NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE.

Te Aroha News, Volume VIII, Issue 485, 5 July 1890, Page 4

NO-CONFIDENCE DEBATE.

MR BALLANGE’S MOTION. GOVERNMENT ACCEPTS IT AS A CHALLENGE. (BY TELEGRAPH.—OWN REPORTER.) Wellington, July 2. On the House assembling yesterday afternoon, Mr Ballanco,amid Opposition cheers, gave notice ot the following amendment: “ That in the opinion of this House the continuance of the primage duty is unnecessary, and is a distinct breach of the understanding arrived at when it was first proposed ; that further retrenchment is imperatively demanded, and can be effected without impairing the efficiency of the public service; that the retention of the property tax in its present form and the land policy pursued by the Government alike impede the progress of the colony.” Mr Mitchelson said the Government regarded the notice of motion by the member for Wanganui as a direct challenge, and accepted it as such. The House then adjourned till 7.30 p.m. The motion was rather a staggerer to a number of members who had previously been counted on as staunch Government supporters. Mr Barron gave notice to move as an amendment on the motion for going into Committee of Supply:—■“ (1) That in the opinion of this House it is desirable that the property tax, unless itcan bo abolished at an earlier date, should be annually decreased so that it shall not exceed jd in the £ for the present, year, j)d for the year 1891, J jd for the year 1892, after which date it shall entirely cease. (2) That any deficiency in the revenue occurring thereby should be made good by further retrenchment in the public service.” Very soon after the notice had been given of these amendments Sir Harry Atkinson was communicated with, and the result was the announcement made by the Hon. Mr Mitchelson that the Government accepted the amendment moved by the member for Wanganui as a direct challenge to the Government. He declined to answer any questions that day. Mr Ballance’s amendment was generally regarded a 3 a masterpiece of ingenuity. When the House resumed at- 7.30 p.m., the whole of the members were in their places, and the galleries were crowded. Mr Ballance, in commencing the attack, said that in the event of his amendment being carried there would bo no necessity for the Ministry to vacate the Ministerial benches, the object aimed at by the Opposition being to secure an immediate dissolution. Referring next to the state of the Premier’s health, Mr Ballance said he understood the Premier’s own intention was to resign, and that the determination arrived at, owing to the urgency of the political situation, had placed the House in a very unfortunate position. They had a nominal Premier out of the House, a nominal leader, and an Acting-Premier in the House. Quoting portions of the Financial Statement, he said there were a number of fine phrases intended to cover a weakness of finance in the body of the Statement. Next he charged the Government with having neglected to place reliable information concerning this colony before the people ol England. They were told in the Statement that the Customs revenue had fallen off £249,000, and this in the Governor’s speech was attributed to the increasing temperance of the people. In reply to this Mr Ballance pointed to the exodus of population from the colony that had taken place. Passing to the £115,000 surplus claimed by the Government, he said this was not a surplus, the Government having wrongtytaken credit for the amount realised by the primage duty, which was ear-marked for a special purpose. The primage duty, he said, was imposed as an extraordinary impost for a limited term of two years, and now they were told that the Government proposed to continue tiie primage duty for another two years to provide for school buildings which, in 1888, they were told would be made chargeable against the consolidated fund. Thesurplus was neb even £36,000, for there was a deficiency of £450,000 in the land fund for the last two years, and actually instead of there being a surplus, there was a deficiency unprovided for. Mr Ballance proceeded to refer to the advances made to local bodies, and charged the Treasurer with having issued a cheque for £5,000 without authority to meet the liabilities of the New Plymouth Harbour Board. It was doubtful whether this money could legally be recovered, and they thereforehad a netdeficiency of £15,634• Mr Ballance proceeded to attack the land administration of the Government, and was met with cries of : “lb was the samp in your own time.” Ho went on to say that while the Minister of Lands estimated the amount of the land revenue at £136,000, the actual amount received vas £87,692, showing a deficiency upon land of £48,418. They were told that Government were not prepared lo recommend the resumption of ordinary borrowing, but they were found to be prepared to recommend a system of extraordinary borrowing. Instead of borrowing in the English market-, they proposed to borrow in the colony at 4 per cent., and it was proposed to make roads and open lands for settlement by borrowing money under the Loans to Local Bodies Act, and by striking a special rate. Mr Ballance also condemned the proposed purchase of native lands out of the North Island Trunk loan, and asserted that this would be a diversion of the money for a very different purpose from that for which it was ear-marked.. Coming to the appointments made during the recess, Mr Ballance said the administration of the Government had been both extravagant ar.d illogal, and challenged them to justify the appointment of a Supreme Court Judge before his salary was fixed. He understood that the Supreme Court Act to be introduced by the Government was a validation of Judge Edwards’ appointment. They were bold last session that the Native Department would be abolished, and instead of that being done the estimates had actually been raised and the number of judges increased. The Public Works Department was also, to have been abolished. They were now told that large reductions had been made in this department, but he questioned whether the reductions were real. Mr Ballance next attacked the expenditure on the defence works, and said that so long as we relied upon Great Britain as we did at the present time, we had an adequate means of defence. Coming to the property tax, Mr Ballance said that last session they were told that exemptions would be made on machinery to the extent of £4,000 or £5,000. The Government now informed them that they did nob see their way to fulfil these promises. Ho contended that they should progress towards a land tax by exempting improvements undor the property tax, and that this couid be done by degrees without disturbing other systems of taxation. Concerning the settlement of people on the land, he claimed that the figures bad not been fairly put before tiie House, and that the. total number of bona /ffiesolectora was less in 1889 than in 1887, and that if a choice of systems had been given, deferred payment settle- I meats would have been in excess of those

