The week in the House

Press, 12 August 1978, Page 2

The week in the House

No separate recess before election

By

CEDRIC MENTIPLAY

The clues to the pattern of the remaining part of the Parliamentary session, which have been awaited with increasing irritation by members of the Opposition, were given yesterday by the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon).

There will be no recess, “working” or otherwise. Mr Mu l boon explained that, even if tie had called a “working recess” to coincide with the August school holidays, members would not have had much chance of being with their families, as the recess would have required members’ presence in Wellington. The plan is for Parliament to work on until it completes its task and adjourn “some time in October.” Mr Muldoon believes that the examination of Estimates by the Public Expenditure Committee is far enough ahead to allow for two days of discussion in the coming week. He expressed the belief that by simply working on — he hoped without late nights — it would complete its legislative programme well before Labour Day week-end (which begins on Friday, October 20).

An unofficial estimate places Parliament’s risingtime as early as October 13, with the provision: “unless some Government members are superstitious.” In the week just past, Parliament has seemed to dawdle. Tuesday afternoon was largely wasted when the Opposition moved an adjournment motion on the trade talks with Japan. Wednesday afternoon was the usual party-political hotchpotch. On Thursday afternoon the Opposition seemed to waste much time on an Auckland local-body measure instead of getting on with the Estimates — for which time had been allocated. As a result, the Order Paper made very little movement. The two traditional income tax bills, validating Budget proposals,

were discussed on Tuesday night. After various digressions, this discussion was picked up again on Friday morning. This was hardly surprising, as members seemed to spend as much time discussing the Labour alternative, with flashes back to Labour’s performance in 1957 and 1958, as in arguing about the effects of Mr Muldoon’s 1979 planning. A highlight occurred early in the week, when Mr R. O. Douglas (Lab., Manukau) assisted by Mr N. J. Kirk (Lab., Sydenham), produced placards to illustrate his speech on income tax. These placards probably will provide an electioneering antidote to the placards produced earlier by Mr Muldoon. The week was also notable for the release by Mr B. C. Barclay (Lab., Christ-

church Central) of Labour’s agricultural policy. This included the possibility of farmers being offered the option of paying land tax instead of income tax. Predictions included one by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling) that if National won the General Election it would have to bring in “a tough mini-Bud-get” to take care of its taxation cuts. He himself was under some pressure to disclose where the funds for Labour’s proposed cuts would come from. Generally, however, it was not an exciting week. The urge towards party-politics proved much too strong for some members to resist, and there is a growing feeling that, if the parties concurred to “get on with it,” disposed pf all available legislation, and called for an adjournment even earlier than the time Mr Muldoon predicted, nobody would really mind.