GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2393, 9 August 1892, Page 4

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 2.30 p.m. on Friday. THE FINANCIAL DEBATE. Mr Palmer resumed the debate on the Financial Statement, and was followed by Messrs Kapu, Parata, Swan, and Fergus. The latter combatted the statements so often made by Government supporters that the cclony was in a prosperous condition, and contended there never was a period of greater depression amongst all our artisans than at present, and yet there was no proposal in the Government programme to alleviate this state of things. He asserted that the producers of the country were altogether opposed to the taxation proposals and the policy of the Government, but the Opposition were powerless, when they had in office a Premier who declared that any means were justifiable to nationalise the land. Mr Fergus was still speaking at the 5.30 adjournment, and on the House resuming at 7.30 he continued speaking until 8.30. He concluded by making a gross personal attack on Mr Saunders, and said it was currently reported that Mr Saunders was to be translated to the other Chamber.

Mr Ballance thought Mr Saunders ■would survive the attack made on him by Mr Fergus. He said it was an extraordinary thing for a gentleman who had held a Ministerial position to speak from Dotes supplied by another gentleman who had held a high position. Mr Fergus—“ The notes were my own, not those of the member for Ellesmere.” Sir J. Hall also rose and stated that he had not supplied any notes to Mr Fergus except to remind him of one incident that he had overlooked. Mr Ballance continued, and defended Mr Saunders from the attack made on him. He said that hon. gentleman had been consistent throughout in his utterances. Mr Fergus had attacked Mr Saunders because he supported the Government and the Government proposed a borrowing policy. It was true there was some borrowing in the Statement, but that was only for the purchase of Native lands, and that had received the approval of the Opposition. He was prepared to show that Mr Saunders was perfectly consistent in supporting a non-borrowing Government. Referring to Mr Fergus’s extraordinary assertion that Mr Saunders ■was to be translated to a higher sphere, he thought nothing was further from that hon. gentleman’s thoughts than such a translation as that, and he could assure the House that there was nothing whatever in that statement. With respect to Mr Fergus’s remarks about Sir R. Stout, they would all welcome that gentleman to the House again, but Mr Fergus himself

helped to defeat Sir R. Stout in 1887, so that his statement that afternoon was rather peculiar. He denied having ever denounced Mr Grigg, whom he respected greatly as a settler, and he hoped there were more Mr Griggs amongst them; if there were, the so-called social pests would not he so much objected to. With respect to Mr Mackenzie’s (Glutha) statement that assessors were instructed to raise the valuations of certain men, he gave that a distinct denial, and his colleague, the Minister for Lauds, could say the same. (Mr Mackenzie—lt is perfectly true’that the assessors told nie they were instructed to go for certain men.) He should like to know who they were instructed by, and he was prepared to give the hon. gentleman every opportunity of proving his statement. He regarded Sir J. Hall’s speech last night as a carping speech, which did not do justice to himself. The hon. gentleman had picked out a number of small things in the Statement, but he had not subjected the Statement itself to any serious criticism, Respecting the taxation on improvements he denied Sir J. Hall’s assertion that the Government policy favored town against country, and said that the Government made no distinction in this respect. Their policy was in favor of small holders as against large holders, who monopolised the land of the country. As to the charge about taxing improvements he asked whether it was not a concession to small farmers, and even the middle classes, that improvements were exempted up to £3OOO, so that an estate of say £IO,OOO in value had nothing to pay for improvements 1 He asserted that the criticism of the Opposition on the Land and Income Tax had fallen wide of the mark altogether. As to the question of capital leaving the colony they had not heard so much about that of late, but Sir J. Hall had told them he advised some people with capital not to invest it in the colony. In that the hon gentleman was unpatriotic and not a friend of the country. (Sir J. Hall—“ I could not lie about it.”) The hon. gentleman, at any rate, should not have advised his friends not to bring their capital to the colony. As to the representatives of large companies who made so much talk about withdrawing their capital, they could do without them, and it would be much better if they shifted their capital from the colony. Referring to the question of the surplus, h© admitted that the larger portion of the surplus of last year was due to the previous Government, but not this year’s surplus. The House would be surprised to hear, however, that not a single enny of the surplus of last year was ad tod. to the surplus of this year. The Government took from last rear’s surplus £IOO,OOO for the payment <d our debt, £38,000 for roads ami bridges, and £15,000 for the deficit in the land fundHe did not approve of continually dragging in the name of the late Treasurer with respect to finance. Sir H. Atkinson was not responsible for the'_ present surplus. He hoped he had done his duty in his public references to Sir il- Atkinson, but, as he s onld show later, on the late Treasurer had nothing to do with this year’s surplus. He defended the labor bureau, and said it bad done yeoman i service in relieving certain districts of surplus labor, and finding employment for a great many workers. With respect to what had been said about freehold tenure if the people of the colony said that they would have freehold tenure they must have it. The Government would leave the matter to the electors of the colony, and he believed they would not consent to part with the heritage of the people. Even those who believed in fme.hold tenure knew that the Government v/ors honestly desirous of settling the people on ' the land on the most advantageous terms. The policy of the Government was not to borrow in the colony at all. Their object was to bring borrowi:.-,' to a close an soon as possible, as borro wing in the past had d&sorganised their industries, and sent people from their shores. He-referred in detail to several portions of Mrßolleston’s .speech, and said if it were not for his position as leader of the Opposition, he would have given the Government credit for their administration. With respect to what that gentleman had said about capital being withdrawn, he aajd if the large companies were leaving the colony at was not owing to Government taxation, hut because they were not paying interest on the money they had borrowed. The ountry was beginning to ’recognise that an influx of capital was not an unmixed ■good, aad iu yaauy cases tou much capital

