NO-CONFIDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 September 1922, Page 5

NO-CONFIDENCE.

LABOR MOTION DEFEATED. liberals vote with labor. budget DEBATE CONTINUED. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. Immediately the debate on the Budget was called on in the House to-dav, a division was taken on the amendment moved by Mr. H. E. Holland (Leader of the Labor Party), which the Government treated as a motion of no confidence. The amendment was defeated by 52 votes to 13, several of the Liberals voting with Labor. Continuing the debate, Mr. G. Mitchell (Wellington South) said it was from the soil and the soil only that New Zealand could hope to increase its revenue. The total number of selections taken up between 1916 and 1921 was 10,850, or an average of 1808 per annum on 391 acres each. If there was nothing to set off against those figures the position would be entirely satisfactory, and he could congratulate the Minister of Lands. However, the Gazette figures did not warrant congratulation. The Gazette showed that while the number of people settled by the Government was satisfactory in some provinces, there bad been an actual decrease in the number of holdings in Wellington, where the Crown had settled 1113 settlers and the actual loss in the number of holdings was 432. In 1919 the Dominion lost 961 holdings, in 1920 we lost 715, and in 1921 the gain was 288.

He said the law against aggregation was a dead letter, and aggregation was still going on. The population figures gave further proof of that, for the drift was from the country to the towns. Thousands of acres of the choicest land in the country were unproductive, especially along the Mam Trunk line. For an expenditure of something like £10,000,000 the untry secured only 4530 settlers, including returned soldiers, who were crying out against the size of the burden they had to carry because of the inflated value of their land. PLEA FOR THE BACKBLOCKS. Mr. K. Williams (Bay of Plenty) stated that as land settlement was for the benefit of the country as a whole, the consolidated funds should bear a bigger proportion of the cost of roading new estates. When bush land was settled a settler should have at least three years free of rent. He trusted that public opinion would not force the Government to settle the Urewera country without careful consideration. There were thousands of acres which would be better if left in their natural state. He made a plea on behalf of the qut-back settlers for greater hospital facilities and generally for improved public services. Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christchurch North) said that though he was an avowed prohibitionist he never obtruded his views on the House, but in the debate the Premier had been challenged to state what he would do if the people decided to abolish the liquor traffic. It had been asked what the Treasurer would do if the revenue from the liquor trade was withdrawn. He maintained that if the people continued the trade for another three years it would involve a gross expenditure of £27,000,000, and this meant they would have to expend £27,000,000 in order to get £6,0G0,000 of revenue. At least £2,000,000 of the £6,000,000 of revenue would have to be written off, but it was said £4,000,000 remained, and it was asked what was to be done about that. This, he maintained, would be more than made up by the fillip given to trade and industries. “Don’t let us look at the reve-

nue,” he said, “but let us look at the problem from a higher standpoint, and lend our sympathy to a movement which is not merely a Dominion movement, but a national movement.” ECONOMY IN WORKING. Mr. H. M. Campbell (Hawke’s Bay) said that though some people abused alcohol the country was best served by self-reli-ant people Who could stand against temptation. We were passing through a time of depression, and it would be a serious thing if we had suddenly to turn round and raise not £1,400,000, but probably £2,000,000. The Hon. J. G. Coates, replying to the Leader of the Opposition’s criticism regarding the stores department, said that the administration of that department was one of the first things he had looked into when he took office. A stores board.was set up specially to report, but excellent*as that report was, it was found impossible to put all the suggestions into operation, and the fact remained that after all they must rely to a great extent upon the honesty of officers, and from the highest to the lowest that prevailed. The purchase of stores had been centralised in a stores control board, which prevented wasteful competition by one department buying against another. Another great reform was the institution of departmental balance sheets, which were installed with the idea of securing economy amongst those responsible for departmental management. The House rose at 11.40 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. to-day.