[ taken up under perpetual leases. He a!mo j asserted that the village settlers had nob I received their fair share of the money for opening up roads, and that the administration of the land was intimately connected with the exodus of the population that had taken place. The remedy for this system of no policy was dissolution and appeal to the country. (Opposition cheers.) Tho Hon. Mr Richardson, on rising to reply, was received with cheers. After commenting on the moderate tone adopted by the leader of the Opposition, ho proceeded to remark that the amendment was of a disingenuous character. The first portion of the amendment was an anticipation of a Bill which was coming before the House. In dealing with the second portion of the amendment, he failed to pub his finger on one single point where retrenchment could be made. As to the third point of the amendment, its purport was not fully explained. The property tax provided for the exemption of encumbrances, which in many cases represented more or less than the value of the improvements. Taking Mr Ballance’s own figures, ho showed that -the most that could be made of the items upon which ho claimed deficiencies was £109,000, whereas tho surplus at the end of the year was £115,000. Passing bo the question of tho settlement of Crown lands, he justified the measure of success claimed by the Government, and said ho thought the proposal made for roading Crown lands would commend itself to anyone. The Government had been twitted with not having acquired a larger area of nath-e lands along the North Island Trunk route, bub there were difficulties in tho way which required the adoption of a cautions policy, which he was confident would bo found to have good results. Mr Ballance, he said, had attacked the Government on the ground that there had not been substantial retrenchment. The Financial Statement showed that there were reductions amounting to £290,000, but, as a matter of fact, there were not many items that could be touched. He went through tho various voces, and said there were only four items on which substantial reduction, could be made, viz., subsidies to local bodies, the education vote, working of railways, and the expenditure on public buildings, including school buildings. The increase in the defence vote, ho explained, was t.o enable them to take advantage of the present defences provided for out of the past expenditure. Passing to the question of land settlement, the Minister for Lands pointed out that there was a great difference between selectors and settlers. They had this year 500 additional agricultural holdings in excess of the largest number recorded in any previous year. Taking into consideration the fact that land settlement was going back year by year into rougher lands, he defied anyone to say that the areas selected had been unduly large. Ho went on to point out that the perpetual lease system had always contained the right of purchase, and that out of 580,000 acres acquired under the perpetual lease system, under one thousand acres were acquired in fee simple. He ridiculed the idea that people were leaving the colony because they could not get land to settle on, and asserted that at the present time the amount of land in the market was greater than was ever in the market for some considerable time. He also read reports from the Crown Land Commissioners showing that very little land had been taken up by speculators. If dummyism existed, the Government was as anxious as any hon. member to stop it. Mr \V. P. Reeves (St. Albans) took up the debate on the Opposition side of the House. He commenced by attacking the alleged surplus claimed by the Government. The Premier, he said, undertook to pay off a deficit of £128,000 in two years, and that therefore became a liability to be discharged. The House gave him the revenue to do it and the Premier said that if the primage duty did nob prove sufficient the balance should be provided out of the ordinary revenue. There remained a balunco of £28,000 to be paid off, and they very properly demanded that this amountshould be taken off the surplus. Mr Reeves vigorously attacked tho administration of land by the present Government, and said that a mistaken system of land laws and land administration had made the province of Canterbury one of the most stagnant and depressed instead of most progressive in the whole colony. In Canterbury, where the cash system had had freest play, it had most utterly broken down, ; and instead of promoting the settlement of people on the land, it had boen driving them away, and during the past year there had been practically no bonei Resettlement in the province. Mr Reeves read a lengthy list of those who had purchased large blocks of land in Canterbury during the past year from 1,975 acres downwards, and caused considerable amusement by describing the qualifications, or rather the non-qualifications, of the purchasers for the cultivation of the soil. These, he said, were the class of people by whom the land was being settled in “small” areas. He spoke strongly against the proposal to extend land settlement by means of borrowing and by rating settlers, and went on to quote statistics to show that prosperity had not returned to this colony. An excess of exports, for which so much had been claimed, was, he argued, a sign of want of confidence in the colony, and a sign that the colony was deeply indebted, DESERTIONS FROM THE GOVERN MENT RANKS. The excitement aroused by the no-con fidence motion proposed by Mr Ballance has now cooled down considerably, and although many of the Ministerial supporters were severely shaken by tho po'icy enunciated by the Opposition, only two defections are reported, viz., Messrs Goldieand Fish. Mr T. Thompson was also reported to have gone over to the Opposition, but I understand that when the question comes to the vote, the member for Auckland North will be found on the Ministerial list. When the House resumes this afternoon the debate will ba taken up by Mr Kerr (Motueka). The Government party admit that the effect of the amendment moved by tho Hon. Mr Ballance has boen to alienate some of their supporters, but they still confidently reckon on a majority of from 8 to 10 votes. The Government also expect that the debate will conclude sons to allow a vote to be taken on Friday night. Members of the Opposition do not think it can be concluded this week, and some even venture to predict that the debate will continue for a fortnight. AUCKLAND MEMBERS INTERVIEWED. With the object of ascertaining the views of Auckland members, I have interviewed a number of them with the following result : Sir George Grey says there is nothing but to support the amendment to get a dissolu ion, although there are many objections. Mr Goldie says : At present I cannot say much upon the question at issue. My own opinion is , that .what is aimed at in the amendment is what the country wants, viz ; a cessation of the

