PATRIOTIC TAX ADVOCATED

Southland Times, Issue 24888, 30 October 1942, Page 4

PATRIOTIC TAX ADVOCATED

Southland Council’s Resolution

The raising of patriotic funds by taxation was advocated in a discussion at a meeting of the Southland Provincial Patriotic Council yesterday. A motion in favour of the proposal received the support of a majority of the delegates present, but others did not consider they were authorized by their zone committees to vote. It was decided to ask such committees to send in their views for the benefit of delegates to the annual conference in Wellington next month.

The Niagara Committee suggested that the patriotic funds be raised by taxation. The Otautau Zone Committee supported the suggestion, but the Winton Zone Committee suggested that all patriotic funds raised by voluntary means receive a Government subsidy of £1 for £l.

Dr C. H. Gordon (Riverton) said his zone supported the proposal for a levy on wages. It was believed that a levy of 3d in the £1 would bring in about £1,500,000. In order to avoid a perpetuation of the tax after the war, it should be recommended that the tax cease at the request of the National Patriotic Fund Board. Only a few persons were giving the great bulk of the patriotic funds. Many of them would probably continue to make voluntary contributions. FEW CONTRIBUTING

It had been argued that the personal effort was necessary for the morale of the people, said Mr J. Hickey (Woodlands). Many people were not affected by the war and it was desirable to bring home to them the necessity for effort through patriotic appeals. Only a few people were “carrying the baby” in the patriotic effort, said Mr J. Lewis (Nightcaps). The attitude of too many people was: “Win the war, but for God’s sake don’t ask me to help.” The time had arrived when the money should be raised by taxation and a levy on salary or wages would be the most equitable method. Mr P. L. Hodge asked if committees had considered who would administer the money if it was raised by taxation. Would a new army of civil servants be created to collect the money? Mr N. W. McGorlick (Bluff) said the committee in his district was in favour of taxation for patriotic funds. He did not think there would be any cost in the collection of the money. Mr Lewis said it should be urged that the funds should be administered by the National Patriotic Fund Board. SUBSIDY SCHEME Mr Hodge said the subsidy scheme would ensure that those who were not contributing now paid indirectly. It was proposed to ask the Government to accept responsibility for prisoner-of-war parcels. If the soldiers were fighting the Government would be responsible for their food and clothing and allowance in the field. Why should the Government escape its responsibilities because the men were prisoners? There were 7000 prisoners and parcels were costing £1 a week each. “What will our men overseas think of us if they know that we had to be taxed to raise this money?” asked Mrs J. Hargest. “They know we are giving and they like to think that. What will they think if we have to raise it by taxation?”

A motion that the money be raised by taxation was carried, but several delegates suggested that such a decision should have been reached after notice of motion. INVERCARGILL DECISION

The Metropolitan Patriotic Committee discussed the matter last night and it adopted a motion put forward by Mr L. S. Alsweiler as the basis of a recommendation to the Provincial Patriotic Council for the guidance of the Southland delegates going to the conference at Wellington.

Mr Alsweiler’s motion was as follows: “That an effort be made to induce the Minister of Internal Affairs to subsidize patriotic collections on a £1 for £1 basis from the War Expenses Account and have such amounts paid into the provincial patriotic fund accounts, the money to be used to pay our quota to the New Zealand Patriotic Fund Board, and the balance to be retained by the provincial councils and used on expenditure for the present and after care of the members of the fighting forces.”

Mr J. N. Armour supported the motion and suggested that an increased amusement tax would go a long way to providing the necessary funds.

The chairman (Mr P. L. Hodge) referred. to a suggestion wHicH. came from. St. Kilda (Dunedin) advocating a £1 for £1 subsidy on collections. Mr Alsweiler said that £1 for £1 was not enough. The chairman: I think the £2 for £1 is too tough. Mr Alsweiler agreed to alter his motion to read “£1 for £1 subsidy.” Mr J. Pickard said he did not think the people who sought amusement would welcome a tax on their pictures and other entertainment. They were the people who were contributing more to the patriotic funds than any other section of the public, and they should not be singled out for an extra contribution.

He was against anything which would mean more taxation of the worker, declared Mr S. Anderson. The motion was carried without dissent.