THE BUDGET.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 November 1921, Page 5

THE BUDGET.

DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. ATTACK BY OPPOSITION. AN AMENDMENT MOVED. By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Laet Night. The debate on the Budget opened io the House to-night on a motion to go into committee of supply. Mr. T. M. Wilford (Leader of the Opposition.) said he proposed at the end of his speech to move the following amendment: “That in the opinion of the House the absence of any policy in the Financial Statement, together with a lack of appreciation of the industrial necessities of the Dominion displayed by the tariff proposals, proclaimed the Government to be without any adequate realisation or conception of the needs of the present day.”

Mr. Wilford contended that the Government had failed to disclose any intentions on the part of the Government •in the matter of finance; it only told the people it expected to have a deficit of £1,000,000 on the current year’s operations. The only way in which New Zealand could increase its capital was by keeping expenditure within revenue, and if this was not done the position could not be sound. The Goverment’s financial proposals were extraordi&ry. For many years we had a reserve fund in London and this had increased by £2,000,000. In October the Treasurer stated he had £6,000,000 in London and later he had stated that £2,000,000 had been saved, yet he now announced there would be a deficit on this year. “OUTRAGEOUS TAXES.” Mr. WRford traversed the revenue returns disclosed in the Budget. The stamp duty estimates for the current year did not allow for refunds that would be paid. The beer duty receipts would also be less than estimated, because there had already been very large clearances before the new proposals oame into force. Referring to the tobacco duties he said a levy should be made on the ability to pay, not in a taste duty on tobacco. In this country there was an outrageous land and income tax, which last year produced £9,700,000, while this year £7,700,600 was expected. How would this be obtained? The ten per cent, allowance on land tax would reduce the receipts considerably below this. Customs were expected to produce £4,900,000, but he contended it was impossible to estimate the returns from this source.

He also criticised railway figures, and asked why the Minister did not take interest charges into account in his statement, as without them it was impossible to ascertain the position of railway finance*. Mr. Wilford asked the Postmaster-General how he expected to obtain the estimated addition of £150,000 tp the revenue through the Post an.d Telegraph services. He criticised the cost of running the public service commissioners department, which was now £ll,BOO. There had been large increases in the public service personnel and the cost had risen from £874,711 in 1913 to £1,900,722 in 1921. Mr. Wilford traversed increase* in the various departments. The Public Health Department in 1918 had 89 employees costing £18.983, while in 1921 there were 182 employees costing £56,807. The Tourist Department had also greatly increased m cost. It would be better to abolish the public service commissioners, who controlled only about seven thousand out of fifty-one thousand, and so save a large amount of money. He referred to the expenditure of £13.000 on the Forestry Department and urged that this department should be under a Minister in this House. THE NATIONAL DEBT. New Zealand’s national debt had increased by about £100,000,000 since 1914, which meant that extreme caution was necessary to re-establish the country’s confidence in the administration. Referring to the taxation proposals, Mr. Wilford asked what consideration had been given to farmers, who were only a section of the community, an<l who could not pass increases on to the consumers. Farmers were subject to the fluctuations of the world’* markets. He asked if small farmers were getting a fair deal at the hands of freezing com-

panies in the matter of the prices paid for stock, as compared with those paid to large producers. Mr. Wilford criticised the taxation of companies, which he said must be amended to encourage trade activities. He also attacked the administration of the discharged soldiers’ settlement department, contending that greater care was needed to avoid loss. He asked what the Government policy was in the matter of the reduction of wages. What v._is wanted was not lower wages, but greater efficiency, which would obviate the need for seriously lowering wages. Referring to unemployment, Mr. Wilford asked what the Government intended to do to cope with the difficulty. The Premier had stated that single unemployed would be able to get work at 10s a day and married men at 12s. What had the Government done to deal with the subject? The tariff was then dealt with. He suggested there should be a permanent tariff commission to adjust taxation on principle* to be laid down by Parliament. The rates should be dealt with by specialists, who should advise the Government. Mr. Wilford closed by moving the amendment mentioned at the opening of his speech. MINISTER IN REPLY.

The Hon, C. J. Parr, referring to the amendment moved by the Leader of the Opposition, said every page of the Budget contained references to policy. The tariff was surely a matter of policy. Important proposals were also in the Budget dealing with education, public health and taxation. Measures dealing with the settlement of the Urewera lands, the native public trustee, main roads, motor vehicles and post office administration were either mentioned in the Budget or were before the House. The Leader of the Opposition, when saying the year’s operations would show” a deficit, neglected to mention that the previous year’s surplus would more than cover that deficit. Mr. Parr said Mr. Wilford’s fears that refunds would greatly reduce the receipts from stamp duties were unfounded. Public Health Department expenditure had been criticised by Mr. Wilford, but the Minister pointed out that the increase in personnel and expenditure was accounted for by the fact that the department had taken over from

the Education Department the control of' school doctors and nurses and school dental and hygiene work. Mr. Parr quoted the import figures for the past) year, which had exercised an adverse I effect on the country’s trade balance. To meet the results of this the ment had taken measures to effect eco-i nomies in public expenditure. A com-* mission had closely examined the activities of all departments and reported that economies of nearly £4,000.000 could he effected without affecting efficiency. - The economies would include a reduction in b muses when warranted by a reduction in the cost of living. The commission considered the time had arrived when a pro rata reduction of the bonus on these lines should be made. These suggestions were now before Cabinet The Government was not out to reduce wages if i,t was possible to effect retrenchment by any other means. INCREASED CHARGES. The Minister said there were large fixed charges, such as interest and pensions, which could not be reduced. The Leader of the Opposition had made charges of extravagant expenditure, but Mr. Parr said such extravagances had obtained for many years past. He said the cost of administration in 1914 was £8,000,000 and in 1921-22 it was estimated at £16,000,000. Of this increase of £8,000,000 railways accounted for £3,500,000, of which £1,639,000 was in increased wages. The added cost of material for maintenance involved a sum of £750,000. Wages in the Postal and Telegraph Department had gone up very la gely, and material in some cases was six hundred per cent, higher than in 1914, while the average increase was 350 per cent, for wages and material. The Education Department also showed very large increases. Salaries accounted for over £1,100,000, out of a total increase of £1,400,000 on education. Over eighty per cent, of the increase on the police was in wages. The cost of salaries and equipment for hospitals since 1914 had more than doubled.

Referring to the tariff, Mr. Parr thought it had been generally well received. It was, frankly, a revenue pro; during tariff and there was a pleasing absence of protests on behalf of people interested in building up high tariff' walls. The small man in this country escaped taxation far more than In any other country, and the Government realised that the family man of small means must be penalised as little as possible. At 9.20 p.m. Mr. R. McCallum (Wairau) moved the adjournment of the debate