was a serious evil for a colony. The real prosperity of the country depended on the cutting up of large estates and settling people on the land, which would increase the Customs revenue, and provide employment for the people. The Government were doing their best to meet the unemployed difficult}'. It was an economic and social question which would tax the efforts of any set of men to thoroughly cope with, and they were entitled to receive the support of the House in doing so. He referred to the statements made by several embyro T; easurers on the Opposition side of the House, and controverted the remarks made on the financial position of the colony by Mr Allen, Dr Newman, and Mr Mackenzie (Clutha). All these Treasurers, however, were out of their reckoning by ,-£IOO,OOO. Mr Richardson, the late Minister of Lands, who was modest, made it only £02,000, which he said he had reckoned twice over in the Financial Statement. After referring at some length to the conversion operations, he said, with regard to charitable aid, the Go-

verimieut hoped to make some proposals next year which would not injure local bodies. It was, however, unfair to say that the Government intended to take 00 per cent of the subsidies from local bodies this year. With respect to Mr Richardson’s figures, he had added the Public Works Fund to the Consolidated Fund, which had never been done before, and was bound to lead to confusion. Was there any meaning in adding these two funds together, and then saying what the balance was ? He did not think it right for Treasury officers to revise Mr Richardson’s tables, but said that almost every line of them contained blunders, and this led the hon. gentlemen into the mistakes lie had made. He fully forgave Mr Richardson for the mistakes he had made in the figures, with the exception of the £62,000, which he repeated over and over again, but the fact was that debentures were set off against £62,000, and that one sum balanced the other. Referring to Mr Scobie Mackenzie’s speech, that gentleman had termed him the Jubilee Plunger, for what reason he knew not. It was true Sir J. Vogel, when he was a colleague of his (Mr Ballance’s), had publicly advocated borowing .ten millions of money hut neither he nor the other members of the Cabinet' supported him in that. They were told again and again that the Grey Ministry left a deficit of a million, which existed only in the imagination of the Opposition. It was true the land fund had failed in that year, but in nearly every other department they had a surplus. In proof of that ho said Sir H. Atkinson had, after coming to office, stated the deficit was only £131,000, less £50,000 of land debt. The same remarks applied to the deficit said to have been left by the Stout-Vogel Government of half a million whilst it was not nearly that amount. The}' were told the annual expenditure was increasing, and they could not get out of it. It meant more work done, and consequently larger expenditure, but that very fact showed that the colony was progressing. Then, what about the increase in our population, and the additional number of children that had to be provided for ? They were actually collecting £IO,OOO more revenue at less expenditure than before. With respect to taking duties oil the necessaries of life, he held it was not a desirable thing to do at present. Their finances were in a state of transition, and if anyone of their sources of revenue fell off they would not be able to make any such reduction without causing inconvenience to their finance. They were told they could get money in the English market at 4 per cent., but he doubted whether they co.uld get any money in the English market as at present. As he had previously said, all tin? borrowing the Government meant to do was fq borow for tiu; purchase of Native land, anfl private lauds, but he thought it was almost impossible to borrow in the English market at ptesout.- With reappet to taxation of improvement ß , h e said the Government hoped to be ab e to take off all taxation on improvements,and that the small settlers should benefit by this concession. The Government policy was not to impose fresh taxation but to adjust it, and endeavour to provide that it should fall on the shoulders more able to bear the burden than of those on whom it h d hitherto fallen. Referring to the Government lusvmu),Oo Department he said it was in a sound combi ion, and he deprecated the statement of the Opposition that mortgages were failing. As a of fact, he believed £2OOO would cover all tfie losses. Some Jion. members talked of a possible run on tiio Government Savings Bank, but the thing was monstrous, as so long as New Zealand was New Zealand it was absolutely impossible to repudiate her liability, and so long as we could pay our debts there could be no run on the Savings Bank. Coming to the Public Trust Offices they were told they were mopping up trust funds, but that office was now lending opt money to farmers and others. The Governmet could not borrow a single penny from the Trust Office except by law, and the member for Ellesmere knew that perfectly well. The money that accumulated in the Public Trust Office must be used, and if used by the colony In a legitimate manner there could be no objection to it. As to the position of tlie -Public Trustee himself, it was. said that that officer should be independent of Government, but the last Trustee was in that position, and what •mis it ]}n result ? He asserted that the present officer performed the work far better than when it was done by an indepencut officer. It had beep said that the Testamentary Trusts Restrictions Bill was brought to meet the ease of a relative of the Public Trustee or some other pprson, but to that he gave an absolute deffial. He was willing to take all the odium that .attached to that Bill, as he had long been jupder the impre-sion that it was necessary to deal with estates that were tied np iu trust, $9 -that justice and equity might he done to those ,009-, earned. Ho defended the proposal to lend money to small farmers at a low rate of interssh, and also the action of the Government with regard to the Edwards appointment, which no said Lad met with the approval of the civilised world. -Thorp was no justification for this appointment. The decision of the Court of Appeal show.qd that it was established now beyond ah’ doubt that the salary must bo provided beioivi ;t Judge was appointed. He denied hat he ever preached a different programme in »ho House on the land qiief-Mon. to that he had preached op the public platform. What ho had always advocated was a wide distribution of land amongst the ppople, and they should never cease their efforts fill they had done something for the amo; iorati on of the apeoyde. The ’.House then went into Committee of Supply, <iJi.fl reported progress without passing any item, on the Estimates. The House rose at 12.15 r„m.