But he has since informed me he intended to refer to land and income tax. In proof of this assertion I showed my uncorrected Hansard proof to two members of the House, including one member of the Labour Party, which clearly showed 1 was dealing only with the proposed taxation. If I have misinterpreted the view of the Labour Party on this mutter I will gladly withdraw my remarks. “I have been further misrepresented in the statement that I have persistently said that Labour wished all taxation put upon the land. On the occasion on which 1 discussed taxation outside this House the member for Raglan was present at Hamilton and on that occasion I suggested that in supporting increased Customs taxation to assist industry the Labour policy was protectionist. The member for Ragj lan then replied to my remarks, stating that the Labour Party was fundaJ mentally free trade. Aly point is that in view of the .above 1 could not have suggested that Labour desired all taxation placed on the land. I have never made such a statement.

“Thirdly,” said. Air Polson, “a further statement was made by the member for Raglan that I claimed to speak as the mouthpiece of the Farmers’ Union. In this debate I made no such claim. In reply to an interjection I said I spoke as one who believed that he enjoyed the confidence of many farmers as expressed by resolution and all I claimed was that I was as sincere and anxious to secure justice being done to the farmers as anyone in this House. I have perused my uncorrccted Hansard proof and it makes it quite clear that 1 spoke as the representative of my electorate and I made no statement which could be interpreted as an attempt to voice the opinion of the Far mers’ Union.”

Claiming to have been misrepresented in turn, Air Martin, Labour member for Raglan, said he was glad to have Mr Polson’s assurance that he was not voicing the opinions of the fanners. Air Speaker: “Where has the hon. member been misrepresented?” Air Martin: “The misrepresentation is that the hon member states that he was not speaking as president of the Farmers’ Union, but 1 draw attention to the fact that the hon. gentleman went out of his way to show that for a large number of years he had enjoyed the confidence of fanners.” Reform voices: “Hear, hear.”

Air Alartin: “I drew attention to the fact that for a number of years he had occupied the position of president of the Farmers’ Union and that at the last conference he was unanimously elected president and that references were made to the fact that the president had been elected to Parliament where he would be able to express the opinions of fanners.’’