SOCIALIST BUDGET.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 586, 14 August 1909, Page 5

SOCIALIST BUDGET.

UNIONIST CRITICS. / , A TAX UPON RAW MATERIAL. COST OF COLLECTION 1 AND THE YIELD, (liy Telegraph.—Press Association.—Oopyrlcb'.l London! August 12. In the course of his criticism of tho Government's Budget proposals; as set forth in the Finance Bill,, Mr. Austen Chamberlain' attaoked the Government's change of front in-substituting 'a duty, of 6 per cent, on nihing rents (including royalties) for tho- previously-proposed duty of id. ill the: £, on.the capital value of ungotten minerals. A Non-Working Owner Safe, ; Mr. Chamberlain said tbo tax on ungotten minerals, which had now been abandoned, was, the geni of Mr., Lloyd-George's "-collection, and the Chancellor had defended it, on the ground that it • was. necessary to enforce development. 'According to the present plan/an owner not. working his minerals was safe; but when'rhe began to work then the tax collector-paid'him a visit. . The Government was going to tax all the coal and iron ore in the country—the raw materials of our great industries—and also to tax granite, qilarricd here, whilo we should probably send to Norway for granite on which no tax would bo paid. • . : Other-speakers epphasised 'the disproportionate cost of the collection of the land taxes to the : amount of'Hhq probable yield. Not Flnanoo, But Socialism. ' -Mr. H. Cox. (Liberal Free-trader arid anti-. Socialist) supported the Budget as a whole, but hoped that when the Ministerialists spoke in ,the prpvin'cos in support! of these land - taxes, they, would explain; that other objects wero intended' than raising ; money ' to meet a' deficit of. sixteen'.millions. . ■ Mr. Balfour,: Leader of the Opposition, declared -that' it" was- quite ; plain they were not dealing' with flnanco in thife part of the Bill, but . with the provision of machinery for; the ;60cial schemes of ..the more extreme sections :'of ..the Government's supporters. Mr. Asquith replied that these would prove more. productive hereafter, and would assist futuro Governments in meeting, the increased expenditure, for which the country must be prepared. .'• ' ■

[As was shown by-the report'of the interview between Hi". Lloyd-George and the'iiiine-pwnersi reproduced yesterday, the Chancellor has ao-: cepted.what.'he tsie's' to b'e. ; tlie View—that. an 'ownPr of "mineral' land should : jbe taxedv'-'oiv .what - ho' aotually. receives, and -not' on -what is purely, a .speculative estimate, of tho value." Hence the tax .on rents .and royalties,-in place of that-on'the capital: valuo of ungotten minerals.. A tax on uhgotten minerals has. behind it something of the argument 'that is ;behind- the - tix'oiv • the. unimproved xaJoeH 'that of "enforcing, development.": '.But ; Mr. Chamberlain, at .once makes .tho point ,that, in .view' of the change, this argument ..must be -To tax royalties.instead of. ungotten minerals is to put an impost on working, instead of bri v.ndn-working; ;;it even encourages noilworking, and is to that extent' a contradiction-of;-the ."enforcing-development", polity. .'.-'Mr.' .Chamberlain: iimkes' the further point, that' a, ■tax on mining royalties'is a;burdqn.ou the'raw.' material of the ;great 'industries.] j EVERY PROPERTY TAX SHOULD FALL ON LANDLORD. THE GOVERNMENT'S POLICY. ■ (Roc. . August 13, 11 p.m.) : V----:-. ... London, August 13. ' ;I .ln. tho,,House. of Commons; : ' Mr..BalfoUr vainly iuquii-eij Itoovfeasomf s - i)iq/..&6voj , n' ment's change ( of;Jroiit : witli,: regard : : io,'ilib 'label"- taxes,; particularly'.'tlio 'snb'stitutloii; of a -'cfiiiyon. mineral:, rents - far "tho' .jax tOA•; te gotten minerals. . ; y.' ' '- ' Clause Dropped Overboard. Sopio Liberals objected to tho abandonment of-;the. latter, tax being,,discussed* in viow-''; of 'the fact, that;' tko..'i'easoris';for. tho change could bo. discussed when- tho, resolution'was proposed to enable the .new clause, to be moved, - Mr. J. C. ( , Wedgwood (a Liberal) ;and a mombor of a pottery .firm) insisted that tho .no'tv", proposal- for:' would penalise the-.working of minerals. .; The closure waß applied, and Clause 12— onaotiug tho now allaadoned duty on ungotten minerals—was omitted from the Bill, by 172 votes to 10. ■ rClause 13 ms then dealt with.. It provides, inter l -aUs, that the Un laid duty. shall bo recoverable from the. owner of the land, and "shall bo borne by ■ that owner or ,person, .notwithstanding,any contract to tho contrary." '. : '; ;': ' '-. - . In Defence of Existing Contraots. .'. In , view of Mr, :Asquith's, declaration-that existing - contracts would be respited, 'this clause led; to a' strenuous- protest from Mr. E. Parkcs (Unionist); who Held.-that' existing contracts were ; being' over-ridden, and that tenants would he unable to obtain long leases.': .This would .be against- tho interests of thousands' of small people, who Wore' wishing, to" hold land". .-. -■ ■ . - |~ The Solicitor-Goneral (Mr. A. Dewar) declared that the Government's view was that every property tax ought to : bo borhO by', the landlord.

EXEMPTIONS.

, OPERATION »OF • THE CLOSURE. London, August 12. : In the course of an all-mght sitting' on the land clauses, two notable amendments wore made in tho duty on undeveloped land (jd, in tho £ on sito value).- London squares wore exempted, and the ■ size of gardens which were to bp granted exemption was increased to five acres. '« ■ ■ Despite opposition from the' Ra'dioalu, Mr. Lloyd-George moved the closure oh , sixty amendments in a single: , b'atoh," including threq of, hia own, concessions/ : Tho .motion was' carried by' 156 votes .to 29. ■