primage duty, rigid economy and abolition of the property tax at the earliest possible moment. These from present appearances we are not to get from the Government now in office, but if the newspaper reports be true it is : proposed to put increased burdens upon the people, as the new Charitable Aid Bill is to deprive us. of one-half the subsidy at present received from the consolidated revenue., This, in the city of Auckland alone, would mean something like £1,500 annually to be raised by taxation in addition to the £3,000 now paid out of the Borough Funds. On the other hand I feated the Opposition from their past record will do better for us. The longer I stay here the more convinced I am that the Under-Secretary, backed by the great army of civil servants, are the real rulers of the country. How we are to get Government strong enough to alter this state of things, taking into consideration the present apathy of the people, is a problem I cannot solve, but it will have to be solved if we are to free ourselves from the crushing burden of taxation now resting upon us. Mr Hobbs states : The motion is Jesuitically worded to trap all tho unwary birds. I am in entire sympathy with tho resolution but the way must be made perfectly clear as to the substitution for the property tax, so that the credit of the colony is not jeopardised by any rash resolution merely proposed .by the member for Wanganui (who last year stated in the House that we could not do without tho property tax) to embarrass the Government, because it is an obnoxious tax. The record of the member of Wanganui is such that I have no confidence in his carrying out his own resolutions, but I have intimated to the Government that I shall oppose the continuation of primage duty. This is quite understood by tho Government, and they will not press it. Mr Moat says that as no one expects the amendment to be carried, it can only have been moved with the view of weakening the Government by debate, showing how few of their supporters agree with them on all matters. The division will give no indication of the members’ opinions on the questions raised, but will merely declare which party they wish to seo in office during the elections.

