SEVERITY OF AUSTRALIAN TAXATION.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 March 1919, Page 3

SEVERITY OF AUSTRALIAN TAXATION.

ATTITUDE OF QUEENSLAND PREMIER. At the annual general meeting of the Scottish Australian Investment Company, Limited, Mr. Frederick William Turner, chairman, said that he thought it desirable at this point to allude to the less friendly attitude towards British capital invested in Australian industries which had, of recent years, grown up in certain sections of the Australian community. There was a failure to recognise the immense amount of good which such companies aa their, had done and were doing in providing the means and the energy for settling the lands of the country, cultivating its soil, providing homes, work, and wages for its people, i and turning areas that were waste into fruitful districts. The capital that was thus employed was too often regarded as a subject for easy taxation, rather than as a benefieient element in the country's progress. To taxation, moderately and equitably imposed, no one could reasonably object, but when influenced by the unfriendly tendency that he had mentioned it became a very dangerous weapon and he wanted to call tho attention of the shareholders to the existence of this clanger as a matter requiring and receiving the careful attention of the board and management. Further, they had had in Queensland to contend with a very- serious effort by the present Premier of that State "to destroy by legislative action a vital point in the leases granted to pastoralists and others by the Crown. These leases contained clauses for the periodical revision of the rentals, limiting such revision to 00 per cent, increase over the rental of the next preceding period. By this means a safeguard for the leaseholder against an unlimited increase of his rent was provided. The Premier, Mr. Ryan, had three times passed Bills in the Lower House to abolish this limitation. These Bills had been each time defeated in the Upper House. Mr. Ryan, in order to enforce his purpose, had passed Bills to abolish the Upper House, which had also been lost, and he had taken a referendum with the same object in view, hut this also went against him. He was now trying to achieve his purpose of neutralising the opposition of the Upper House by other methods. He (the chairman) could not go more fullv into the details of these matters. He only touched them slightly, as he desired that the shareholders should know of this further danger to British capital, and that the board were strenuously resisting it. He hoped that ultimately the more just-thinking portion of the Australian community would assert itself and put a stop to the injurious action of the extremist section of the Labor and Socialist Parties that were now doing so much mischief. British commonsense would, he hoped, in the end prevail.