DEBATE ON BUDGET.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 885, 3 August 1910, Page 6

DEBATE ON BUDGET.

ATTACK AND DEFENCE.

LAND TENURE AND SETTLEMENT. ■MR.FISHER ON RETRENCHMENT. Another day was occupied in tho House of Representatives yesterday on tho Financial Debate. -There were in all seven i speakers,- Messrs. Forbes, J. C. Thomson, Witty, and Laurenson on the Government side, and Messrs. Buick, Hine, and Fisher on the Opposition side. It is understood that there are still thirty more members who desire to speak on the'.Budget.' Mr. M'Laren will .continue the debate this afternoon. . FINANCIAL DEBATE. VIEWS OF MR. FORBES. When the' House met yesterday afternoon Mr. FORBES (Hurmiui) continued the debate, on the Financial Statement. Referring to the public debt extinction scheme he stated that there was a.general desire that such.a- proposal should be adopted. Just as there : was a growing feeling '• against the disposal of the national endowment so there'would be a strong sentiment 'against interference with .the sinking funds., A glimpse at the. amount which the Government was spending .on roading. etc., would show that there was n° truth.in the assertion that the Ministry was not in sympathy with the back-blocks settlers, lie regietted .that Mr. Massey-had raised a cry of "Tauilnanyism" tor, in his opinion, it was quite unwarranted and contained a reflection- on members 'of- the public service. It would be impossible tor the Government to .bring down land legislation:such as was promised in the Budget. Any measure providing for the freehold tenure would not be-in accord with'general, feeling—with-the "signs of the.times", all. over the Empire. The proposal by Mr. Massey. last session that, land for settlement lands settlers should be given the option of tho freehold was a bare-faced attempt to bribo the constituencies." It was equivalent, to asking the Government to.. deprive . itself of .£647,000 of public moneys. If that proposal had been, adopted it would have made a'difference of .£3000.t0 himself as he was the lessee.-of a-Cheviot holding. AVas not , that proposal "Tainmanyisni''? From his point of. view the Government's land settlement system had been verysatisfactory. ''.■.,'..,

"Tenure not the Question," There was no difficulty in-.settling the Crown 'lands no mutter what was the tenure. •■.Hβ was. confident that if any back-block land:, in the North ■ Island were offered on'lease, it. would all be taken up by Canterbury farmers. ■He challenged' Mr. ,, Massey to give details.of any-freehold scheme which would prevent aggregation. When a man was. given a freehold title ho was free to buy and ■sell. '..".. "...'■ ■ Mr. Massoy: . Xou .are hopelessly wrong. ~.■..::■■>.:. Mr. Jennings: I want limitation of leaseholds. (Laughter.) Continuing his remarks Mr. Forbes stated that, thero was no better gilt-edged security in the Dominion than thelease-in-perpetuity tenure. Land monopoly was starving the railways and driving . the people into the towns. By- wajrV.of- por-sonol ..explanation,.. Mr. 'Mnssey said''that■■.Ms' remarks on the subject of Tamraanyism, referred to a system—not to individuals. Ho had not reflected on members of tho Civil .Service, for, as he had previously stated, New Zealand, speaking generally,' had just as good men in the Public Service as' were in the public service of any other country.' As regards his statements with referenc.o to the question, hd was prepared to make them on any platform, arid felt sure that his audiences would agree with him. Then, again, Mr. Forbes was wrong'in stating that he would have benefited if tho settlors under tho land for settlement system were given thn frethold for Cheviot where he held his property did not' corao under that Act. Limitation of area, ho would also remind Mr. Forbes, was already-;dealt, with by law. ' ■ ■ ' : : MR. BUICK'S SPEECH. Mr. . BOICK (Palmerston North) said he. had been sent into the Houso as a freeholder, and' to oppose tho Government, in which his district had no confidence. He thought that the optional freehold created the most energetic and onterprising settlers. He knew of Govornment runs held on expiring leases which were not worth half the money they wcro worth a few years ago. This was becauso tho lessees were getting all the valued possible, out of the land before thdir'leascs expired. Ho would have every man in New Zealand .a .freeholder as soon as ■■ possible. If he had not the money to obtain a freehold, let him go on the land as a leaseholder, but give him the opportunity to acquiro the freehold: as soon' as he could.. 1 Their parents had come-, to Now Zealand tacuuso they were not satisfied with leaseholds. .When thu next No-Conlidencti motion was taken, about November of next year," the Opposition would not be tea votes behind, but about ten votes ahead! -Figures read by Mr.. Hogg in regard; to the King Country lands showed that the leasehold tenure .did not prevent. aggregation.

