THE BUDGET

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 87, 9 October 1931, Page 5

THE BUDGET

AN EMPHATIC CRITICISM

A* strong attack on the Supplementary Budget is made by Mr. P. J* O'Begaa in a statement to "Tha Post." "I propose," rtates Mr. O'Began, "to supplement the scant comments offered by the Minister of Finance on the proposed abolition of the graduated land tax, the outstanding feature of the great betrayal with which the men who once boasted of the name of Liberal have now identified themselves. •

"Although the facts have not been put clearly, I have extracted some information from the StastiticalEeport for 1929. There it is shown that the graduated tax falls on 9143 persons, that each of them 'owns' 1500 acres of •the people's heritage,' having an average unimproved value of £14,000 each, and a total unimproved value of £135,000,000! The total unimproved value of the privately-owned land, of this country is in round figures £338,000,000, but, although the fact is Blurred over, and the Minister very, deftly avoids . reference to it, £191,000,000 pays no land tax whatever; Yes, I repeat that three-fourths of the freeholders of this country pay, absolutely nothing by way of land tax. Of course, the payers of the graduated tax are the richest men in the country. But the total land tax revenue is now little more than a million annually, that is to say, half the rate revenue of Wellington City! I ask is it fair or equitable that these men should cast off their comparatively trifling obligations while the landless masses should be called upon to pay taxes on bread, on tea, sugar, and other of the commonest necessaries, to say nothing of such unutterably'mean imposts as the poll-ta* which is euphemistically termed the unemployment levy! | "The Minister's reference to the recommendations of the Commission of 1924 recalls most unpleasant facts. The Commission was composed of friends of the Massey Government, and it was a remarkable coincidence, to say the least, that the Commission's recommendation to abolish the graduated tax repeated the like suggestion by Mr. Massey a year earlier when addressing a 'rally' of supporters at Christchurch. As a matter of fact the Commission 's recommendation was made in defiance of the most emphatic evidence in favour of the tax by many of the witnesses who gave evidence.". Kef erring to the suggestion that the loss in revenue was to be replaced by an income tax, Mr. O'Began states: "I am well aware that that will be tha answer, though it is palpably no answer at all. The land tax and the income tax are fundamentally different both in principle and effect. The land .tax is really a rent charge on the community; value of lanc^-it is the assertion of the right of the people to their own property. The income tax falls upo» earnings—upon production. The harder you work, the more you will pay. Accordingly, the mere land monopolist, the careless or incompetent fanner, hates the land tax, but he does not mind the income tax. He can blockade land to his heart's content, because the income tax will not affect him., That will be paid by tho mail who gets tho most out of his land. The land ■ tax exempts production and so will fall on both alike to the relief of the producer. As a matter of fact, if all the money, bow collected by the Government by; way of income tax were left in tha pockets of the people who pay it, more good would result to the public Capital is always seeking investment, and if invested in production, will do more'good to them than if it be merely paid away; in taxation. No, the question in issue is not answered by considering tha mere question of amount paid in tax*tion, but it is the method of levying that matters all the time.

"This Budget shows the utter hollow* ness of the pretence that coalition waf) necessary in the public interest. Th« Elain fact is that two political group* aye. pooled their resources to make * I daring declaration of war on popular , liberties. Naturally, they are afraid of the people, the great mass of whom live from hand to mouth, and so we may expect the postponement of the elections and possibly the destruction of the great boon of triennial Parliaments which was wrung from the gquattocracy over fifty years ago by; Sir George Grey. Here we have a grave public wrong proposed by an unrepresentative Government in a House foist* ed on the country by a dishonest electoral system. No, the people will be emphatically and uncompromisingly; against this betrayal of their best interests."