The Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, JULY 13, 1882.

Temuka Leader, Issue 975, 13 July 1882, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. THURSDAY, JULY 13, 1882.

The National Insurance proposals of the Government, if we understand them rightly, are most extraordinary. So far as we can gather from the Press Association report the Government propose to make every young man and young woman between 16 and 23 years of age pay to tho Government £4l 17s Id, to provide for themselves in case of sickness or old age. The rate at which this is to be paid at is 2s 3d per week for persons who commence to pay at 16 years of age, and 8s 3d per week for persons who commence at the age of 18 years. The proposer of this scheme—the Honorable Major Atkinson—has some vague ideas about how to provide for persons over 23 years, but either he, or the Press Association, has not made them such as we can: understand. He says that this class’ will be compelled to pay £6 a year for i number of years, but for how many years or what total amount they will have to pay has not transpired, and this if we understand rightly will apply up to the age of 65 years, because that is the age at which they are to be provided tor out of the consolidated revenue. The only exception to this is persons over 50 years who are provided for by Friendly Societies. We feel diffident in placing these facts before our readers because we do not feel sure they are correct. We have gathered them from the repoitof Major Atkinson’s speech J as telegraphed by the Press Association, but surely no man occupying the position of a Minister of the Crown could be so silly as to lay such proposals before any sane body of men. There must be something mote in the proposals of the Government than what has been transmitted to us, but at the same time we think the principle they involve is clear enough. It is evident that the aim of the Government is to com iel people to make provision for old age and infirmities in or der to avert the probability of ultimately having to erect poor-houses, and levying rates for tho maintenance of those who are unable to take care of themselves, It would be very well if that could be done, but we cannot agree at all with such a sweeping method of doing it as the Hon, Major Atkinson proposes. Let us, for instance, take the case' of young women of 16 years. What means have 60 per cent of them to pay 2s 3d per week, or £8 Is a year ? Are they to go to service to get their 2s 3d, or how are they to get it ? Their parents may have more than enough to do to provide them with food and clothing, without having to pay 2s ?d or 3s 3d a week for each for them to the Government. We look upon this proposal as a monstrous attempt to saddle all the taxation of the country on the shoulders of the poor. The present Government removed the taxation from laud to property, thereby handicapping industry, and now they want to shift it on to the shoulders of young girls and boys under age. It is the most extraordinary attempt at legislation that we hare ever heard of, but as the full details of the proposals are not yet before us we will defer further criticism of the matter until a more opportune occasion,

The burden of the song of the Government in their Financial and Public Works Statement is “ we have saved enormously. We got so much for public works, and so much for other works, but instead of spending it, we kept it safely in the coffers of tho Colonial Treasurer, and are we not entitled to the gratitude of the colony for our frugality.” This is the leading feature of both statements with (he exception of the proposal to add another three millions to the national debt. We cannot gratulato the Government on what they have done in this matter. They got the money to spend, and we think they did a great deal more harm than good by not spending it. W&ut of employment has driven a great many people out of this colony who would have remained in it if the £900,000 which the Government boast they have saved had been spent on public works. The colony has paid £2,000,000 for bringing* people into it, and certainly it cannot be looked upon otherwise than as a loss that they should go away as soon as they have put a few pounds together, This is exactly what the penny wise and pound foolish policy of the Government has done. It has driven a great many good colonists of a very desirable class to New South Wales and other places, and the question is now whether the si has not been double the gain.

Besides, why should the Government stick to this money ? The Minister of Public Works pictures in glowing colors how profitable money invested in Public Works has proved, and urges that the sooner more is spent in the same direction the better. If the Government saw that to finish certain lines of railway would add to the revenue derivable from them, as they say is the case, why did they delay their construction? It is all nonsense to say it they had spent all the money voted they would have cone to go on with now. Of course they would. They can raise money at any moment by issuing treasury bills. On the whole we think that the saving of the Government for which they take so much credit has been a very bad thing for the colony, as-it has driven away many, who were not only the most desirable of colonists, but men wbo had saved .their earnings, and were , likely to settle, down upon land in a .feyy years. This, and the cry they raised that the colony was in a state of bankruptcy when they took office which contributed largely, to the depression of past years, has done more harm than can be remedied for years.