A Coat of Many Colours. Mr! Buick went on to-explain his reasons for opposing tho Government. Sir Joseph Ward, he said, walked jauntily on to the platform in his cont i»f many colours. A few years ago he was the sworn friend of ■ the bookmakers, and foisted them upon "aa unwilling' community. . Afterwards he became a social purist, but though the .totalisator was an honest machine, be said that if the House would not. accept his friend the bookmaker, he would not let them have Iho totalisator. Ho 1 pitied \ Sir. Joseph Ward if ho brought down a Land Bill, the opinions' of his-followers were so mixed upon that question. Sir Joseph Ward brought.out figures in sucha.rush thnt it was. practically . impossible 'to know what they wore. He, said that he could not' acquire lands for settlement because thft owners wanted such high prices, but that was the effect of the high values placed on property by the Government for purposes of taxation. There had not been much real saving'by retrenchment, because those in high places had had their salaries increased;- The money spent on repairing the old Government House to fit it for Parliamentary Buildings would have built a. proper Governor's residence that would' have served for fifty years, and the money spent on tho new viceregal residence on Mount View—he could never/understand why it S was. called Mount View becauso there was no view to speak of—would have provided satisfactory Parliamentary Buildings. . He thoroughly approved the Government's proposals for the development of water power.

A Premature Suggestion. TJntil the Government decided not to borrow any more money from outside it was useless to talk about a 'sinking fund tor extinguishing the public debt. There ivas great need of telephone extension :u the- country districts. . Ho doubted if £in proposed importation of Polled Angus cattle .would be of much benefit to small farmers, but the importations of blood .stock for tho experiment farm should prove of value. Mr. Mackenzie had stated his intention to keep a stilF back on tho question of establishing a dairy school at Palmereton" North, but his replies to several questions which tho speaker had put to him on this subject did not show much of the stiff back. In bis attempt to show that farmers wore not heavily, taxed, the Hon. T. Mackenzie had not included local taxation, which nm.iunted to six times as much ns Iho general taxation. To argue as Mr. Mackenzie had done was .only to mislead his hearers and mislead.

himself. If.thero was one thing to which the retrenchment knifo should not have been applied it was education.

MR. J. C. THOMSON ON THE PUBLIC DEBT. Mr. J. C. THOMSON (Wallace) opposed .Mr. Herdman's suggestion that advances .should not bo made by the Advances Department to men with means, and alleged that, if Mr. Herdman could have his way he would abolish this Department and throw the country into the hands of the private money-lender. Mr Thomson defended the growth of the public debt, of which ho said a large proportion was reproductive, and also the rate of taxation, for,which there was the compensation of new services. Ho relerrcd to the comparison made in regard to our debt and the debt of a country like the Argentine. The comparison was an unfair one on the part of the press,- necauee the circumstances were different. Here the State was doing everything in regard to the'-build-ing of railways, etc. In tho Argentine private: companies were building the railways. As regards- Canada also the comparison was unfair, because there also so much was don,e by private companies.

