LABOUR’S POLICY

Hokitika Guardian, 12 March 1931, Page 6

LABOUR’S POLICY

A SUPER TAX. HIGHER DEATH DUTIES. (By Teleyrapk —Per Press Association) WELLINGTON. .Match 11. Increased death duties and a supertax were advocated by the .Leader ol the Labour Mr H. E. .Holland, AI.P., in an address to-night, as a means of securing the revenue to make up the anticipated shortage of £4,500,000 at, the cud of the next financial year.

Ju explaining the Labour attitude towards the Government’s economic proposals to a crowded meeting at the Wellington Town J-lall, Mr Holland sltited that the Labour Party would fight the reduction of wages to the last ditch, and would use every form that the House allowed to achieve that end. Air Holland said that bis Party stood for a special moratorium that would give some measures of protection to the mortgagors during the present

crisis. Every seat rn the body of the hall and in the galleries was occupied, while Ihe Parliamentary colleagues, and officials of the Labour -Movement, occupied seats on the platform. .Mr P. Fraser, AI.P. for Wellington Central, presided. Generally speaking, Air Holland received tin attentive hearing, his remarks being frequently punctuated with applause. One or two pel sistent interjectors mad,, their presence fell, ami one man made such a nuisance ol himself that he was removed by the police. Mr Holland spoke for an hour and a half. At, tbi‘ conclusion of bis address. Air If. Semple, ALP., moved a motion expressing confidence in the Labour Party’s policy, ami pledging support tor tlic Party in opposing the Government's wage and salary reduction l*>licv. The motion was seconded bv .Mr R. AleKeeii. and was carried amid applause.

Mr Holland remarked that it was unnecessary for him to remind the Public Servants and the wage workers thill, they Were about to pay a heavy price for the voles I hal were cast by a huge section of them in ft)”."’ and 1928. “Jt is open to any Party to review ami rovis< its programme,” said Mr Holland, “but no Parly is eiitiil.d to continue in office when ii has jettisoned almost every plank in the programme on which is: was elected.” Air Holland mentioned that Mr Ran-

som had told tile House less limn a year ago that it was not the policy ol the United Government to cut salaries or to discharge employees. Bet on Ids departure for th ( . Imperial Omlereiice. the Prime .Minister had said that tin re would be mi wage reduction, but. on his telurti, Mr Forbes had proclaimed ■ a wage reduction. Tim reason was that. Sir Otto Niemeyer had come to New Zealand with a message from ; the fmancjai dictators to reduce the j wages of the workers. When Mr f or- j bos wan Home, he had that message j supplemented then?. “Apparently in-; t crest is to bo Stic red.” continued Air | Holland, “hut no agreement between : employers ami employees is to lie treat- j as such! The Labour Party agree i that the Budget, should he balatie; d. j but we do not agree that the wages of the workers should he levied upon ; to make up the shortage. The Public 1 Service is to be asked to find £1,0(10.-. (JOO, out of a £-1,600,000 shortage. The Labour Party holds that the proper, method to make up the necessary money is the super-tax ami a substantial increase in the death duties.'" Air Holland added that, while the Labour I’arty did not favour wage reductions. it was fair to suggest that, !

even if reductions were necessary, it was a lop-sided arrangement that would take ton per cent, off every salary without making a raid on the high salaries first. .Mr Coates was not in the happiest position, because his distinguished Conservative colleague, Fir Francis Bell, had come now to do pienanep for one of his many sins, and incidentally, to admit that the Labour Party was right in W‘2'2. Mr Holland was waiting, lie said to hear Mr Conte’s answer. Mr Holland said that lie ventured to say that there was no working farmer in his constituency who wanted to see reduced wages. When it came to wage reductions, the Prime Minister was definite and emphatic; but it was in a different tone that lie talked about interest rates. Apologetically, Mr Forbes made what be termed an earnest appeal to the banks and the money-lenders to review each individual case.

A reduction of two per cent., or even one per cent., in the rate of busiest would, said Mr Holland, bring an enormously greater measure of relief to the bona fide working farmers than any system ol wage reductions wiuhl give. ’I lie L:iho.:tr Partv stood for a

special moratorium in connection with the present crisis. Legislation should he. passed during the short session which would give some protection to debtors. Conditional legislation should be passed which would include authority to set un a tribunal which would he representative of the Government and the other interests involved, such tribunal to have the power to deal with the cases on their merits. He s «rid: "It/ is not the desire of the Labour Party to assist people in evading their legitimate financial obligations, but it will bo obvious to everyone -that we are passing through abnormal times which demand special eft forts on our part to save the people from immediate disaster.”

.Mr Hoi In ml declared that, a moratorium alone, without any other objective, would he useless and prohahlv harmful. in the meantime. Jeyritimate eases of hardship should he earefnlly and definitely dealt with. I’he Labour Party held that the Dominion's credit should he mobilised. Tt was done in the days of the war. I he Labour Party stood for a State hank lor the purpose of controlling credit and finances and for the pnr- ! pose of reducing interest rates. It aimed at the nationalisation of the banking system. The public control and organisation of credit was far better than the dictatorship of the hanking institutions. Referring to the railway losses. Mr Holland said that his party was out tor the co-ordination of the transport services, and particularly the railway and motor services. Neither the Coates and the Forbes Governments had shown any capacity for co-ordinating these services. Mr Holland contended that there could he uo non-political control so long as Parliament had to , vote the money for the railways. I