THE BUDGET.

Taranaki Daily News, 25 August 1922, Page 5

THE BUDGET.

THE DEBATE CONTINUED. NO CONFIDENCE MOTION. MOVED BY LABOR LEADER. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Wellington, Last Night. The debate oh the Financial Statement was continued in the House to-day. Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) said the Government had not asked the Opposition to suggest means by which expenditure could be cut down. This was not the function of the Opposition, for the duty was cast on the Government to do this; but notwithstanding this, he would make a few suggestions. The member for Hurunui had suggested a reduction in the number of Ministers, but the Premier had said he could run the country with half-a-dozen secretaries. If that was so, why did he not do it and abolish Ministers altogether ? For many years past we had been losing heavily on the Tourist Department, and ha objected to this country providing at its own expense amusement and comfort for the idle rich. The High Commissioner’s Office cost us last year £45,000, and yet we could Pot get our market reports for a week after private buyers had been able to get theirs. There was gyeat scope for economy in this direction. Then, the Board of Trade might be abolished, for most people had come to the conclusion that it had entirely outlived its usefulness and was of no further service to the people of this Dominion.

He advocated a reduction of the Legislative Council by one-half, and unity of control in education was needed in the interests of economy and to bring to an end the present wasteful system. The Public Service Commissioner’s office was costing the country £lo,oso last year, and giving no adequate service in return; in fact, Ministers themselves had no more faith in the office than other people had. Those were, he said, practical directions in which money might be saved, and he recommended them to the earnest consideration of the Government.

MARKETING PRODUCE. Continuing, Mr. Masters proceeded to deal with the question of marketing our produce in London, maintaining that in spite of promises of the Premier and the Government no legislation had been placed on the Statute Book to relieve the position. In Australia, farmers had the benefit of competition by Commonwealth steamers. He wanted to know what the Government proposed to do to relieve the producers from the operations of the shipping ring in New Zealand. The remedy was the establishment of a Governmentaided co-operative line to compete with the ships of the combines, and the people of New Zealand would be behind the Government in such a policy. Mr. E. Newman (ManaWatu) said he agreed with Mr. Masters that the shipping ring would have to be tackled. He considered wool and dairy produce should be under one control, as in combination with the meat pool there would be a better chance of getting a reduction in freights. He advocated the High Commissioner being empowered to advertise for British capital to develop our secondary industries, which would save us years and years of time. Dr. H. T. Thacker (Christchurch East) wanted to know what the Government was going to do in the event of prohibition being carried. Personally he favored State control, and he thought the people would, too, if it was more clearly explained to them.

The Hon. W. Nosworthy defended the Government against the charge of doing nothing to ease the shipping position for farmers. It was not always advisable for the Government to disclose what they were doing in these delicate matters, especially when negotiations were proceeding, and he was not going to do so, but the Government was not idle, and would probably surprise the Opposition when they knew what the position was. The Leader of the Opposition had attacked the banks of the Dominion, but there was much to be said for the banks,, for during the war they kept the rate of interest lower than in Britain, and but for heavy importations, which forced the banks to advance more than their deposits, the rate of interest would never have been so high as it is.

“SOLDIERS WILL PULL THROUGH.” The accumulated surpluses had not been wasted as had been alleged, but could not have been utilised for a better purpose than for settling soldiers on the land. The soldiers were all right and were going to pull through, but the Government had not sought to help them in the hope of getting their votes at the election. In putting them on the land the Government had only done its duty. Mr. H. E. TT olland (Leader of the Labor Party) said if the Budget was an exact statement of the position then it carried on the face of it condemnation of the Government. The Budget stated that on March 31 last there waA a surplus of over ' £7,000.C00. yet in spite of this the Government allowed a huge unemployed problem to grow up in our midst. There were starving men in our t midst, and there was scarcely a member who had not appealed to the Minister of Public Works to find work for the unemployed in their districts. The Bud-

get showed there were large accumulated surpluses, while many necessary works were waiting to be put in hand to give essential communications to the baekblock settlements and to give work to tlie unemployed. He repudiated the charge of disloyalty made against the Labor Party. AMENDMENT MOVED. Mr. Holland then moved the following amendment: “That in view of the fact disclosed in the Budget, that on March 31, 1922. there was a surplus of £7.531.367 in the Consolidated Fund, this House is of opinion that the Government failed in its duty by not making provision for the absorption of unemployment by proceeding with urgently necessary public works.” Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Central) seconded the amendment. Sir William Herries, acting-Leader of the House, said the amendment was a direct challenge to the Government, and under those circumstances the Government accepted the challenge, and would accept it as a want of confidence motion. The debate was adjourned, and the House rose at 10.55 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. to-morrow.