When Borrowing Should Cease. He held that New Zealand could not cease .borrowing for works until the Minister of Financo could show a surplus of .£1,000,000. He believed fhat retrenchment should be continuous. As to education he believed that the primary systom should not be. trenched upon for the purposes of- secondary education. He objected to education being handed over to such bodies as county councils. Directly they began to mix up education with roads and bridges they would produce a similar state of affairs to what they found House of Representatives, in which hardly a debate occurred in which some road, or bridge or railway was'not brought in to distract attention. He objected to the burden of education being thrown upon the local bodies, and he advocated the co-ordination of the administration of primary, secondary, and technical education under one board of management. This would lead to greater efficiency and greater economy. He agreed with the Budget except in regard to one omission—the guestion of land tenure. •■ • ■ j Mr. WITTY (Riccarton) spoke in favour .of Mr. Rolleston's land policy. He held that the smaller man should have the leasehold. " If hi wished he could sell it at a later stage and buy a freehold. 'But. the leaseholders should not be allowed to sell on the 2i per cent, rebate. In regard to tho Maoris, he said the sooner they did away with Maori representation the bettor. (Opposition hear hears.) The Maori should bo treated in the-same way as the Europeans, and when they were so treated they should be asked -to pay the same rates and taxes as the Europeans do.. If the.Auckland League, who wanted so many railways, would agitate for one good lino at a time, tho southern members would support them. The Gisbbrne line should be finished first of all. He did not think there would be a better paying line in the North Island. Any Land Bill passed this year would simply have to be altered again. . It was impossible to. get a fixed tenure. It Was bolter to assist maternity cases than to squabble'everlastingly about the tenure of land. '

VIGOROUS SPEECH BY MR. HINt, Mr. ItlN'E (Strutford) stated that the groundwork .of the late Mr.: Rblloston's land -system was tho deferred ' payment system. There were at present just four Civil Servants on the special settlement for which they had. been given preference. He was surprised that, any Civil Servants had gone on to this land, aiter a life spent at the desk. Speaking on-the land question, Mr. Hine said that the policy of the Opposition wns to put everyone 011 tho land who wished 'to go .there, with tho option of tho freehold. "■' Speculation would then be leducod to its minimum. It was suggested that there would be a breacH'of'contract iii giving the option of tho. freehold Ip. Crown tenants, but a breach of contract had been committed already by the Land Bill of 1907, which annulled the right previously given''to holders of small grazing runs to convert their tenure into lease in pcrjwtuity. He would like to know why the lease in perpetuity system was to l>o .continued in: Nelson, and in Nelson alone, for two years after.its repeal by law. The House had had no statement on the Nativo Land policy from the Minister for Nativo Lands. There was tho Native Land Act of last session, but who could understand its complications? • Ho would like to hear the Native Minister propound a policy. Mr. Carroll had been advancing' backwards for the'past five or six years. In Taranaki they bad a system of Maori landlordism, and over .£22,000 a year was paid to Maori landlords under tho West Coast Nativo Settlements Reserves Act. They could traverse twenty and thirty miles of road metal'ed by Europeans nnd going through Native lands which paid no rates. Hβ. did not believe that the Maoris would pay any rates or taxes while Mr. Carroll was in office. Telephone .extension was not likely to go far in the back country, while the present exorbitant charges continued.. ■ ■ " Promise and Performance; ■ ■The statement, that tho Government hoped to nccelerato the extension and improvement of, roads had been made with great emphasis before the election of 1908.' , It was then stated that .£250,000 a year extra for four years ;was to be spent on backblocks roads, but tho records showed that the amount had not been spent. Mr. Hine quoted a resolution, passed by the Taranaki.Land Board, drawing i attention to the hardships and distress suffered by Crown tenants, owing to the lack;of reasonable access to their land. 'This wns a common experience in the backblocka of ' Taranaki. During tho years 1907-08 the Government spent ,£680,000 odd .on roads, and during 1903-1910, in which years it was promised that .£250,000 extra should bo silent each year, only £730,000 had been expended, nn increase of only about .£IOO,OOO. Whero was the other .£IOO,OOO that was to bo spent? Mr. Hine went on to criticise the Government's finance, and complained of the increasing charges for loan transactions. The Government used the Post Office Savings Bank accumulations in an unfair manner, especially as they'-represented the savings of the working men'of the Dominion. The Prime Minister obtained loans in London atper cent., and received only .£9B 10s., yet when he came to deal with the Post Office Savings uccount he made the working,men accept £3 10s. for £W. Inferring to-national annuities Mr. Hine said that if £1 was set aside on the birth of each child it would provide a pension of ,£3O or .£4O at the age of 65.

