CONTINUOUS TALK

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 72, 26 March 1931, Page 8

CONTINUOUS TALK

LABOUR'S STONEWALL.

LITTLE PROGRESS MADE.

INFLEXIBLE PRIME MINISTER,

"CUTS" DEEMED ESSENTIAL,

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, this day. The fight over the Financc Bill had ■astcd 45A hours (actual talking time), when the House of Representatives, after .lie third all-night sitting, adjourned for breakfast to-day with clause 2 of the bill not passed. The Labour party has a long way to so if it wishes to beat former fstonewall records, but the organisation on all sides is now functioning smoothly, and it is difficult to predict what may happen. At the moment the problem can be stated in terms of the familiar catch question: "What happens when the immovable meets the irresistible?" Calm followed the prc-breakfast storm yesterday morning, and the subsequent verbal efforts to secure an alteration in -Jie title of the bill even infused a note jf humour into the debate. There were :hree divisions on "alteration"' amendments before the short title was passed. Supplementary order papers began to ippear in the half-dozens, showing the scope of the Labour programme when .he operative clauses of bill were •eached. The fight on the short title :nded at 3 p.m., and with this stage jnded the privilege of talking for four inies for a period of ten minutes -'peaking times arc now down to four »f five minutes each. There was a Attendance of members to witness this lefinite stage in the battle, and the livision in favour of the short title, 52 In its favour and 20 against, provided ictual evidence to this effect. The Labour force on that occasion was helped by the vote of Mr. G. C. Black (Ind., Motueka).

Wlien, at 3.15, the committee reached the point of considering the first operative clause of the bill, the Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates, Leader of the Opposition, reminded the Prime Minister of the suggestion lie had made on the previous evening that there should be a modification of the measure in its application to the locomotive branch of the Railway Department, as had been provided in the retrenchment measure of 1921. Under this the men were able to make an arrangement with the general manager, subject to tlie approval of the Minister of Finance, for a method of carrying out the reduction, and it effected eventually the same saving as the 10 per cent cut. The New Programme. The Prime Minister did not reply at this stage, therefore Mr. P. Fraser (Lab., Wellington Central) moved the first ot the Labour amendments to clause 2, which was to insert. after the words salaries and commissions which would be subject to the deduction, the words ■"income taxable under the Land and Income Tax Act. 1923." Mr. Fraser said he would be quite frank about the effect of this proposal, [t would bring everybody fortunate enough to be in the possession of a taxable income under the scope of the bill. It sought to :arry out an elemental principal of justice. The House should not single out the public servant and the wageearner, but should spread the burden on the whole community in accordance with ability to

pay. "I don't want to discuss it," he added. "I want to see a vote right away." The division was taken immediately, and the amendment was negatived by 53 votes to 21.

"Cutting the Whole Thing Away." "We have done all we could," said ill". J. McCombs (Labour, Lyttelton), "to prevent what we regard as a very grave injustice being inflicted on the wage and salary workers of the Dominion. We think the fairest way would have been to impose a 10 per cent cut on all incomes in excess of £500 a year. Now we are going to save what we can out of the wreck of this miserable bill." He disclosed the further plan of the party, that of a series of attempts to lessen the scope of the cuts by moving that they should be only applicable to salaries in excess of £400. The Prime Minister stated that the o.Tect of this amendment would be that the saving in salary expenditure would be only £200,000, instead of £1.399,000. 'That means practically cutting the whole thing away," he said. The Labour plan was further explained !>y Mr. C. H. Chapman, who described it, as practically a Dutch action, with amendments to find the limit of salary at which the Government would insist on reductions being made.

"The Dutch 1 Auction." When the House resumed at 7.30 last night the debate was continued on the amendment moved at 3.25 p.m. by Mr. J. McCombs (Labour, Lyttelton), that salaries below £400 should be exempted from wage reductions, b u t within ten minutes of the resumption it was disposed of, being rejected by 44 votes to 21. Mr. Fletcher again voted with Labour.

Labour then developed its Dutch auction process, and with the minimum of debate sought to capture support for the exemption of salaries at. progressively diminishing levels. There were no takers" on the £350 proposal, but an amendment suggesting the exemption of salanes of £320 and under extracted a vote irom Mr. Wright, who entered the aves lobby to the accompaniment of Labour cheers. This amendment was defeated by 52 votes to 22. P- m - M '\ Jordan advanced a £300 proposal, and the House settled down to a further exhibition of obstructionist tactics. There was no alteration in the position at midnight. The debate gained a fresh lease of life shortly after midnight, when the Leader of the Opposition, the Right Hon. J. (}. Coates, renewed his request for a definite statement as to what the Government proposed to do regarding lowerpaid public servants with families Mr Forbes' reply, which indicated that a Governor-General's Message dealing with a hardship tribunal was ready for introduction, and also covered the objects of the legislation before the House, was eagerly seized upon as "fresh matrial" by the stonewallers, who, for the next few Irours, directed their talk along channels which seemed to be far removed from the actual terms of the | amendment.

Signs of strain among the stonewallers were evident when the Chairman of Committees at 3 a.m. commenced to confine them strictly to fresh remarks on the amendment restricting the reductions to salaries of over £300, which had been moved at 8.15 p.m. yesterday. Repetition of former remarks was barred. Mr. J. McCombs (Labour, Lyttelton), who affected ignorance of the restricted subjects, was promised a list. The division came at 4 o'clock, when the amendment was defeated by 37 to 23. Mr. J. O'Brien (Labour, Westland) moved for the exemption of salaries of £275 and under. Then Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Labour, Avon) introduced a new phase, moving to report progress, because only one Reformer and not many United mem bens were present to hear important arguments. "Knock off, call it a day's work," said Mr. P. Eraser (Labour, Wellington Central). In seconding, Mr. Parry (Labour, Auckland Central) pleaded tor the tired pressmen, until this argument was ruled out. The health of members as an argument was also soon exhausted. Mr. O'Brien di. cussed the untidiness of the chamber, which had been occupied since Monday. Mr. Clyde Carr (Labour, Tiinaru) declared himself the representative of a wide-awake constituency, which expected its member to be equally so, though this was impossible. Mr. McCombs' text was the lost opportunity of private members with their bills. Mr. J. S. Fletcher (Independent, Grey Lynn) asked if the Government would make no concessions at all on isalaiies, adding a personal pica for an adjournment. The Prime Minister remained quietly indifferent to these appeals, and was then reproached. This topic flagging, Mr. Fraser moved to add to the amendment leave to sit again, explaining that otherwise the bill might be killed. An interlude was provided by Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Independent, Gisborne) breaking into the dull discussion with the remark: "Look at the picture we have before us. These Labour people have been talking here for nearly a week." Mr. R. Semple (Labour, Wellington East): Yes, we will talk you to death. Mr. Lysnar declared that the amendment, involving a saving of £200,000, would leave the taxpayer to provide £1,000,000. Mr. McCombs as*- !iim that was exactly what the L: piirty wanted, from incomes over -

Chairman's Restrictions,