In the earlier portions of the Minister's speech, to which we have just listened, there was an air of optimism, even though the first portion of it referred to the fact that last year the conditions all the world over were bad. In no case, the speech went on to say, were they worse than what they were here. Then, in so far as they were worse here than elsewhere, the responsibility for that rests upon the Executive Council. Examining the returns of the export and import trade of this country for 12 months, one observes that the contraction is enormous, amounting to about 25 per cent. Last year the Minister reviewed the trade returns in the country for some years, but his speech on this occasion was in marked contrast; all that was avoided. The only reference to trade or conditions generally was contained in the few words, "In some respects as bad here as elsewhere; in some better, in none worse."
Last year we had an immense imposition of taxation which, in the light of the Minister's statement as regards conditions of trade then, was a remarkable decision of the Executive Council. We had presented to us this morning, a departure from precedent, the Estimates of receipts and expenditure. We could read it all in the morning papers before our post arrived. The remarkable feature of this publication is that on page three, where tax and non-tax revenue are recorded, there is a reduction in the estimated receipts on the same basis of taxation of about 7.3% as compared with last year's reduction of 6.5%. It might come to this, that a person who was in receipt of a multiple of £73 last year is in receipt of £65 this year.
We have the satisfaction of knowing that taxation is not going to be increased except to the extent of £143,000. The trade conditions in this country at present do not warrant, and are unable to sustain, the collection of the sums of money which will be necessary to defray the expenditure as outlined. Those conditions are not likely to improve, if we are to take the analysis of the Minister's speech as an indication of Government policy. The sum and substance of this pronouncement is that the economic war will be with us for all time. If that be the case, then there will be a much larger percentage reduction each year in any taxation which may be imposed.
There is no analysis this year, no comparison, in gold ounces of our liabilities and our assets. We have to pass from the gold standard, the last to abandon it being the Executive Council when the Americans departed therefrom. I do not know whether they endeavoured to persuade the Americans to remain on it in order to justify the arguments they put forward here 12 months ago. Anyhow, the gold ounces are gone. I would like to know if we were to compare in gold ounces the trade of this country during the 12 months since the present Executive Council took over responsibility how it would compare with the conditions of a couple of years ago. The Minister referred to several items in connection with taxation. I find it difficult to discover one of these in the White Paper. The Minister said he had received £5,301,000 in respect of income tax and sur-tax as against an estimate of £5,245,000. In the White Paper I find that income tax and sur-tax are separate items. The sum total of the two amounts to £5,194,000. The Minister stated that the Corporation Profits Tax realised £495,000. The sum inserted in the White Paper is £460,000.
The Minister mentioned excess profits duty at £116,000. I find from the White Paper that the figure is £113,000. I presume the Minister will have some explanation to offer in that connection later. What concerns us most in the Budget is how the money is going to be found. In that connection I presume we shall also have some extra explanation later. I would like to say right off that I discourage these double explanations by the Minister of the different items of his Budget for 1933. The Minister proposes to borrow half the cost of the export bounties and subsidies. On the one hand, we have his manipulation as to the surplus or Suspense Account. He sets against the deduction from Land Bond deficiency £534,000 the sum of £550,000 from the revenue side and transfers the difference to the expenditure side which is somewhat mystifying. There was no necessity to waste ink on those two transactions at all. They might have been allowed to stand.
The revenue which the Minister states he is receiving from beer and spirits, home made, exceeded his anticipations. That is not borne out in the report which I presume every Deputy has got from the Licensed Grocers and Vinters' Association. The drop there is remarkable and it is a matter for consideration who is right in connection with these imposts. If those who are interested in prohibiting the sale of those particular commodities are called upon in the near future to provide the revenue short by reason of the prodigality of those duties I think that the consideration that might be brought to bear upon it might alter very considerably.
Taking the Budget as a whole there seems to be some satisfaction from the fact that there has been an interruption from the rake's progress. Last year we piled taxation on top of taxation and the expenses on business and industry and commerce and trade generally were practically beyond the country's capacity to bear. There was some finesse in the statement of the Minister in which he referred to the taxation which has been derived from the imposition of emergency duties. The difference between emergency duties imposed here and emergency duties imposed in England, as far as I can judge the situation, is that the cost of the article is increased to the consumer here. We collect from our own nationals. On the other side the tariff is imposed against our agricultural products and that tariff falls heavily upon the producers of agricultural produce in this country. In other words the British public gets our goods so much cheaper. It appears, in respect of those goods, first of all, that the tariff is deducted from world prices and our people get the world prices less the tariff. Here, in this country I presume taxation imposed is imposed upon our people. It does not hinder the British producer or supplier in getting the sum that they secured for their goods before the articles were tariffed. It is upon our own people the taxation is imposed and they are paying the more for the goods which have been taxed whether they know it or not. The Budget, as I have said, imposes a burden on the people of this country which they cannot bear in the circumstances. The sooner people realise that the economic war is not an an economic proposition for the people of this country the better it will be for all concerned.
Reference was made in the Minister's speech to the situation they found when coming into office for which the previous administration was responsible. Again we get the old strain of humbug that their predecessors had not balanced their Budget. The Minister referred in his speech to the fact that they paid £1,000,000 in Exchequer Bills left over by their predecessors, but the fact is that their predecessors left money in the Treasury to pay these Bills. They left over £1,600,000 there and they could be discharged at any moment. The Government's predecessors balanced their Budget for the last ten years, and the best evidence for that is to be found in the various sums of money spent, the cost of compensation for damage done during the civil war, and various other sums presented to the House on different occasions totalling in all £33,000,000 or £34,000,000. Even according to the account here it is acknowledged that something like half of that was paid back under normal circumstances while still reducing taxation, lessening the burden upon the people, and seeing that industry and commerce in the country were making progress. In a Budget speech such as this one would look for more attention to items of interest that affect the public, and not to attempts to secure political advantage, more especially when those attempting to secure political advantage are least entitled to it. The further consideration of the Budget will be before the House at a later stage. I have only again to emphasise that in my view no greater damage was ever done to this country than when it embarked upon a policy of economic war with its best customer, reducing the supplies of imports and exports. In attempting to remedy that the ultimate price we will have to pay for the experiment will be very heavy.
