FINANCE BILL.

Taranaki Daily News, 11 February 1922, Page 5

FINANCE BILL.

ANOTHER MILLION LOAN.

PREMIER REVIEWS POSITION. REVENUE COMING IN WELL, FURTHER “CUT” IN EXPENDITURE. By Telegraph.—Press Association Wellington, Last Night. The second reading of the Finance Bill was moved in the House by the Prime Minister this afternoon. Mr. Massey said it was largely a machinery Bill, and might be called a financial “washing-up” Bill. He explained the measure clause by clause. The principal provisions were clause ten, which proposed to exempt from gift duty certain classes of gifts, and the voluntary discharge of morsgage debts. This was intended to give relief to certain dairy farmers. He would, be able to make adjustments of mortgages with the mortgagees. Clause twelve provided that the Customs duties collected on motor tyres be paid into the main highways account. Clause twen-ty-seven empowered the Government to pay into the Samoan Treasury certain sums by way of loan. The position was that the -fall in the prices of commodities prevented the revenue equalling the expenditure there, and the Government had to assist tmporarily the local Treasury. Clause 29 dealt with cases of certain civil servants who were retrenched on the eve of normal retirement, and who were entitled to receive superannuation. Section 35 gave increased powers to town boards, and clause 48 empowered the Senate of the New Zealand university to grant degrees to certain students at the Duntroon Military College in recognition of their education attainments. OPPOSITION’S CRITICISM. In commenting on the Bill Mr. T. M. Wilford (Leader of the Opposition) strongly criticised clause 19, giving the Government power to borrow an additional £1,000,600 on the security of Treasury bills. He said that in days gone by the expenditure of £250,000 was most keenly scrutinised and watched with the greatest care, but to-day £1,000,000 was asked for in a most light and airy fashion. Personally he was not going to agree to the proposal in this clause unless the fullest information was given regarding the necessity for it. Mr. T. K. Sidey (Dunedin South) said our finance was getting the upper hand of us. We were running amock, and he, in common with the Leader of the Opposition, would challenge clause 19. Mr. C. E. Statham (Dunedin Central) said the House was certainly entitled to know move about the circumstances under "which the House was asKed to give the Government power to raise an additional £1,000,000. Mr. W. A. Veitch (Wanganui) advocated something being done to make kauri timber available to the people immediately. He approved the proposal for limiting pensions under the superannuation scheme tc £3OO, and the provision of the extension of superannuation benefits to public servants who have been retrenched. He urged a close investigation of the effect of clause 35 (increasing the rating powers of town boards) so that no unfair interference with their functions should accrue where rating was on unimproved values. Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) criticised the amount of money spent in the travelling expenses of public servants throughout the country. He supported the appeals for assistance for dairy farmers who were hard pressed by the financial stringency. Mr. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said fanners could only get assistance through legislation, and the House should not rise till such relief was given, though he feared even legislation would not save some fanners. He suggested that protection to men in difficulties should be given for a limited period.

THE PREMIER’S REPLY. The Premier, in reply, said he depended on raising money by Treasury bills, because money could be got cheaply by that means. He had recently raised funds that way at from 31 to 5 per cent. He was not afraid of the finance of this year, but what he had to guard against was the finance of next year. The land tax had come in so well under the new system that he was perfectly satisfied that if the income tax came in as well there would be no difficulty about the balance on March 31.

Coming to the Opposition’s complaint that the Government was extravagant he said that was simply an electioneering cry, and he recognised it as an old acquaintance. So far as borrowing was concerned, he had no intention of going anywhere but to Britain for money. He would not go to America for any money we require. Returning to the question of expenditure he said those who accused the Government of extravagance always selected the quarter of the year in which a large number of accounts came to charge and when the expenditure was necessarily heavier, but this quarter members would find that the Supplementary Estimates had been considerably reduced, and would amount only to about £335,000, as against over £2,000,000 last year. Clause 19 was necessary, because there was sure to be financial difficulty next year, and extra money might be required for various purposes—wheat transactions amongst others—and as there would likely be a serious falling off in income tax this provision was all the more necessary. The second reading was agreed to and the House went into committee on the Bill. In committee the House passed the Finance Bill with minor amendments moved by the Premier, and on resuming the House agreed to the amendments. On the third reading Mr. Wilford referred to the difficulty the Premier must have in mastering every detail of these highly technical Bills, and he suggested some of them might be handed over to one of the four legal members of the Cabinet, who were not so overworked as the Premier.

Mr. Massey said he accepted the suggestion in a good spirit, but the difficulty was that he could not divest himself of the responsibility in connection with the finances of the country.

The Bill was read a third time and passed.