SECURITY COSTS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 26 August 1938, Page 5

SECURITY COSTS

MR COATES LOOKS INTO DETAILS INFORMATION SOUGHT MINISTER AND ACTUARY (By Telegraph—Press Association.) ■ WELLINGTON, This Day. The finances of the Government’s national health and superannuation schemes were discussed by the Rt Hon J. G. Coates (Opposition, Kaipara), during the second reading debate on the Social Security Bill in the House of Representatives yesterday. Mr Coates said there was more than a suspicion that the Minister of Finance, the Hon W. Nash, was endeavouring to withhold from the country full information regarding the future costs of the scheme. “We are now considering a Bill which will not become law until April 1 next year,” Mr Coates said. “If the Government is returned to power, does it intend to modify the scheme before it becomes operative?” Mr Nash: “Why not talk of possibilities?” Mr Coates: “It is quite all right if the- Minister thinks it is a possibility, or even a probability, that he will be ousted from office.” AN EXPLANATION NEEDED It appeared that the Bill was being made something in the nature of a political stalking horse, said Mr Coates, and that the Government was less concerned with the benefits proposed than with the assistance which the Bill might prove at the next election The Minister himself had said that all the Government was concerned about was immediate finance and that future finance could look after itself. That statement required an explanation. Mr Nash: “I said we were budgeting for one year at a time." Mr Coates: “That looks as if I am right.” Mr Nash: “Have you ever budgeted for more than one year at a time?” Mr Coates: “One must always budget in advance. It is impossible to disregard the future.” 'One point I would like answered,” said Mr Coates, “is whether the Minister has obtained a report from the Treasury on the Government's proposals. If so, he should release that report for public information, because the country is entitled to it. I am not the only one who is curious as to whether the expert financial advisers at the Treasury have been taken into the confidence of the Government. “There is another point, too. Will the Minister be good enough to give the House the benefit of the original Bill which he himself prepared and took to the Government caucus?” Mr Nash: ‘'This is the only Bill that has been prepared.” “That may be so,” said Mr Coates, “but it would be interesting to know what happened to the proposals in the Minister’s original memorandum. There is an impression that they were dragged about a good deal. However, the Treasury report is particularly important. When we are faced with expenditure running into millions, we want, more than just the Minister’s word.” \ \

AN ARBITRARY DEDUCTION Mr Coates surveyed in detail the Minister’s financial proposals, given at the opening of the second-reading debate, and said that, by excluding war pensions and making an arbitrary deduction of £1,610,000 which was not expected to come to charge, Mr Nash had whittled down the actuary’s estimate of expenditure in the first year from £17,850,000 to £15,000,000. Of that sum, the Minister had stated that only £1,500,000 would have to be found from new taxation. “We are entitled to know why that sum of £1,610,000 will not come to charge next year,” Mr Coates added. “The British actuary, Mr G. H. Maddex, said it would . Here we have two men—the trained actuary who says one thing, based on expert investigatoins, and the Minister who flatly contradicts him.” In spite of the Minister’s figures, said Mr Coates, it was clear that the costcost of the entire scheme, with the additional benefits to wives and widows, would be approximately £18,500,000. To that sum would have to be added £3,500,000 for unemployment relief, the funds for which would disapear; making a grand total of £22,000,000. Present taxation for the services outlined in the Bill brought in £12,000,000. The increase in the wages tax would produce £3,500,000, but a similar sum would be required for unemployment purposes, leaving £3,000,000 to be obtained from the Consolidated Fund. In all, there would have to be £10,600,000 of new taxation in the first year. “There is the matter of total incomes on which the wages tax is to be levied,” Mr Coates said. “Mr Maddex reaches a figure of £150,000,000, but the Minister calmly adds another, £24000,000.