BUDGET DEBATE

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23977, 18 June 1943, Page 4

BUDGET DEBATE

WOMEN’S LAND ARMY DISCUSSED COMPLAINT ABOUT LACK OF EQUIPMENT (P.A.) WELLINGTON, June 17. Continuing the financial debate in the House of Representatives to-day, Mrs A. N. Grigg (Opposition, Mid-Canter-bury) made a strong protest regarding the Government’s lack of consideration for members of the Women’s Land Army. The scheme, she s&id, had been started for the benefit of farmers, who were desperately in need Of help, and also because of the demand on primary producers for increased production. It was nearly a year ago that the scheme had first been mooted, and a great deal of thought had been given to planning the Women’s Land Army, conditions of work, and equipment. The Treasury had approved of the necessary expenditure on equipment last September, but equipment was not forthcoming. The member for Waite* mata (Mrs Dreaver) and herself had done a great deal of travelling, addressing meetings, and it had seemed that the scheme would be a very great success; but things seemed to hive gone ag tray. Both she And Mrs Dreaver hid received dozens of letters of complaint, and last February she hid approached the Prime Minister, whb had issued i statement promising that the matter of providing equipment would be gone on with as soon as possible. However, letters were still coming in to her, showing that the position was anything but satisfactory Mrs Grigg read three letters, one from a landgirl, one from a parent, and one from an employer complaining about lack of equipment. She said she had submitted a letter to the National Service Department, and equipment was now being supplied; but members would agree that the lag betw en the time the girls enlisted and the time they received equipment was nothing short of deplorable. She mentioned that thousands of girls had joined up in other war services, and she believed that they would join up With the land service if they were given fair and proper treatment. The total number of girls in land service in the Dominion was 699, half of them being farmers' daughters working on their own farms. Further applications to join up had been received: but 127 had been withdrawn, which was not altogether surprising, \vatrp« diij] TAxet; Mr R. McKeen (Government, Wellington South), replying to the Opposition contention that since the Labour Government had assumed office it had been responsible for an Increase in direct taxation of £33,000,000, said this was a mere bagatelle compared with the increase there had been in incomes, Wages and salaries during the present Government’s period of office had increased from £72,500,000 to £150,000,000, and in the same time the gross income of the farming community had increased from £57,800,000 to £81,300,000. Mr McKeen, referring to Mrs Grigg’s claims regarding equipment for land girls, said that most of the girls had now been supplied with full equipment, and there were only a few who were waiting for other pieces of it. The department had all the dress equipment in stock, ready for issue, except for dress uniforms and overcoats, the bulk of which would be available within the next few weeks, Mr C. W. Boswell (Government, Bay of Islands) said he wished to express the gratitude of the citrus fruit growers of North Auckland to the Government for resisting the temptation to control the price of locally-grown citrus fruit. This new industry had been commenced in northern districts at considerable expense, and the Government by its rction in not controlling prices had enabled growers to receive a fair return for their labours. Mr Boswell also referred to the introduction of the waterfront control system, claiming that as a result work on the waterfront was now being done more cheaply,.more quickly, and more efficiently than ever before. Soldiers’ Incomes

The Budget had had a very favourable reception throughout the country, said Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Independent, Egmont), One anomaly in present taxation, he said, was the fact that many soldiers did not pay income tax. He did not suggest that those who had gone overseas should have to pay taxes; but there were many men in New Zealand who were receiving high incomes who were not required to pay income tax, or social or national security taxes. Many of these people were in receipt of higher incomes than they had ever previously received, and he thought that they should be compelled to shoulder the taxation burden with the ordinary citizen. It had been said that the Dominion should pay the whole cost of the war out of taxation; but Mr Wilkinson said he did not agree with this. If we could pay 50 per cent, out of taxation we were doing very well. He endorsed the Government’s policy in this respect. He also urged that after the war revision should be made immediately of the high taxation on unearned income, otherwise businessmen would lose incentive, and we would have stagnation. He asked if the Minister of Finance had considered what was being done in other countries about payment of income tax. In New Zealand payment was always about 12 months in arrears, That was a bad system, and he suggested that we might adopt the “pay as you go” method. This would help salary and wage earners and the Treasury, too, because it would mean that money was coming in all the year round.

Mr Wilkinson had some criticism to offer regarding present E.P.S. activities. He agreed that the war was not over; but he did not think that a state of emergency existed at present in the Dominion, and he considered that there was far too much running round in connexion with the E.P.S. There were instances of elderly men being required to attend parades nearly daily, and a lot of people in country districts considered that the service was only to keep a few people in salaried jobs. Mr A. S. Richards (Government, Roskill) challenged the statement of Mr W. S. Goosman (Opposition. Waikato) earlier in the 'debate that subsidies paid to the coal industry in the last three years were equal to an allowance a man of £147, compared with £l4 received by the dairy farmer. Mr Richards said that on the basis of computation used by Mr Goosman the figure a man in the first year was £22, in the second year £26, and in the third year £SB. The decision to pay time and a half for Saturday work was in accordance with the practice in other Industries, and why should there be discrimination against miners? He objected to consistent attacks on industrial workers by members of the Opposition. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 10 p.m.