DAIRY PRODUCE BILL

Press, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 25247, 28 July 1947, Page 6

DAIRY PRODUCE BILL

LONG DISCUSSION IN PARLIAMENT

OPPOSITION SUPPORT

(From Our Parliamentary Reporter.) WELLINGTON, July 27. When first it came before the House of Representatives, the Dairy Products Marketing Bill was expected to engage only a small part of the House’s sitting time. Not only were the provisions in it already known to members because of earlier statements by the Prime Minister (Mr P. Fraser), but the Opposition members made it plain that they were supporting it when it came to the vote. But the debate, instead of being brief, took the best part of seven days, during which a majority of members in the House aired their views on dairying generally. In the committee stages there were divisions about amendments, and the Government reinforced its voting strength by bringing in Mr Speaker. The debate generally was dull, and rhe House collectively breathed a sigh of relief when the bill finally went through. Enough had been spoken on cows, Taranaki mud, the long hours worked by farmers, and the general problems of dairy produce marketing to last most members for a long time. Because of possible divisions, the debate made it necessary for most members to stay within the building. This hardship bore heavily on at least one member on the Government side who is an ardent wrestling fan. When the time for the main bout at the Wellington Town Hall came on he left the chamber and went to his room to listenin—the next best thing—but through some inexplicable quirk in his radio set the only programme it could or would bring it was the broadcast of Parliament. The debate was lively, if disjointed, during the committee stages. Some of the Opposition members raised eyebrows at the firm ruling of the Chairman of Committees (Mr C. L. Carr) lhat Mr T. H. McCombs (Government. Lyttelton) was in order in speaking of Ahe consciences of the members on the other side, with the proviso “if they have any.” Mr Carr ruled that simply to ask if they had any was different altogether from inferring that they had none.

Activity in Cabinet If the proceedings in the House itself have been dull, there has been much activity in Cabinet. South Island Ministers missed their week-end trip home because a long meeting of Cabinet was held yesterday morning. The night before there had been a fourhour meeting which did not end until 11.30 p.m. These Cabinet meetings have followed a series of long sittings of the Government caucus, as a result of which new legislation is now before the House. It includes new hospital legislation brought down by Miss M. B. Howard, the Minister of Health, enlarging some of the powers of hospital boards, and dealing with the appointment of the director of the gynaecological and obstetric hospital. The person appointed under the new legislation must be the holder of the chair of obstetrics and gynaecology at Auckland University College—a proviso which led the Leader of the Opposition (Mr S. G. Holland) to ask whether the director would be completely free from domination by the Government or the hospital board. This hospital bill, which has been referred to the Health Committee, is expected to provide considerable ground for discussion when it next appears before the House.