BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

Hokitika Guardian, 4 May 1925, Page 2

BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CAULK ASSOCIATION PROPOSED .SILK DUTIES. LONDON’. May A. An outcry has developed over the "hole country against .Mr Winston Churchill's proposed silk duty nicknamed “Silk Stocking Budget.’’ Ju conxet| lienee of the outcry the rreasttry issued a statement to the eflect that the criticisms will he considered. and the export trade "ill be consulted. It is now declared that it was never intended that because tin article contained a little silk, it v.as to lie taxed to the extent of one third of its value. There- was an irumen.-e range of gods in which a small proportion of silk "as employed, and it- is admitted that the effect of imposing a tax of one third on the full value of such articles would malic the duty highly protective. It s understood that Mr Churchill has been in consultation with the customs authorities, the result of which uiil be a system of charging calculated to carry out Mr Churchill's real intention. The most pointed criticism of the silk duty (ante in the House of Commons from .Miss Wilkinson (Labour M.P.) "ho declared that tirtilitial silk had to-day taken the place among working women of wool, which they cannot alford to buy. It was largely used for knitted jumpers, which the women made themselves, and one

pound at three shillings was sufficient for a jumper. She proceeded to argue that a tax of three shillings per pound meant a hundred per (entnni increase, but a tax ef four shillings per pound 'on the heavier silks, used by the rich women, meant only (!!’> A-’l per I out uni. Concerning stockings Miss Wilkinson said a sixpence tax might be a matter of indill'orcnce to women v.bo bought stockings at two guineas a pair, but it meant a 35 1-5 per cent, increase to the women who bought artificial stockings at is fifd a pair. LONDON. May 2. Lord Oxford (Liberal) speaking at Glasgow yesterday, declared tbe silk tax is a tax on the raw material of a groat industry. Sir Alfred Aloud i Liberal i speaking at Cardin’, asked Why destroy one of the tow prosperous industries which tbe country had?" It was a mystery who advised Ml Chur bill tn take siteli a stupid step, and lie was certain Mr Churchill would bo obliged to abandon sucli a proposal.” TO AID I.M.M lOH ATION. LONDON. May A. The “Morning Host’’ in an editorial, discussing the Budget’s provision lor preference. siyß: “When this system is once working, it will make practicable, a comprehensive migration within the Empire, for which we have waited so long. Although tlie budget makes no provision for such intgral ion. its every line shows the necessity lor it. for the new insurance scheme means an milled charge on an industry. which is burdened by ever a Ic.illinn unemployed.” The leading article incident ally suggests the immediate tnodiliealinn ol the Portuguese treaty, tn enable Australia and Soul!; Africa to label their wines as port LRITT-M HI'DO FT PRAISE. LONDON. May 1. Mr Winston t hureliill. addressing the I’rimro- ■ League at IL i her: llaii, said bis budget <•( nsl-tcd ot a series ol carefully adiu-ieil balances. The tax on silk would produce exactly lour millions tins voir and sovi!i millions next year, which would precise!, meet the i ost of tin- re lie |' eiveu on earned 111-i-nines to the smaller taxpayers. lie was conlident the -ilk tax would not diminish einpluynicni ami would be paid bv an I'uoriniius number ol people in smaller in.- talnum;.-. Woiicn. il convinced ii was for tlie i minify s good, would nut hesitate to assume I'm burden of tbe tax. Another balance to the Budget was that the .McKenna duties would fully defray the cost id Imperial C mterenecs. Referring to the previous night's scene in the House ol Commons. Air f. little hill vigorously assailed the LaIhi nr critics. Mr Philip .Snowden had said it was a rich man's budget. Let him and his Socialist friends say that at the new year to two hundred thousand widows, who would then be drawing pensions, also to six millions who would he assured ol pensions, or say to old age pensioners. ” Comrades we meant to give you these on a contributory basis, but we bad tn go and help our Russian friends lirst

CRITICISM INCREASING;. tPr-eivcd this day at S a.m.) LONDON, May d. Mr Chamberlain's budget has been the subject of an increasing volume ol criticism during the week end. The chief points ol attack are the silk dutv and the added burdens to the industry in I'cmseqeume nt the extensions to the insurance scheme. " Reynold , News ” goes so far as to say that the sill; duly will he withdrawn ami the insurance proposals will he modified, postponed or withdrawn '•lit i rely. The effect, of such a withdrawal would Ice to rut the heart, out of tiie budget entirely. There is no doubt, however, the budget propose Is are undergoing a review at the Treasury and modilieatioiis ol the original proposals will not he unlikely. -Mr d. L. Garvin, discussing the budget in the “Observer" says Britain has been kept down by unexampled, taxations. No mortal man could put this situation right hy one's first hudget work. It can only he clone hv a connected series of budgets. The nation has never had a clearer or graver duly than to strengthen the hands of its Chancellor.

L R ITT All PARLIAMENT LONDON, .day I. The House of Commons, In gg:t votes to 2S rejected a motion by Mr Buchanan. Labour member, who moved the second reading of tlm Private Members Bill leased on the Washington Eight Hours Convention. providing that ! hours of labour in industrial occupations. except seamen and turrn labourers, should lint exceed I- weekly. Mr Kirkwood in seconding the motion vigorously protested against the efforts cd engineering employers to increase the hours of labour. Mr (larrv iCoitsorvuliv") moving the rejection, declared tie hill would injure the industry, ami cause unemployment. The provisions ol the Washington Convention could only he eftectively introduced by simultaneous legislative action in all countries, who- ■ representatives signed the convention.