PARLIAMENTARY.

West Coast Times, Issue 10339, 31 July 1896, Page 4

PARLIAMENTARY.

]Per United Pre^s Association.] Wellington, July 29. THE HOUSE. The House resumed at 7.30. Mr Newman continued his speech in criticism of the Government policy.

Mr Hogg warmly approved of the G< vernuaent policy and said the goo« 3 deeds Ministers had done should be weighed in the balance against their sins of omission and commission. The Opposition now attacked Government for the?r Banking legislation but he asserted the majority of the other side of the House had supported the Government in that legislation. It was not the Government side of the House which wanted to strangle the enquiry now going on into the Bank business but it was those whc were connected with the Bank troubles in the past. He defended the Native policy of the Government and challenged a comparison of that policy with that of their predecessors. He also warmly eulogised Mr Carroll's service to the . tive Department and said the Minister representing the Native race in Cabinet had done more to settle the Uriwera and other Native troubles than any other gentlemen that had been ]in office in the Colony. He applauded the efforts of Government in fostering the settrement of the people on the land and in crushing monopolies of every kind. It was be' cause Government were carrying the war into the home of the capitalist and monopolist that they met with such bitter Opposition and wpre now confronted by this want of confmtsuce motion.

Sir R. Stout sal- 7 he had no fault to find with the tables in the Financial Statement, as Mr Seddon had put matters very lucidly, but he wished to draw the attention of the House to the state of the finance of the Colony. Leaving out the borrowed money and the amount of £ 180,000 with which the year had been started, there was a net deficit for the year of £109,365. The interest account of the colony was steadily mounting up and in two years (since 1893 '94) it had gone up no less than £116,390, nearly all of which went to absentee capitalists. Our loans were also mounting. An average increase of loans ur.der the Seddon Government since 1893 had been £1,374,93g as compared with £400,381 for two years of the Ballance Government, £757.213 for the Atkinson Government and £1,350,000 for the Steut-Vogel Government. The question was whether the Colony could continue this borrowing policy. He complained of the way in which the accounts of the Land Department were kept and said no idea could be gained from them of the way in which purchases of lane for settlemei t had turned out, for instanceno profit and loss account of the Cheviot estate bad evtr been given. Dismissing the borrowing proposals of theiGovernment, he said of the one million specially mentioned only £250,000 was to be expended on immediately remunerative works. He contended the proposal to spend £200,000 on gold fields was needless as English capital was pouring into our mining districts and no assistance wa< asked. The Government polio}' as laid down in this year's statement wast a ':omplete abandonment of the policy laid down by Mr Ballance in 1891 and 1892 and those members who were true to their pledges crust vote against it. He referred at some length to the alleged seizure of the local bodies sinking funds, which also was an abandonment of the policy of 1891 and 1892: On every loan that was now given to local bodies, the Colonial Treasurer, by his manipulation of the sinking funds, was making two per cent out of it for his cvi - rent revenue. Even comparing the budgets of the last twelve months they were diametrically opposed to one another. 1 1 was absurd to raise the cry that the success of this motion meant the defeat of the Liberal party and the return of the Conservative party to power, and he hoped the House would vote according to its conscience without any concern as to the names Conservative and LiberalHe ridiculed the incomplete way in which the Old Age Pensions Bill had been placed before the House, and said it showed the ir competency of Government to deal with this great question. He severely criticised the provisions of the Bill and said it really amounted to a tax on the saving and thrifty. No attempt whatever to solve this great difficulty could be made under this Bill. He also criticised the State Fire Insurance Bill, j which would tend to help the property class and interfere with private enterprise. There were many other things that the State could take up with better advantage to all concerned tbau State fire insurance, and the Bill opeind up the whole question of the extent, vi uit rfurjice of tb» SUto with individual tmt*

prise. Under this Bill all private Insurance Companies would be swept out of existence and another hu-je State monopoly would be created. The Bill was unnecessary. It would be an injury to the Statf and would violate the firsi, principles of action by the St»te, viz — that private enterprise should not be interfered with unless it was, for the well-being of the State.

Mr Morrison twitted Sir R. Stout with having formed a coalition with the Opposition. He warmly supported the policy of the Government. They heard a good deal about the self-reliant policy of the late Mr Hallance, but many of those who now spoke in that way had reviled Ballance when he was head of the Government. He combatted Stout's contention that the State fire insurance scheme would play into the hands of the I propertied class, and proceeded to defend the scheme at some length. A rug of Insurance Companies had been formed at a meeting recently held in Melbourne andjasaresult the tarifflhad been f tormously increased and he considered it was quite right for the State to step in under the circumstances in the iuterests of r.he great mass of the people. If priv; te companies could make such a great srecess of the insurance business Government could do likewise, at twenty-five per ceufc reduction in cost and with an equal measure of success. The old ag' pens 1 <>n scheme must be carried out on general lines and he thought payment should be made to every man and woman in the colony who had complied with the conditions.

