The Hokitika Guardian THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19th, 1922. THE GOSPEL OF BUNKUM.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 October 1922, Page 2

The Hokitika Guardian THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19th, 1922. THE GOSPEL OF BUNKUM.

.A i. most every Ministerial move, comments an Invercargill paper, brings tue realisation that it is election year. Rebates and concessions are in order though the weight of debt has not been reduced and though there is little money to devote to those purposes that will bring permanent relied. So far as we are aware, the Taxation Committee expressed no solicitude for the small taxpayer, yet- the Prime Minister emphasises the fact that this class is bunefitiug. It is quite as evident that the Government bad not the courage to readjust taxation more equitably is it I is that the goodwill of the majority is desired at the present moment. The relief to companies is practically negligible, and in any case cannot delay long the fate of those industries that are threatened with serious trouble as a result of the sustained pressure on their finances. There are no moie cogent arguments in favour of redistributing taxation to relieve industries than those advanced bv Mr Massey, and yet he applies a principle which merely provides pocket money for the taxpayer instead ol permitting companies to institute those development operations which will assist national ledcmptioii. The Prime Minister conceals trouble with a veneer of platitude. He is a consummate artist in repeating wliat everyone knows should be clone, ami using this as an excuse for doing the direct opposite. “High taxation lias resulted in a reduced output of agricultural and pastoral products,” he says, but he makes no attempt to change the system in an effective manner, though he atul every other Minister echoes the papular demand for the increased pioduction which will end our financial worries. The benefit of the reduction cannot he appreciable so tar as coiufpanies are concerned because they provided last year six of the eight millions of Income Tax and the entire concession to taxpayers is less than one million under the recent legislation. Ihe hopes and fears of the Prime Minister are endless. He is optimistic or pcssimistic to suit his own convoniouco, ami the* country is exvet-ted to nwopt his small comforts and to view the lutnre in the rosy tints he supplies to clothe his imagery. The necessity for revising company taxation is shown by the fact that lie anticipates collecting two millions loss of Income Tax next year, while C‘900.000 is outstanding. This is not consequent upon reduced taxation, tint upon reduced earnings due to restricted business tluongh a lack of development more than anything else. No one denies that the pressure i< having disastrous lonsoqeences, and yet to all intents and purp< scs it is lioing maintained at a volume other needy Ministers ot Finance and Chancellors of the Exchequers have considered inadvisable. It is not surprising that tbo inconsistency of Mr Massey’s statements provides a theme, for Opposition criticism, but bis colleagues come to bis rescue and' by intruding irrelevancics cloud the issue, and their chief escapes in the fog artificially induced. This is one of the tricks of modern polities, but we wonder why the public permits itself to he deluded by pretext, platitude and promise that have done service since the party gained supremacy in the Dominion. The closet friends of Reform protest most strongly against the financial policy of the Government. They are convinced that the position is most unsatisfactory but they claim that the author of this unsatisfactory condition of affairs is the only man capable of administering our finances and a chastened country would sooner acquiesce than take the trouble to think the matter out for itself.