THE TARIFF.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 9238, 16 October 1895, Page 6

THE TARIFF.

Tho i_'Yiev.i.in-:Hi«j made in the Customs and V.xoise Duties Bill were moved by Mr W« .',. He first moved to place gas meters j unii-r 'he same tariff as apparatus for pro- j duc!-i_ 10 percent.; also, to place steam ensT-;;•••« mid parts thereof, including boilers | thy- »:.'cf, imported specially for mining or j dairying purposes, under a 5 per cent. duty. He explained that these amendments were j eimrily omissions which occurred during the pa_si-_;« of the Bill through the House. Sir ROBERT STOUL' moved to strike cut the portion of th« clause fixing a 5 per < out. dufy on dairying and mining mar: niery. Such machinery, he said, could be nude in the colony, and the old tariff of 20 [ii r cent, ou the class of machiuery ■houlii l>e adhered to. i Mr SEDDON pointed out that similar ) classes of machiuery were admitted at a duty of 5 per cent., and it would not be fair to now specially tax Brining and j dairying machinery. j A lengthy discussion followed. Sir Robert Stout's araeoilm-i was lost by 42 to 12, and Mr Ward's motion wa_ carried. Mr WARD moved in class 5 of the tariff schedule, after concentrated essences, to omit "ea-ences in liquid form," also in clause 12 after " separators and coolers " to insert "for dairying purposes," and after " machine saws " in the same class to insert a new item, "imchiuery for gold-saving purposes and processes." Agreed to by 47 to 5. LAND TAX AND INCOME TAX BILL, Mr WARD moved the second leading of the Land Tax and Income Tax Bill, to impose land and income tax for the year. He said the Bill was the usual one, and he presumed the House would not raise any objections to its pissing. There was no variation in the r_te of the tax. Sir ROBERT STOUT said it was a most unusual thing to biing down au Aid to Supply Bill before the Public Works Estimates were passed. He felt sure that if the present Government were in Opposition they would not let this Bill pass so easily. Mr SEDDON felt somewhat grieved that be should be reminded of tbe indiscretions of bis youth, and he had hoped Sir Robert Stout would pot incite other members to act as he (Mr Seddou) would have done before he had more experience in the House. He reminded the House that the estimates would in no way affect the land and income tax. Tho motion was agreed to, and tho Bill committed. Clause 4—Date of payment oi tax, Mr MONTGOMERY moved—"That tbe land tax be collected not earlier than the Ist of November, 1895, and the income tax not e-rlier than the 31st of January, 1895." Mr WARD said it was not desirable to tie the hands of the Treasurer in this way, and the Government must exercise their judgment iv matters of this kind. He proposed to make both those taxes collectable m late as possible, and he hoped tho Committee would not accept Mr Montgomery's amendment. Mr T. MACKENZIE suggested as a comJroinise the 31st of December instead of the st of November for the land tax. Dr. NEWMAN moved—"That the dates be the Ist of December and the 31st of January respectively." Mr WARD asked Mr Montgomery if he was prepared to go in for borrowing. If he caused this tax to be fixed annually not earlier than the Ist of November the necessities of the colony might require borrowing. Sir ROBERT STOUT objected to the Treasurer raising this cry of borrowing at every possible occasion. It seemed to him as if Mr Ward was trying to find a pretext for a big borrowing scheme and to familiarise bis followers with it. Mr MONTGOMERY failed to see what connection existed between a borrowing policy and the fixing of a date for the collecting of the land tax. Mr G. W. RUSSELL did not see that fixing a date in this Bill would create a precedent and bind the House in auy way. Captain RUSSELL thought the tax Should not be collected in one lump sum. He rrould not understand why the tax should be collected from farmers at such an early date, and suggested that the tax should be paid in two equal instalments with two months' interval. Mr WARD said this was not such a serious hardship aa the House thought. He represented a farming constituency, and he hud never had a oomplaint ou the matter. Dr. Newman's amendment was lost by 32 to 18. Mr Montgomery's amendment was lost by 29 ro 26. Cant. RUSSELL moved—"That land and in-Mine iax, exceeding £20, shall be collected iv two equal instalments at intervals of