Prosecutions dismissed by an Independent court’

Press, 25 September 1978, Page 2

Prosecutions dismissed by an Independent court’

| What th&M.P.s were saying |

From CEDRIC MENTIPLAY , Accusations were flying [last week, when local members had their chance to the [extent of one “all-nighter,” a [host of notices of motion, and an adjournment debate on the freezing workers and th’ rule of the law.

Prominent among the Goviernment’s defenders was Mr D. F. Quigley (Nat., Rangiora).. Mr Quigley explained that a Minister was constitutionally responsible for his department, but that this role stopped short of any interference. “If the Labour Government adopted a different course or attitude, if it continually, as I, suspect it did, directed departmental heads when to prosecute and when not to, the opposite should say so .. . There are many members on the Government benches who are disappointed that these prosecutions have been dismissed-. This was done by an independent court, not by the Secretary of Labour. I regard the policy of the Government as having been frustrated in this instance by an independent Court..., Mr Quigley said that the member for Mangere (Mr D. R. Lange. Lab.,) had suggested that the Government had interfered in a court process. Mr R. L. Bailey (Lab., heretaunga) protested. “It is a slur on the Magistracy and the court structure to suggest that a magistrate would be influenced by a departmental officer or by the Government,” Mr Quigley said. “Earlier in the debate the member for Roskill (Mr A. J. Faulkner, Lab.,) suggested it was ‘dead easy’ to interfere with this type of process I wonder.”

Fish Board doubts When the Fishing Industry Board Amendment Bill was discussed on Thursday night, Mr M. F. Courtney (Lab., Nelson) had some strong things to say. He made a pledge that the fourth Labour Government would examine the possibility of setting in train a system through which the board j could come before that Lands and Agriculture Committee when it was studying the estimates. “If the board is funded to the extent of $400,000 it must be answerable to the committee.” Mr Courtney said.

Opposition members supported the basic intention of the bill, but believed that the words “New' Zealand” should be inserted. “I feel that I made a mistake when the bill was introduced in taking the Minister’s word that all sections of the industry had been approached regarding this legislation,” Mr Courtney said. “It now appears that this is not so. Should the Minister send the bill to a select committee after the second-reading stage?” ” Mr-Courtney said that he had received a number of communications on this bill. He later displayed them — and they do represent a widespread sector of commercial fishermen. Among them was a telegram from the president of the Sharefishermen ’s Association which has a membership of 180, catching about onp-third of New Zealand’s : wetfish. Its members objected to. being asked to contribute without consultation. Social welfare Mr M. A. Connelly (Lab., Wigram) said that the Social Welfare Vote ($86,170,000) revealed the Government’s pathetic approach to the subject. “The expenditure has rocketed under National,” he asserted. “It is now SIBOOM. In January and February, means-tasted beneficiaries and national superannuitants will receive further increases.” The increase of 190 in staff, he said, was dealing with unemployment, which the country could do without, rather than with social problems, for which more staff were needed. “The de-

partment is now paying 280 people to pay people to do nothing.” The more persons who were deprived of their jobs, the more administrators had to be employed by the department. The Social Welfare Vote provided another SIIM for unemployment benefits, in addition to the S4SM in the main estimates. ‘Complete shambles’ Mrs Mary Batchelor (Lab.,. Avon) said that every day the newspapers outlined the “complete shambles” in

(which the New Zealand work-force found itself. Even the Police ' Department was upset by the National Government's employ-: ment policies. “Why are the police asked to train personnel, only to find that after a short period those people are sacked and others taken on for train-’ ing?” she asked. “It is cold comfort for those unable to find work to be told that New Zealand’s unemployment figures compare very! favourably with those of: other countries. No person : is secure in his or her job.” |