DEBATE ON THE BUDGET.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2472, 26 August 1922, Page 4

DEBATE ON THE BUDGET.

OPENED BY MR WILFORD. TAXATION QUESTION DISCUSSED. WELLINGTON, Aug. 22. In the House of Representatives this evening Mr Wilford began the debate on the Budget. He said he proposed to discuss tile policy of the Government as set out in the Statement, the publication of the public accounts, and the taxation report; he proposed to show that while the Government had preached economy it had not practised it in connection with the finances of the country. The Government had .badly blundered, and what was worse they did not appear to bo aware of the extent to which they had blundered. He proposed to indict them with (he statement of their own Auditor-General, and in this indictment every Minister of the. Crown was implicated. Dealing first with' the Public Works Department, he quoted Hansard to show that he had already drawn attention to the looseness in connection with the stores department, and then quoted the report of the AuditorGeneral, a report which he said in days gone by would have wrecked a Government, but this Government would not budge from their seats. Mr Wilford complained of the method of keepin> r the accounts, and then proceeded to deal with the taxation report. Ho said that there was ono thing that everyone shoidd know, and that was that the country had exceeded its taxation limit, and there was no taxable reserve left. Yet in spite of this, the Government was proposing to raise new louns and fresh taxes. Taxation in this country was killing production because the farmers could not get cheap money. The blundering extravagance of the Government, lie said,’ has brought about a state of affairs whioh was paralysing industry, and tliereforo there was justification for the conclusion of the taxation committee that we had reached our Unlit of taxation. Coming; to the savings of the Government, he said this was the most farcical part of the Budget. The accumulated surpluses provided by the Libera] Treasurer' had gone;, and the Railway Department was'living on the maintenance surplus built up by the Liberal Government. With regard to the proposed finding of twenty-seven millions of (lie public debt, he could nob see how that, transaction was going' to lie a good contract for the country. They at least required fuller information than they at present had before they could come to the 6ame opinion as the Premier. In conclusion he repudiated the statement that the Liberal Party was about to league itself with Labour. The Liberal Party stood for the Empire and the Uhion Jack; they were just as loval as the Premier. IJON. ANDERSON IN : REPLY. The' Hon. G. J. Anderson, replying, traversed the Liberal Party’s relations with Labour, and-said that when the leader of the pa'rty spoke his party was involved, arid the moment the leader lost 1 hat close , touch with the party then ho ceased to lie 1 1he leader. Turning to the Budget, lie claimed that no previous Statement had so clearly put the position of the country befor the people. Mr Anderson said that the waste complained of had since been stopped, and a careful check was being kept upon all transactions. Mr Wilford had not quoted the statement by the Auditor-Generar that there had been a marked improvement during the past 12 months'. The Government was 'well aware that tin limit, of taxation had been reached, but how wore they going to reduce taxation, because they could not reduce the public services? If the taxation on companies was reduced, then they must increase it on individuals. Was Mr Wilford prepared to admit that ho was willing to reduce the exomption from £3OO to £250? The savings referred to iri the' Budget were real and tangible, and the Government was not living on surpluses provided hv ‘the Liberal Party. He was confident tlial (he result of Ml' Wilford’s speech would lie to convince the country that Mr Massey was the safest leader to follow. During the past, few years the Government had carried on the administration of the country under, the greatest difficulties, but they had tackled them with the greatest determination and carried on with every success. Notwithstanding what Mr Wilford had said, further economies would have to lie effected in which everyone must assist.

Th» debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr Sidey, and the House rose at 9.30 , P ' m WELLINGTON, Aug. 23. The. Hon. E. P. Lee, during the debate on the Financial Statement in the House this evening, said the position was not one for which the Government was responsible; it was a position common to all countries. In considering the Budget, and what (New Zealand could do in the way of expenditure and taxation, there were a few guiding lines which should not be lost sight of by the critics of the Government. The most important of these was that do what they would'they could not reduce the payment of the charges which the Dominion had to meet. Further, those who criticised the reduction in the Public Service salaries wore > not candid enough to say that if they got into power they would refund the amount saved in this direction. They would not say that because they knew they could not do it. The Opposition had complained of the Government expenditure, but not one pf them had suggested how it could be cut down. Cutting down expenditure was not a popular thing to do, especially in an election year, but the Government had not hesitated to do it even though it was unpopular. The Labour Party had one way of cutting down expenditure, and that was by not paying the interest- on loans. ,

Labour members: Where did you get that? You are distorting the position. Continuing, the Hon. Lee said there was then another method by which the Labour Party would meet the position; they would pay interest on the loans, but immediately take it back by some means of taxation which would amount to confiscation. If, however, the Labour Party would honour the present contracts, then the House and the country had a right to know from what source they would get the revenue to carry on and .meet the present expenditure. They said they would give larger pensions and grant other concessions, but where would the money conic from. No one would object to giving the old people larger pensions if it could'be done, but there were limits, and lie contended that we had reached that limit. The critics of the GoVernment clearly were not prepared to say in what direction they would increase taxation to provide the revenue to meet the expenditure necessary to carry on the affairs of the country.