Mr Buchanan said Government must, be reduced to great straits when they

put up a member to defend them who displayed so much ignorance of the sinking fund question as the member for Caversham had done. He then went on to refer in detail to the financial operations of the Government all of which he strongly condemned. Mr Maslin asked where the consistency of Opposition was, they were now stror.^ly condemning the borrowing of Government but many of their party had voted for the land 3 for'settlement, advances to settlers, and other Acts which dealt with borrowing. In order to get the Hppo *ition out of the hole they were in, he moved an amendment to strike the following words out of Russell's motion " that the administration of Government has been unsatisfactory that while they have professed to have abstained from borrowing the public debt has been increased between 31st March 1891 and 31st March

1896 by £4,928,581." The debate was adjourned on a motion by G.W.Russell.

The House rose at 1 a.m.

July 30.

THE COUNCIL.

The Council met at 2.30.

Mr Jones gave notice to ask whether the Bank of New Zealand was in a sufficiently solvent position when it established its pension fund to show such liberality towards its employees.

Hon. Mr Bolt was elected by ballot to fill the late Hon. Pharazyn's place on the Banking Committee.

Owing to the want of confidence motion proceeding in the Lower House the Council adjourned till Tuesday. THE HOUSE.

The House met at 2.30 Mr G. W. Russell resumed the no-con-fidence debate. He compared the last two financial statements made by Mr Ballance with that just brought down by Mr Seddou and aaid there was an absence of the broad Liberal spirit and in Seddon's budget Stout had made out there was an an tual deficit in this year's statement but according to his (Russell's) calculation there was a genuine surplus for the year of £132,000. Discussing the question of taxation he pointed out that since 1888 there had been a steady increase in the load p'.'t on the masses cf the people but tho direct taxation on property was growing less and this was a matter that Government should take seriously into consideration. He objected Government wengoingf to borrow a million of money to ■^pend in various parts of the colony so chat places like Canterbury, Otago, Nelson, and Marlborough, which were already settled would be taxed for public works from which they derivpd no benefit. The proper way would be to loeal'ae the responsibility for thrse works. He deplored the fact that Canterbury ami OUigo had increased very little in population whilst Auckland, Wellington. Hawkes Bay, and Taranaki h<ui largely increased owinj to the large amount of public money poured into these districts, which was not the case in Canterb 11*3 and Otago. He was returned to tht House as a member of the Liberal party, and although he should not back down v tlie opinion he held independently in th«. 'lousu he should not put himself in th< position of helping Capt. Russell to oarn his motion, which might result in putting the Conservative party in power.

Mr Willis praised the administration of the present Government and said the colony had been in a state of stagnation fora long time before they came int. power. He did not appiove of 11 d verument did, but he asHerted that uiti advent to power had been the means o' putting the colony into a good position He warmly approved of the State fir insurance, and thought that was a matte' which Government should take up. Hi was not so sanguine as Government ove the old age pension scheme and though: it was quite beyond the means of th colony to carry on. Giving Governmen a general support he was simply carrying out his platform pledges.

Mr Fraser condemned the use of th sinking funds of local bodies, pointing out that Govoruraent were practically borrowing mouoy at 3J per cent andlcnd-

ing it again to local bodies at 5 per cent, using the profit of If per cent as revenue instead of putting it into a sinking fund as provided by law. Ministers had persistently refused to state whether this had been done in accordance with the advise of the law officers of the Crown. He beliered the actual surplus for 1896 was £138,935. that it was the most genuine surplus they had, yet, at the same time, a great deal of the surplus was made up by mc» eased taxation. He criticised the administration and policy of the Government at some length.

Hon Mr Steward contended that the. responsibility on account of the Bank of New Zealaud should bo shared by tho Opposition mcml era, as they had voted for the guarantee to the Ba"k. and the j expenditure by Government of this ! money should not be regarded as a departure from their non-borrowing policy. It , was impossible for the House to pass Russell's motion without taking the consequences, for Russell would immediately be cafled upon to form a new Ministry. He would vote against Russell'R motion and also Maslin's amendment. He could have no confidence in a Conservative administration, and when a change came in the present administration it would be from the ranks of the Liberal party and not from the other side of the House. The House rose at 5.30. The House resumed at 7. 30. Mr Geo. Hutchison thought Captain Russell's motion was an excellent one as it would make such gentlemen as the member for Riccarton, and the member for Waitaki, declare themselves and their action. He referred at length to the sinking fund and said that the late Mr Ballance, in establishing this fund, never intended to give it with one hand and take it away with another. It was evident that Government felt they were doing something not creditable over this s inking fund as they observed the utmost secrecy over it, and it was not until the last day of the last session that Sir Robert Stout forced Government to admit. they had seized this sinking fund. He held there was no necessity to go in for a million loan for roads and bridges, as the present system could be continued foi another year, especially as there would be considerable increase in revenue. H seemed to him they wanted a complete change in their system of finance and the present budget was merely an array oi figures and showed no policy. The portfolio of Minister of Finance seemed to have fallen into decay. Mr Seddon had no special aptitude for finance and although he had the capacity of an ostrich for picking up things, nature had denied niin the power of assimilation. The Premier had put before the country misleading issues and hud said this motion meant either putting the continuous Ministry into office ot retaining the present Government. That was altogether misleading, as the continuous Ministry had suffered for it since six ye"rs ago. Mr Seddon had also put it forth that the Opposition wanted to change the present system of taxation, but the colony was now committed to that taxation and what the Opposition wanted to do was not to increase the direct taxation but to decrease the indirect taxation, especially on the necessaries of life. He held the policy of the colony should in future be free trade, which would enable the country to advance more than in any other way. It would, he contended, be a misfortune for the country if the present Ministry were permitted to remain in office.

