Taxation Major Issue In The Australian Election

Wanganui Chronicle, 5 September 1946, Page 5

Taxation Major Issue In The Australian Election

(Special from C. R. Mentiplay, N.Z.P.A. Correspondent) Received 6 p.m. SYDNEY, Sept. 4. It is now plain that the Federal elections will be fought primarily on the issue of a reduction of taxation.

With a little over three weeks

to go before the country goes to the polls on September 28, it is also patent that the Labour Government is still on the defensive, and that no notable effort has been made to counter the detailed promises made by the Opposition leaders.

'Fhe strongest and most influential statement by Mr. Menzies and Mr. Fadden is that, the Commonwealth must risk taxation cuts in order to restore incentive, and so increase production. Both argue that only by increasing output, can the country escape the continuing rise in prices and the menace of inflation.

The Opposition campaign has been capably handled, even to Ihe timing of the leaders’ speeches, which sandwiched Mr. Chifley’s survey of the Labour administration between two well-balanced statements, embodying a constructive future policy. Both Opposition leaders chose tc deliver policy speeches at actual political meetings. This contrasted vividlj with Mr. Chifley’s chosen method ol reading his address into the micro phone of a recording machine, and the contrast has not been lost on Lite man in the stre'*’

. Opening his campaign Ihe Liberal 'leader, Mr. Menzies, promised a taxa- | tion cut of £25,000,000 operating from (January, 1947, but said that he would (leave it to the Country Party leader, Mr. Fadden, to show the practicability of subsequential concessions. Mr. Fadden, who js an accountant by profession, and who, in the event of a Coalition Government, would probably occupy the position of treasurer, produced schedules to show that reductions could total £35,000,000. In reaching this figure, he worked not on his own calculations, but on Mr. Chiffley’s estimated expenditure of £479,000,00 for the year ended June 30, 1947* The reductions, as outlined, range from 100 per cent, on an income of £l5O a year to 20 per cent, on an income of £2OOO. The Opposition contends that the recent cut by the Labour Government of £17,500,000 was absorbed in the general rise of revenue, due to the workers’ returning to the industry from the services. The existence of this rise is shown by the Treasury figures, just released, indicating that customs and excise receipts for the first two months ot 'this financial year were £4,750,000 ■ above the receipts for the correspond- ' ing period last year. The Liberal and Country Party 1 platforms show minor differences,

which should not, however, prejudice the harmonious working of the parties.

In contrast, Mr. Chifley’s address revealed an iiiconchwiveiiess and absence of promises that has proved disappointing to many electors.

He based his appeal on lhe claim that Labour administered soundly during the war and will continue to do so, but has not yet made any positive proposals to deal with the problems which have arisen since.

The promises of the Opposition have been stigmatised by Mr. Chifley as “unbridled election bribery on a scale that cannot possibly be paid.”

With all the policy speeches now made and the campaign nearing its climax, the electors are left with a clear idea of what to expect from a Coalition Government, but have little

knowledge of labour intentions. Nevertheless, Labour is strongly entrenched, particularly in New South Wales and Queensland. In order to defeat Labour and have enough margin to appoint a Speaker, the Liberal and Country Parties will have to take 1 13 Labour seats. As this implies a 'change of allegiance of 250,000 voters, out of total 4,500,000 neither side can [afford to be confident of the outcome.