HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1569, 27 May 1887, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Thursday, May 19.

The House met at 2.30 p.m. "etSNERAL BUSINESS SUSPEND B».

The Premier informed the House that owing to the no-confidence motion then pending, the Government did not feel called upon to reply to questions or transaot any other business till the motion was disposed of. RESUMED FINANCIAL DEB AT B. Mr Maoarthar resumed the debate on Major Atkinson's amendment. He said that under the present Government the taxes had increased, also the expenditure m every Department. He considered that the Flnanoial Statement had been brought down before the Representation Bill was disposed of In order to create confusion, bui the result of snoh o nraaion must rest on the shoulders of the Government. It was incumbent on the Governi ment to Bee the Representation BUI passed through all its stages before the House j.dlssolvbcl. He denied the savings rete rad to by the Treasurer were real sitings, and as to the Bpeolal settlement scheme he considered it would be a failure. Members should assist m retrenchment, and Government] before xeduoing the salaries of the Oivil Servants should have oommvnoed with their own salaries. The whole of the Financial Statement he oonslderad an electioneering programme. The Property tax proposals were inequitable, and would result m driving capitalists from the colony. He oondemned the policy of of the Government relative to the North Island Trunk Railway, and ridiculed the idea that the line would be completed la 1890. He considered that the Ministry had been unsatisfactory to the country. Mr Dargavillo said that the principal objection to the financial proposals was the graduated Property Tax, Jmt he pointed out that Major Atkinson 'waa the author of that policy. He denied that the previous Go7ernment had effected retrenchment, and were they to regain office, he doubted their sinoarity to do so. The prlnoipal objections to the tariff vnere made by the Chambers of Commerce who represented the importers, but the country endorsed the Treasurer's proposals. The overthrow of the Government waß desired by throe classes, viz , the Freetraders, the friends of the Oivll servants, and the so-called land sharks. He favored the special settlement soheme, and eulogised the Government for inaugurating it. He thought the tariff would be acceptable to the colony, and that a polloy of Protection would induce prosperity. The alternative proposals of the opponents of the Government wore taxes on tea and sugar, and an attempt to reduoe the Education Vote,

Mr Montgomery said the saving of £65,000 on railways was doe to a great, blander m oTer-BBtimating the traffic by £157,000 The other savings olaimed by the Treasurer were no savings at all. The real deficiency that existed was £192,000, not £92.000 as slated by the Treasurer. If In 1884 the late Treasurer had had the windfall of £104,000 which had now aoctned he would not have had a deficiency of £150,000. There would therefore have been a deficit this year of abont £220 000 only for this windfall. The remedy proposed by the Treasurer was to paBH tha Customs Duties Bill, to increase taxation by £186 000, 'o increase the Property Tax by £76,000, and to borrow to assist the Land fand. But he (Mr Montgomery) thought the country could not stand such a heavy burden of taxation as was proposed by Ihe Treasurer, The Treasurer hlmsolf had eald that the codt of living had been reduced 25 per cent, If that were so he should have proposed a likb reduotion of Ministers' own salaries instead cf 7£ per cent as pro* posed m the Financial Statement. He intended to vote for the amendment.

The debate was interrupted by the 5.30 p.m. adjournment, The House resumed at 7-30.

Mr Montgomery continued. He considered that the House could plaoe no dependence on the Treasurer's promises of retrenchment, and they even now asked to put on what was equivalent to £280,000 additional taxation. He voted for the amendment, not on parly grounds, but m order to allow an appeal to be made to the country.

Mr Pyke thought the true object for which the tariff was brought down had been rightly desoribed m a number of ways. One was to ralie more revenue, another to effect retrenchment, and another to encourage industries. A Protective policy would ruin the colony, and continued interference with the torifl would injure commerce. Retrenchment could be effected m various Departments of the public eerrlco, bat he objected to an Income tax on Civil Serv ants. Heavy taxation was ruinous to the oolony, and he pointed out many wayß m whioh retrenchment might be effected.

Mr W. F. Buckland condemned the administration of Government.

Mr ffur&thonae could not believe that New Zealand was to be made more prosperous by increasing the already heavy duties, and quoted various Inatanoes of projected Industries which had failed or died out. He had come pledged to resist any inorease of taxation, and waß therefore bound to oppose the Tariff Bill, bat he had not loafc confidence m the Government as administrators. He ad* roitted that members usually ( hough t that retrenchment shou'd be made m anyone's district bat their own. He consideied that savlnga might be tffucted m working railways, higher education, the Native Department, and other luxuries.

Mr G&rriok oomplained that Government had made no earnest attempt at retrenchment despite the heavy deficit, which wri really £298,000, not £92,000. Even when the number of members had Men reduoed to 71 the eoonomy thus effected was not allowed to be preserved. Honorariums conld well be reduced, but there was a growing class of politicians to whom the money web all In all, and they would not allow it. He strongly urged tbafc they should begin with themselves. As to the tariff it wai made up on protective dntloß, and he quoted many illustrations of their ill eff ots. Ho was sorry Government had oboßon to take their stand on this BUI, because he believed them to be as capable and honeßt as an> men win oould be found to replace them, The prim l^la .of t ration should be to levy it where it wa3 most equally distributed and most readily collected. He. did not eeß why there should be any exemption from the Property Tax. The great remedy for the financial situation was honest retrenchment.

Mr Smith s»ld they had to consider who was to succeed the Government. If they left It was olear the polioy of the Opposition would bo to pat taxation on the working classes. He reviewed the notions of the Government In favorable contrast to the performances of their opponents, dwelling particularly on the way m whioh the settlement of the country had progressed under their auspices. It was no use thinking of retrenchment when it was well known everyono and each district was unfavorable to It when It affaofcod him or them personally. If a good eoheme could be adopted no doubt it would be the proper course to pursue. Sir Julius Yogel moved tho adjournment of the debate ano] the House adjournod aU245».