' Mr Ward said Mr Hutchison alleged that Messrs Seddon, M'Kenzie and him self (Ward) had advocated anon-borrow-ing policy and had gone in for borrowing. He quoted extensively from figures and said the total additional amount on which interest had to paid under the vfyime of the present Government was £301,774, which, d'vided among the whole population of the colony represented only 3fd per head and for this the people had obtained enormous advantages in the construction of roads, bridges, etc. He denied the sinking funds had been seized. Debentures had been issued against the sinking fund but the money was not seized. He referred to the whole question at some length and pointed out how a better system coulo 1 be devised to protect the whole of the sinking funds of the colony. Stout had contended that instead of their being a surplus there was deficit, but he (Ward) combatted this and held that as theie were no deficiency bills issued, and no overdraft, there could be no deficit. It was tb^ usual practice to carry torward a balance at the beginning of the year and that was justified in the present year. In dealing with the criticisms of the Opposition on the Customs tariff, Ward said last year £3800 was receive.d by jnoieases, but against that £40,000 was remitted by articles put on the free list, which wore hitherto dutiable. Tobacco and sugar, neither of which was altered, brought in £10,000 extra, which showed the elasticity of the revenue and increased spending power of the people. The accusation that Government' had imposed a heavy additional taxation on the peoplu was groundless as figured he had quoted -hosved that the free items were in excess of those on which duty was paid. So far from departmental expenditure having increased, as alleged by some members, he declared that it had actually decreased Ward vent on to defend the proposed -expenditure on roads, bridges, railways, goldfields, etc., saying it was necessary in the best interests of the welfare of the colony. As instancing ihe desirability of fostering the gold mining industry he pointed out that last year New Zealand had exported more gold than the much boomed colony of Western Aivtmlin, and he believed money expc, d. . in this uiiaunel would be returned I

hvy iold fa (,1m ueyply of tile colony,

What more judicious expenditure, he asked, could be iccurred than in attracting tourists to the colony. The Opposition had not formulated a policy that would assist the colony in a greater degree than the policy of the present administration and their silence on this point could only be interpreted to mean that they were unable to do so. He believed the general verdict of the country would be that Government were deserving of renewed confidence and support.

Mr Montgomery disagreed with the j attitude taken up by the Government on the question of the sinking f un<?» and said the seizure of the funds was dut: to a strained interpretation of the Acts dealing with the subject. He spokt at some length in support of his conten tion that the transaction was an improper one. He hoped Russell's motion woul'l be divided so that members who disapproved of the sinHng fund transactions could vote on it as they pleased. He re f erred in detp.il to other financial operations of the Government and attributed the enormous loss last year uuder the Advances to Settlers scheme to the desire 01 the Treasurer to go in for a large loan straight *ofE. He thought Government was entitled to credit for having tor the last 4 years constructed all public- works except railways out of the revenue.

Mr Allen »aid his views with regard to the|lucal bodies sinking funds were similar to those just expressed by the member for Ellesmere. Discussing the Public Works Fund he said most of the borrowed monoy had gone into this fund and during the last 5 years two million of money had gone in this direction. He combatted Ward's contentions on the subject of alteiationb in the tariff and maintained that the increase in the customs revenue was derived from articles on which increases had been placed last session. He contended the increase in taxation as per head of population was much larger than claimed by Ward and he quoted statistics in support of Mr contention. He wanted to know why the trading community was not to be treatedlin the same generous manner as the goldmining industry. As to the seizure of the sinking funds, he said he believed that however members might speak or vote they would teei inwardly that this was morally a wrong transaction. It was entirely wrong that the local bodies should be taxed specially to aid revenue m this way and if it were to be continued they should do away with the sinking funds of local bodies altogether. Mr M'Guire dealt at considerable length with matters relating to the New Plymouth Harbor Board bonds he also adversely criticised the general administration of Govrnment and said he would vote for Ruaauil's motion.. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr M'Nab and the House rose at 12.40.