THE BUDGET.

Taranaki Daily News, 18 November 1921, Page 5

THE BUDGET.

DEBATE STILL IN PROGRESS. TARANAKI MEMBERS SPEAK. VARIOUS VIEWS EXPRESSED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. The debate on. the Budget was continued in the House to-day. Mr. J. Craigie (Timaru) said our expenditure had increased by £6,000,000 over previous times and we had not yet reached the climax of the depression. He anticipated more difficult times next year, when the national income will have fallen considerably. The orgy of expenditure set in with the period of high prices for our produce and the Government had not set an example of economy; they indulged in inexcusable expenditure and had gone about with too open a hand. This was a time for the exercise of rigid economy. There should be no frills indulged in by launching big works, and people must be taught to live within their means. After all adversity was not without its blessings. As a means of economising in the public service he advocated amalgamating the State lending departments, the receiving of money on deposit by the advances office and the establishment of an insurance office in connection with that department, which was handling a great deal of property.

Mr. Massey: You must have been at the last Cabinet meeting. Mr. Craigie remarked that he did not know he was anticipating anything. He then proceeded to say that he saw little benefit in the Government housing scheme; it afforded little relief, being merely a drop in the bucket. Our defence scheme and department were too elaborate and expensive; all high colonels should be dispensed with, cadets and boy scfbuts being retained as sufficient. The tourist department was also too expensive, and. ought to be pruned down. There ought to be closer relations between the State and the Bank of Zealand. He hoped the Premier would set up the promised committee to go into the whole question of banking, because there was much in connection with that subject needing ventilation.

MR. S G. SMITH’S SPE’ECH.

Mr. S. G. Smith (Taranaki) deprecated the attempts on the part of Government supporters to characterise the speeches against the Budget as waste of time. The Budget was surely

a fit subject for discussion, and it was J not the fault of the opposition that they ’ were not able to bestow upon it un- , stinted praise. in his opinion the Bud- ’ get was simply a printed chronicle of bluff and expediency. Discussing re- . trenchment he asked who was behind this movement. He was afraid there was a commercial ring in this country who could go to the Premier and demand that certain things should be done. There had recently been a deputation of commercial men to the Premier, and to . them the Premier had disclosed more of the country’s business than he disclosed to the representatives of the people. He blamed the Government for enticing people into the public service and then bringing retrenchment down upon them. It was at least doubtful if much had been saved by hundreds of sackings from the Post and Telegraph Department. It simply threw the burden on the superannuation fund. Huge expense had been incurred in making transfers. The Government was claiming a saving of £4,000,000, but they were creating untold hardship to do it. The Government was to a great extent responsible for the present position, and they should bear it themselves and not throw it on the workers. He asked the Government to be courageous enough to introduce legislation which would reduce the cost of living to the working man. He deprecated the claims of the Government that there had been much land settlement outside soldiers’ settlements. He regretted the tariff afforded so little protection to industries. They had been told a solution of their difficulties was more production,- but he was not going back to his district to tell his people to work harder simply for the benefit of the people who had the ear of the Government. Mr. R. W. Smith (Waimarino) thought the Premier was unwise in preserving the attitude of false optimism, ft would have been better if he had told the people plainly what the position was. Mr. Massey: I have always done so. Mr. Smith: And yet you objected to the farmers referring to it. Mr. Massey: I objected to their running the country down, and I would do it again. OTHER TARANAKI MEMBERS. Mr. O. Hawken (Egmont) contended that during the 'past nine years there had been 27,382 sub-divisions of land, which he thought was a very excellent record; indeed, it was a better record than that achieved by any previous Government. The prosecution of such a policy was one thing which would get us out of our difficulties. It would make this Dominion what it should be —a country of small freeholders. Proceeding, he claimed that the housing scheme of the Government had been much more successful than was generally supposed. Over £8,000,000 had been expended by the Government on housing, and if there was any fault to find in this connection it was that the Government used the money of the Advances to Settlers Department for housing, thus diverting money from settlers to the building of houses. Moreover, most of this money was being spent in the towns, where only half the population was located, and it seemed to him that no houses were being built by private enterprise. The Government was doing all this building and would soon overtake requirements. Coming to the Budget he said the policy was to tax wealth. The late Mr. Seddon favored taxation on the basis of wealth paying one part and the people at large three parts. Sir Joseph Ward favored taxation on the basis of wealth paying one part, or 6/8 in the £, and the people two parts, or 13/4 in the £• This Budget based its taxation on wealth paying two parts and the people one part. It had been said the Government was the friend of the rich man, but it was rather hard on the rich man to have such a friend. He claimed that the Government was more the friend of the poor man than ever the Liberal , Party had been, and the Premier was . the best friend the poor man ever had in New Zealand. Mr. R. Masters (Stratford), discussing soldier settlement, said though it ■ WAS not reasonable to expect every sol- (

diet to succeed the Government wae not altogether free from blame for some of the failures that had taken place. Some of the country was not suitable for inexperienced men, and the financial restrictions imposed upon them were unduly hard, soldiers’ operations and prospects being considerably hampered thereby. The Hon. D. H. Guthrie: The conditions are not hard; they are only the usual ones required under such circumstances.

Continuing, Mr. Masters declared soldiers, were also being handicapped by the incompetency of the Government officers who purchased their stock. He then proceeded to put in a plea for soldiers settled in the backbloeks of Taranaki, contending that these men had more right to decent roads than people in settled districts had a right to a railwas running parallel with the roaxls. He favored moderate protection for industries, but condemned taxation on necessaries, such as kerosene, which was the light of the backbloeks settlers. The taxes on tea and tobacco were also denounced, but the worst tax of all was that on infant foods, which hitherto came in free. The Government’s financial position was evidently so bad that it was trying to catch the poor kid from the day he was born. They were making an attack on the cradle, yet at the same time they were making a concession to the rich land owner in the shape of a rebate on the land tax. Mr. W. T. Jennings (Waitomo) questioned whether we were getting the right class of immigrants from Britain. From what he saw in England we were not in every instance and he suggested the need of greater precautions, such as Canada exercised. Land aggregation was going on in the country and schools were being closed. This he maintained in spite of what the Premier said. A reciprocal tariff should be arranged with Australia, and something should be done to better the conditions under which our produce was sold. He was sorry to say the greed which existed in New Zealand had created prejudice against our produce, and one big Manchester firm told him they were no longer going to rely on New Zealand butter, but were going to Belgium for it. He concluded by urging the Government to do something to dissipate the ignorance which prevailed in America concerning New Zealand, which to Americans always appeared to be part of Australia. The debate was then adjourned, and the House rose at 11.25 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. to-morrow.