PARLIAMENTARY.

Otaki Mail, 14 February 1923, Page 3

PARLIAMENTARY.

THE ATTACK OH THE GOVERNMENT MR WILFORD'S CRITICISM. Wellington, February 13. The House met at 11 o'clock. The debate on tho Address-in-Reply was resumed by Mr Wilford, Leader of, the Opposition, who complimented Mr Girling upon the masterly manner in wiiicit he addressed the House l'or the first time. He, however, was bound to take exception to his conclusion that, tlie rich man paid llic bulk of the taxes in this country. He

WUUIU UtbAutU cl L-UllbiUcl cIIJIU jJUI llOli ot his remarks to showing that the tiie bulk of the tuxes of the Dominion. At the conclusion ol iiis speech he would mine a vole oi no-confidunco in tiie Government. He would not tack on to it any reason for doing so, because his position as u private member did not entitle him lo initiate any financial proposal, such as an increase in pensions or pensions for the blind.

In the last Parliament the Government, held a majority in the House on a 1 minority vote. In this Parliament j they were in a minority on a minority [ vote in the country. This was abso- j lute proof of the need ol reform in the j electoral system. Constitutionally it was wrong that any Government

should hold office in New Zealand with less than 45 supporters in the House. The speaker next dealt with the policy oi the Reform and Liberal

Parties, contending it was not necessary for the Reform Party to repeal Liberal measures to kill them. They could do so by neglect, and that was what they were doing. The first step taken to kill Liberal measures was the circular sent out by Sir James The Minister said Mr Wilioi'd’s

Allen giving the right to those who borrowed from the Government to insure with private companies. This step dealt, a deadly blow at the State Fire Office. He next censured the housing policy of the Government, which, he declared, was useless to the workers, Only those with considerable capital could avail themselves of

it. So far as the worker was concerned, the Act was a dead letter. 1 The Premier's financial statement, just issued, looked splendid on the lace of it, but the claim that savings iiad been made was a plea of guilty form Party wanted him to hand over to previous extravagance. Only last year the Premier declared we were galloping to a deficit. To-day he claimed a surplus. Which was correct.' The question was whether the Premier was being correctly informed by the Departmental officers. Otherwise, why were such contradictory statements made? Nor did the statement set out the true position, tor it took no account ot interest on the capital cost of railways, 'which for the past nine months amounted to 11,173,000. The reason the Government was unpopular in the country was the fact that they had been too long in ofiiee. He agreed with the Premier’s former declaration that someone should look into the pigeonholes. Further, the Government was a one-man Government, and .the people were growing tired oi autocratic rule. The Government's system oi taxation was contributing to unemployment, increasing the cost of living, restricting borrowing, limiting enterprise and strangling industry. All these effects arose out of the present company taxation, which did not flit, the wealthy man, but was passed on by liijn to others less able to pay. Mr Wilford said it was no use trying to kill the joint stock companies, l’hey bad come to stay, but they should be taxed in such a way that, they would noi be abie to pass it oil. He had no iiopc that the Government would do this, and therefore he moved as an amendment “That, the Government did not possess the confidence of the House or the country.” The amendment was seconded by Mr Sidey.

The Hon. Downie Stewart followed and spoke till the House rose at l. appointment in the country. The fight going on between Reformers and Liberals was only a sham fight. The country wanted to get rid "Of the threeparty system, and so did many of the followers oi' Mr Wilford, whose wishes he did not express. The Reform Party had invited the Liberals to explore the position and see whether there 1 was . not some way by \Vhich those who were not seriously separated in thought could come together. The only way which Mr Wilford met this invitation was to ask whether the Respeech would be read with deep disthe official Opposition to Mr Holland. In this he UMr Wilford)' only thought oi his own interest. The Liberals | should have approached the Reform invitation in a more conciliatory spirit., for there was not a member of ] the Ministry, from the Premier down- j ward, who was not prepared to stand j down if that would make mailers j easier j

Resolutions of want of confidence in the Reform Government were moved in the House yesterday. The Address-in-Reply debate was resumed by Mr T, M. W Ilford, the Leader of the Opposition, and in his speech he contended that the result of the last election was a declaration by the people against the Givernment. He moved a resolution of want of confidence in the Ministry. In the evening the Leader oi the Labour Party. Mr H. E. Holland, spoke; and he sprang a surprise on the House by moving an amendment to the amendment of Mr Wilford. this, no doubt, with the idf-fi of having the vote on his resolution taken first. The speaker, after authorities quoted, ruled that Mr Holland’s amendment was in order, and that it took the precedence he claimed

ror it. This is generally esclever str"- 1 " * .„midered to be a ...Ltgieul move on the- part of the Labour Leader, and it will nor occasion surprise if it has an interesting bearing on the course of events.