HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XII, Issue 2426, 6 August 1891, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

August 5. „ The House met at 2.30. SfoCOiSD IIEAI'JNG. The Auckland Electric Lighting Bill was read a second time. QUESTIONS. Replying to questions, it was statectlrnt some alteration would be made in the quarantine regulations relating to/the admission of dogs into the colony, and the matter had been referred to the Stock Committee; that the licensing question would receive every possible attention during the recess. NEW I'LYMOUTH lEONSAND, Mr E. M. Smith gave notice to move, on going into Committee of Supply— "That in the opinion o; this 'House, Government should appoint a Royal Commission, with power to spend £3600 in the trial of the ironsand and iron ores of New Plymouth, so as to ascertain whether they can be smelted, thereby enabling New Zealand to make iron and steel from its own ores." LAND AND I>COME ASSESSMENT BILL. Mr Richardson resumed the debate on the Land and Income Assessment Bill. He said the Bill was based on a conjecture as to the amount of revenue it would yield, and the most the Premier hoped for was that he would obtain as much money under it as he had done under the property tax. He referred at some length to the revenue which hf,d been obtained since the present Government assumed office, and after a very careful consideration of the figures, he calculated there was an actual deficit for the last six months of £101,000. The present state of the colony did not warrant such a change as Government proposed on the incidence of taxation. Mr McKeuzie (Olufcha) complained that no light whatever had been thrown on the change proposed to be made in the system of taxation. He wished to lodge a final protest against this measure. It seemed to him that they were now dominated :>y the towns «[ the colony, and that being so it was essential that the country party should be formed for their own protection. The effect of the present Bill would bG to remove taxation from the shoulders of wealthy people in the cities and place it on the land, which would then have to pay an undue proportion of taxation. The debate Avas interrupted by the 5.30 adjournment. The House resumed at 7.30. Mr C. H. Mills was in favor of Dr Newman's amendment, but thought it should be withdrawn now, so that it could be brought on again in committee. He could not agree with the last speaker that the proposed taxation would pre^s heavily on small farmers, and his reading of the Bill lead him to a different conclusion. Mr Buckland took exception to the Premier's remark's concerning Chambers Qf Commerce.. As to the taxation proposals, he thought this new system would prove no better than the property tax, and he would record his vote against the Bill. Sir John Hall only wished to refer to one or two points in the Bill. The powers given to Government by the clause providing for secrecy under the income tax would render that impost extremely- unpopular. A Jittle more information might have been given as to exemption. He could not see why a man who invested his capital in improvements should be taxed so much more heavily than a man investing in bank shares. Jit was said the reason land was singled out for such heavy taxation was in order to qbtain revenue ,' but if that was so, he a^ked « by Government proposed to throw away £40,000 by reducing the postage rates, a proposition that would be opposed by ninfctenths of the people in the colony. Mr W, P, Reeves said he did not think the people of this colony would care f the American system of collecting the Income tax, and he imagined the Treasurer would rather run the risk of losing a certain amount of revenue than put that system in force hero. He was alad to hear Mr Bryce say that the Income tax was a good revenue tax, and wa& always to be relied on in that respect. Ass to fraud, any heavy tax always led to fraudulent •practic.e. ! 'He, denied ahsqJufcely. that because Government were WQf|fpig up, the land tax pufre and/ simple, ilt meant {ihaf fhsy wqrking it)' a single tax. There'were things in tf)e Bill perfectly unreeoncilahle with a single tax, and it was unfair to assume that Go., yernment were tending towards that tax, He explained, with reference to incomes derived from live stock, that they would Xjiop be jtaxed, but incomes derived from dealings' in stock WQJjW De liable to taxation. As to Dr Newman's' amendment, Government were not going to allow vc red herring to be drawn across the scehfc, and they 1 could not consent to 1 have their Jjojicy" traversed in that manner. Go•Vernnie.n^ woujit} gisre every facility for discussing the absentee tax in Committee, but they wished' to "get 'their.Land! and Income ' Bill into Committee without b,eing' jmcuiYfberetl by 'Dr Newman's amendment. .He, pointed out that" Mr Richardson in drawing the attention of the Hoftse to the alarming falling off in the revenue to the extent of #42,000, for tjie first three months of the present yeiar, had omitted to state .that the : fourth month's return lessened the decrease to £13,000 instead of £42,000. He denied that the present Bill was revolutionary in character, 1 and saiif it: would now be aegn , whether those who ha 4 clamoured so loudly against the property tax 1 would be ,true to their colours. '.. : Mr M^filntiosh 1 supported the Bill. I Mr SaundtnV thought that faQtqrjcs and j mndhinery ought toiescape taxation, and what jbhe Government, should attempt to' tax away was the habit of'the people of crowding into the towns,'wh*ch was*one of

lha g rcifce.se curses fro tha colony. He would suppmt the (Jill in a friendly | spirit. Mr G. Hutchison snid that the Bill to his mind was the greatest effort at prophecy that had ever been brought before the House, as it assumed that certain results would fallow its introduction. Minister.s themselves had no idea what those result* would be. He asked why native lands were exempt from the operation of this Ac L, and held that (.hose lands should couliihute to the taxation of the country. Hs belief was that, the proposed taxation would not obtain the necessary revenue, nor would ie meet the requirements of the country. His belief was that the proposed taxation would not obtain the' j necessary revenue, nor would it meet the i requirements of the country, and he asserted that if those proposals had been before the country in December last they would not now be promulgated from the Ministerial bench. It might be said that in opposing the Bill he was deserting h ■ party. He had not done so. The opinions he had jusfc expressed were the S!ime as those he had always held. Mr fehera spoke in support of the amendment re the exemption of all improvements and the abolition of the reduction of £500 proposed in certain cases, which he intended to move in Committee. Mr Blake said his vote depended on what the Premier had to say in replying. Mr Duthie moved the adjournment of the debate. The House rose at 1.10.