Relief Expenditure Regarded as Waste

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 754, 29 August 1929, Page 7

Relief Expenditure Regarded as Waste

PLEA FOR INDUSTRIES LABOUR MEMBER’S VIEW Press Association PARLIAMENT BLDGS., Wed. The expenditure of large sums on purely relief work was criticised by Mr. C. H. Chapman, Labour member for Wellington North, in his Budget speech today. He made a plea for the development of the manufacturing industries. Mr. Chapman quoted figures to show the seriousness of unemployment and added that well over £1,000,000 was being spent annually on relief works. The question arose whether that money was being spent wisely or whether it could not have been expended on productive work, instead of on merely relief measures. He thought the greatest contributing factor in the creation of unemployment was the fact that nothing had been done to provide other work for those people who had been displaced as a result of the advance of science and invention. One reason for the drift to the cities was the use of machinery on farms. A policy of “back to the land” would improve the position temporarily, but it would not be a permanent remedy. Complete reorganisation of industry would be neces;sary before the problem could be solved. The Budget contained no proposals to meet the situation that had not been tried unsuccessfully before. PROTECTION MORE USEFUL Until a more satisfactory system of applying capital to the material of the country had been evolved there could be little permanent progress. He described the primage duty as a most distasteful method of obtaining revenue and suggested as an alternative the amendment of the customs regulations in such a way that in addition to obtaining revenue encouragement would be afforded manufacturing industries. He believed protection to the motor-body building industry would provide employment in New Zealand for thousands of men. Mr. H. G. Dickie (Patea) described the Budget as “one of broken promises: a Budget of borrowing and additional taxation.” He considered more chan a fair share of the additional primage duty would fall on the farmer, who would have to pay it on his fertiliser, corn sacks, woolpacks, fencing wire, implements and, in fact, everything he required, except his livestock. He considered the South Island railway extension would be a losing venture. Referring to land settlement, Mr. Dickie said the present Government had been in office eight months. It had placed a few men on the land, and of these two had walked oft. Furthermore, these were men who had been carefully selected. He was afraid the manner In which the Government was endeavouring to grapple with this problem would cost the country a lot of money. Ho was prepared to see the country lose some money on land settlement., but he wanted to see the scheme conducted on a sound basis. LAND VALUES SUFFER It had been stated that the taxation proposals would not affect small farmers, but Mr. Dickie said these proposals would deal a severe blow to land values and the direct consequence of that fall In values would be that small farmers would lose all their equity in their land. He hoped that when the taxation proposals were brought down the present rate of mortgage exemption would be allowed to remain. Mr. J. T. Hogan (Rangitikei) said members had criticised the proposals to Increase taxation, but was not that a reasonable course to adopt when members from all sides of the House were asking for increases in pensions and additional expenditure in other directions? He welcomed the Prime Minister’s proposals to break up large estates and enable people to get back on the land. He nad seen houses vacated and Echools closed in parts of the country as a result of land aggregation, and if the Budget proposals resulted in these houses being again occupied and the schools reopened they would be of great benefit to the country. The debate was adjourned until tomorrow.