Mr Kelly says: “lam going to support the leader of the Opposition in his amendment unless the Government can refuto the charges of maladministration made against them. In any case, lam in favour of a repeal of the property tax and primage d u ty. u

Mr Monk says : The Financial Statement abounds in informational padding, and breaking-off into essayic dissertations, finishes with wrong conclusions. It is made to bavo a semblance of material in which it is absolutely deficient. Witli a few exceptions, it" is out of touch with tho necessities of New Zealand. With regard to Mr Ballance’s amendment, J. believe that all the best and most disinterested members are longing for the unifying change that can ° come only through the process of a general election, as there is no promise in an overruling of public opinion giving hope of good from forcing an immediate election. That in ordinary course wili come in a few months. I shall support a motion to go into supply, but shall oppose every increase of taxation shadowed in the Financial Statement. If the amendment and criticism had come from Mr Bryce it would have had some force, but from Mr Ballance as against the Government, it is only liko the historic row between fryingpan and kettle, Mr Ballance as represented by one of those utensils having by far the darker shade of the two.

Mr R. Thompson says Mr Ballance’s amendment is only an electioneering dodge, and that as such it cannot have his support. “NEW ZEALAND TIMES” ON THE SITUATION.

The “Times” says : The honours of debate were with the Opposition last night. The Opposition leader made a strong attack on tho Financial Statement, and the member for St. Albans sustained him well. Between them came the Minister for Lands, who wearied the House and threw his colleagues into a state of perspiration. His speech was the chief incident ot the debate. It was full of matter which could not be found at the light moment, and deadened the pauses, which were filled in by a conversational buzz. It came to a lame conclusion until the Minister sat down. In former fights the Premier's reply to the leader of tho Opposition was always one of the features of the debate. The Opposition leader’s criticism about the judicial appointment was fearless and pointed, and received no satisfactory reply. What he said about the Ministerial policy remained to a large extent unanswered. The member for St. Albans was brilliant as well as fluent. His re Hew of the history of the lands administration in Canterbury was full of knowledge remarkable. In fact, if the Government wish to justify their claim to public confidence, they will have to answer these speeches. Dealing with the position of parties, the “Times” sa}'s : Yesterday afternoon the Government confidently claimed a majority of eleven, but during the evening circumstances happened which would appear to.have cast a doubt on the accuracy of that calculation. Messrs Fisher and Gcldie have, we believe, gone over to the Opposition, and Mr T. Thompson, if he has not actually deserted the Ministerial party, is considered very doubtful. Even with this lose, however, the Government assert that they have a majority to Mr Ballance’s motion, and perhaps it may be necessary to move a further amendment on the last clause. Ministers offer no policy, and remain in office nearly 12 months without a Premier chosen by the country, and for two months absolutely representing nobody. “POST” ON THE SITUATION. The “ Post,” commenting on the situation* says : —“lb is always a grave moment for her Majesty’s Opposition when it has to make up its mind to attack her Majesty’s Government. In the present case the responsibility on tho shoulders of the leader is not a whit less than is usually so in such cases. He has before him a Government which is apparently determined to sit there as long as it possibly can, secure in the idea that it has behind it not only a large but a willing majority. He is, however, aware, as every tactician must be who is in any degree conversant with politics, that the Ministerial majority is nob necessarily as strong as it looks. The Government party has adopted tactics which are in many quarters regarded as a deliberate attempt to disarm the Opposition, and even to blunt- the edge of criticism. A Government whoso head is always disappearing to return in another shape is not the easiest kind of Government for any House to deal with for good or for evil, amicably or otherwise. The only thing for the Opposition is to keep to its point and never to swerve from an early dissolution. The closing hours of last session left it of that mind ; the opening hours of the present find it in the same attitude, bub acting with judgment and decision. The Opposition leader is sure of strong co-operation with an opposition purpose if he can proceed by direct attack. It wiil of course be the better way, especially if be is short, sharp, decisive and

victorious, but to attempt this he must be sure of his force. It is stated the Auckland members have been carefully sounded re Mr Ballance’s amendment, and that as a result only one (Mr Goldie) has gone over to the Opposition. The others question the genuineness of the policy of the Opposition, and continue Government supporters.