THE FINANCE BILL

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 174, 24 July 1936, Page 8

THE FINANCE BILL

SECOND READING DEBATE I RESTORATION OF "CUTS” FAVOURED ALL ROUND 1931 AND TO-DAY CONTRASTED [ Per Pre=s Association. ] WELLINGTON, July 23. When the House of Representatives resumed at 7.30 p.m., the Hon. Walter Nash moved the second reading of the Finance Bill. He said that had the cuts not been made in 1931 there would have been no need for the Bill. Had the cuts not been made there would not have been the amount of suffering there had been during the last five years. It was admitted that real difficulties had to be faced in 1931. but the difficulties and sufferings of the people were extended by cutting of wages. But now 1936 had arrived and wages would now be restored to the 1931 level so that they could go forward to something better. Government’s Two-fold Object The Government's policy had a two-fold object; first, to increase production and, secondly, to improve the standard of living. The Government had endeavoured to help first those who were most in need. Therefore, it had dealt with the unemployed first and then dealt with wages and salaries. But pensioners had not been forgotten and when they were dealt with any increase would take effect from July 1, as was the case with the present Bill. He explained that where an award 1 had come into existence since 1931. 1 an attempt would be made to readjust wages as far as possible to those paid in 1931. Referring to duty on steamer passages, Mr Nash said that in the fu- j lure the duty would be paid on a oneway fare only. It might be that it was not a good tax to have on the Statute Book, and some day it might be removed. Work for Public Service Commissioners Referring to the two Public Service Commissioners, Mr Nash said they would have plenty of work to do, as there was much regrading and reclassification to be done. Mr Nash said that a clause giving the Minister power to control industry on money at call by building societies would remedy a difficulty that had caused trouble for years past, and which tended to keep interest rates up. The Hon. G. W. Forbes (Leader of the Opposition) defended the reduction in wages made by the Government in 1931. He said it would be well to remember the circumstances that then existed. The people were apt to forget that the then Government had given an assurance that cuts would be restored as things improved, and a partial restoration had been made. He was thankful the restoration was now being made. He asked the members to contrast the Budget position of this year with a surplus of £280,00b and 1931, when the deficit was nine million. Steps had then to he taken to meet the position. Mr Forbes said he did not know where the money was to come from. The Government had a reserve bank and he was somewhat apprehensive of the result. He contrasted what had happened in New Zealand with the happenings in other countries, and the Government had not wanted such things to occur in New Zealand. In the United States many Govern- i ment servants could not be paid and j lhe Government was determined that j no such thing should occur in NewZealand. The Hon. D. G. Sullivan: But you left a hundred thousand others unpaid. Mr Forbes referred to the setting j up of an Economists’ Commission and its recommendations. The falling value of exports meant a falling income and that was responsible for the increase in unemployment. Mr Forbes said that better returns for wool and butter, and the expenditure on Public Works from borrowed money meant a better Budget and the Minister of Finance would probanly have all the money necessary for reasonable requirements. Mr Forbes criticised the Government’s proposal to attempt to readjust interest rates on loans held in the United Kingdom. He welcomed the Prime Ministers explanation of a statement he nad made and that the British bondholder would be fairly treated. He thought a compulsorv return to the 1931 standard would mean hardship in some cases. Perhaps an employer s business had fallen off and he would not be in a position to pay the old rates. He believed the way the present Government was going made for a short life and a merry one. At the end of a period of extravagant spending New Zealand would be lucky to be in the position of many other conntries. worker, he felt, would be in a much worse position than he was at present. He predicted that, before long, the rising cost of living would soon overtake any restoration of wages. Benefits given with one hand would be taken away with the other. Mr Forbes concluded by criticising . the Government for the haste with which it was putting through its legislation. Mr J. A. Lee (Govt.. Grey Lynn> said he hardlv liked to say "Good evening, Mr Hyde." "Good morning. Dr. Jekyll.” and referred to the past Government’s method of passing legislation. He said that in 1932 in 72 days the Arbitration Court was down and out. five-year-olds were out of schools, pensions had been reduced, the life of Parliament, the very’ constitution. had been tampered with, the unemployed army had grown to an unprecedented figure, business was disorganised, and. from one end of the country to the other, there were riote. There might not be any precedent for haste in doing good, but there was ample precedent for haste for the bad things that resulted from those actions. He said that the Onnosition had talked of askinthe British people to fund the New Zealand debt at a lower interest, but now the

i House was asked to believe such a i thing had never been done. He referred to the position existing between Britain and America, and mentioned that the debts owing Britain by Italy. France, and Belgium had been wiped off and New’ Zealand should receive the same treatment accorded outside countries and the people would endorse that. Mr Lee said that in 1931 butter was as high as it is to-day, but the quantity proI duced to-day was very much greater. Mr. Lee. continuing, said that the ! deposits in trading banks became • steadily greater while the people bp- : came steadily more pauperised, and i the people's deposits in the savings banks came down by thousands. i Restoration From Taxation. Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Opp., Central Oiago) said the Bill was an admission of failure on the part of the Government because it showed it had to pay the restoration out of taxation. Benefits were illusory and would he cancelled out. He reminded the Government that they were only restoring a minor part of the cuts. The major portion was restored in much more difficult times. He challenged any member to deny that restoration was not made restrospective further back than July 1. because Government funds would not permit. The Government, he claimed, could not fulfil its promises. He urged it to be careful I what it did regarding oversea loans, as it was essential that New’ Zealand’s high credit on the London market must be maintained. He predicted that costs would rise to such an extent that the farmer would not be able to market his produce at a profit. ! He regretted that restoration was not I made retrospective to April 1. Answering the Hon. D. G. Sullivan, Mr. Bodkin said he favoured | the restoration because the price of wool and other primary produce had improved and all sections of the community should share in the prosperity. He asked if it was proposed to restore the remote allowance to country school teachers. He hoped the Minister would do so. Mr. Bodkin thought a Parliamentarian was the roorest paid public servant in the !country, but he would not support the payment to a member travelling at the request of a Minister because the clause, as drawn, was too wide and might permit of abuses in that the member could travel at the country’s expense to spread propaganda. He criticised the pronosal to set up two Public Service Commissioners, and contended that one could do all the work available Mr. W. J. Lyon (Govt.. Waitematai said the Bill would satisfy the bulk of the pecple that the promises of the Government were being fulfilled, and a suggestion that restoration to civil servants should be made retrospect we to Anril 1 was merely an attempt to set one set of workers against the other. The deb n was