MR. LAURENSON'S REMARKS. Mr. LAURENSON (Lyttelton) contended that a wrong impression : was conveyed by Mr. Eerdman's figures iu regard to declining industries, though the figures quoted were correct. Mr. Laurenson quoted figures to . demonstrate the increasing prosperity, of the country. He stated that'in'lßß9 there were 7£l bankruptcies, the total 'amount involved being X' 755,000, and in 1898 the number of bankruptcies was 330, and the amount involved £158,000. Tho number of assignments of estates showed a'similar dScreasc: In 1889 thero were 13.il per 10,000 of the population in gaol, the number in 1908 being only 8.8. Tbe accumulated wealth per head was greateT'in New Zealand than in any other country.,' Mr. Laurenson declared that Messrs. Wright and Fisher had gone against the pledges given to their constituents on the land question in voting for Mr. Masscy's no-confidence motion. He also spoke in defence of the Deatli Duties Act. No Government had ever done moro for the small farmer than the present Administration. When the history of New Zealand was written,' it would be stated that the blackest crime against any party was that there had been a party so lost. to telf-respect and decency that when it wonted to get into power it said , , "l'nt us into power, nnd we will sell you ■ tho national endowments." Mr. Lauronson asserted that the Opposition , was not opposed to land aggregation. MR. FISHER'S VIEWS. ' Mr. USHER (Wellington- Central) prefnrad his remarks by a justification of hip. vote on tho wnnt-of-confldence. motion. He said that lie had no hesitation

under the circumstances in voting against tho Government. When Mr Wright and ho joined tho Opposition they did so on tho understanding that they should bo allowed to retain their principles on tho leasehold question. To Mr. Laurenson ho would say that he bad never yet recorded a vote lor the alienation of a single acre of Crown lands. But tho Government which Mr. Laurenson had supported had been alienating Crown lands at an extraordinary rate. On March 31, 1806, there were 7,300,000 acres of Crown lands available ior disposal; by March 31, 1910, the area was reduced to 4,282,000 acres. Mr. DH: Your party would sell the Crown lands.

Mr. I'isher: I would rather deal with Mr. Massey than with the present Administration.

Continuing his remarks, Mr. Fisher suid it was clear that the cost ot the Departments had swallowed up year by year tho whole of the increase, in the revenue. He believed that tho cost of living, which had gono up of recent years, could be reduced by economical administration. Debt Extinction Scheme. Referring to the debt extinction scheme, Mr. Fisher stated that in 1901 a similar proposal was urged by Mr. John Duthie, and in reply to it Sir Joseph Ward stated that the proposal was absolutely impossible, that it had been suggested before, that he at bno time had been very strongly in favour of it, but that he had gono into details of the matter, anil that when the people realised, as ho had done, the impossibility and futility of the whole scheme, 90 per cent, of the people would unanimously reject it. And >that was exactly the same' scheme as tho Prime Minister had brought down this time. Tho Prime Minister: Nothing of the kind.

Mr. Fisher said that'the Prime Minis; ter had commended Mr. i'Vaser for opposing the scheme. Sir Joseph Ward, however, had now found that the national debt was growing at such an enormous rate that ho had had to throw twelve .'millions of it over the back fence this year, and pretend that he did not carry it about with him. He had attached twelve million pounds to the State Guaranteed Advances Department. Reverting .to the proposal for wiping out tho debt' by means of a sinking fund, Mr! Fisher said that the idea probably emanated in the first' place from William Pitt at the time of the Peninsular War, and Pitt had found it impracticable and impossible. ,If the Prime Minister was in earnest about extinguishing the debt ho should attach a sinking fund to each loan, and set up a board of sinking fund commissioners. The debate was adjourned, on the molion of Mr. M'Laren (Wellington East), at 11.50 p.m., and the House then rose.