not. less than two calendar months, and not prior to the Ist of January, 1896." Mr WARD said he could not accept the amendment. After a lengthy discussion, Mr DUTHIE moved to report progress. He said it was evident the House had not heart to work, and it was really time the Government should tell them what business thoy intended proceeding with, If they had such a statement before them, he felt sure the House would assist the Government to bring tbe session to a close. Lost on the voices. Captain RUSSELL'S amendment was tost by 26 to 20. The Bill was reported without amendment, read a third time, and passed. LOANS CONVERSION. Mr WARD moved the second reading of the Local Authorities Loans Conversion Bill, to authorise local authorities to convert and consolidate their loans. He said he proposed to move in Committee that when conversion by a local body had taken place a sinking fund should be established of not less than 1 per cent, or more than 2 per cent, for the purpose of redeeming the loan that may be converted. 1 his would make it compulsory for a local body which converted a loan to j establish a sinking fund for its redemption, j He proposed also to make the currency of the loans fifty years instead of thirty. He should propose in Committee to bring all i the Harbour Boards in the colony under | this Bill. The idea actuating the Government was to give local bodies power to improve their financial position and to ' inscribe their stock. Mr DUTHIE said the fact of the Treasurer proposing to make several important amendments to the Bill in Committee was a proof of the haphazard and unnatural character of this Bill, which was the case also with to many of the measures of the present Government. He was opposed to the whole scheme, which was nothing but a delusion, i He held also that they should not give local bodies power to convert their loans at 4£ per cent. If the Bill passed it would be a great blow to our local institutions. j Mr BELL thought the Bill might be ' useful if the Treasurer would not bribe local bodies by offering them the released •inking fund. These accrued sinking funds were savings of the past and they should not give the ratepayers at present power to squander them. What was the use of esta- ] bushing a sinking fund for the future when in the same Act it was proposed to squander the sinking fund of the past. He fait that what might be a great benefit to local bodies , could be made under this Bill a means of profligate expenditure by those bodies Mr MONTGOMERY thought Mr Ward was to be congratulated ou having brought down a very feasible scheme, which waa very much wanted. He differed from the Premier, however, in the way he proposed to dispose of the sinking fund, as everybody would be anxious to convert their loans tor the purpose of having an immediate amount of ready cash at their disposal. He strongly deprecated realising the sinking fend of the past. Sir ROBERT STOUT said it was better to have a general Act to enable local bodies to convert their loans, and on that ground he congratulated the Treasurer on his Bill. He (the Treasurer) had, however, introduced three important changes in his Bill, tbe first dealing with Harbour Boards, the second establishing sinking funds, and the third changing the currenoy of the loans to fifty years. It was, in his opinion, a bad financial operatiou to convert for long terms, and this opinion was expressed by the best financial authorities. He hoped the Treasurer would modify this question of the Siuking Fund, aud that it would not be used for public purposes, but for the costs of conversion and the remainder for tbe reduction of the debt. Mr BUCHANAN opposed the Bill in the interests of iocal government and sound finance. Mr G. W. RUSSELL thought the Bill was very nsoeuary, and although there were some

points that were not desirable, they could be threshed out in Committee. He thought the Bill was capable of being made a very useful measure. Mr CROWTHER had no objection to the second reading. Mr ALLEN said if the Bill provided for the conversion of loans colely, ho should not object to it, but it allowed local bodies to utilise sinking funds for other purposes th_n those for which they were intended. Mr HALL thought it right that coming generations should become liable for works at present constructed. Mr MORRISON supported the Bill. The motion for the second readiDg was agreed to. The House rose at 2 a.m.