PARLIAMENT.

Clutha Leader, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 22, 19 September 1911, Page 3

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14. WELLINGTON, Sept. 14. The House met at 2.30 p.m. * A PETITION.

A Special Committee was set up to inquire into the petition of the Taupo fotara Timber Company for railway extension and any other matter in connection therewith. FINANCIAL DEBATE.

The debate on the Budget was re- ' sumed by Mr Dive (Egmont), who deplored the absence from the Budget of ! a Land Bill and a Local Government j Bill. Regarding the Government dairy herds he declared that the Ayrshire herd was very poor and that the ma- j jority of the animals would not bring i 30s in the open market. He condemn- I ed the "taihoa" policy of dealing with ' native lands and criticised the adminis- j tration of experimental farming by the Agricultural Department. I Mr J. C. Thomson (Wallace) contended that the Opposition by dealing only in half facts respecting the public debt were not fair to the country. They I omitted to state the assets. He asked, j Could the social and intellectual wel- ' fare of the people be better catered for 'than under the present Government? Ho considered that the Government was doing everything possible and he depre- j cated any. self-constituted body asking intending candidates to do more in the matter of expenditure. ' Mr Newman (Manawatu) said the ' Budget was a good election one and provided bribes for political support for every section of the community. He re- ! gretted the absence of a Land Bill in : tho Budget, also that the Lands for Settlement .Act was not being made better use of. He urged greater ex- \ pediency in dealing with native lands, | which were increasing in value every year. He regretted that there was nothing proposed regarding our indus- ' tries. The legislation which had been passed had had a.paralysing effect upon ' them and the present position was dis- j couraging.

Mr Sidey (D'unedin Souths expressed satisfaction with the railway proposals for Otago and complimented the Government on the activity displayed on the unemployed question. He also complimented the Minister for Agriculture upon his activity in the multifarious duties coming within his scope. He welcomed the setting up of a Royal Commission to ascertain to what extent monopolies existed in the Dominion. It was absurd to contend that the Government had not reduced taxation. The worker paid no direct taxation and the tendency was to reduce indirect and increase direct taxation.

Mr G. M. Thomson (l)unedin North) urged 1 the importance of putting afforestation work on a scientific basis, and advocated the appointment of a chief forester for five years at £IOOO a year. He complained of the vague way in which information respecting experiments was given in the Agricultural Journal.

Mr Reed (Ray of Tslands) remarked upon the circumstance that although the Budget was as important as any placed before the House and an Opposition counter-blast was expected, the only front bencher to reply was the Leader of the Opposition. He approved of the humanitarian proposals in the Budget, and maintained that the Opposition had' constantly opposed better provision for the aged' and needy. He traversed statements that the Government had some of the Opposition planks in the Budget. Mr Okey (Taranaki) said that the allegation about the front benches of the Opposition being silent applied to the Government as well. He averred that the Opposition was responsible for the workers' homes scheme, which was quite as beneficial as the old age pensions scheme. He urged pushing railway works in the backblocks. He would support the humanitarian proposals of the Budget. The House adjourned at 11.55 p.m. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 15. WELLINGTON, Sept, 15. The House met at 2.30 p.m. BUDGET DEBATC

The debate on the Budget was resumed by Mr Arnold (Dunedin Central), who pointed out that the main had not been touched except by the first two speakers. He looked upon the Opposition as being as dead as Julius Caesar, and he thought ihat the Government would do better to watch the under-cunvr.ts runn'iig through the Dominion than to pay so much attention to the Opposition. Personally, he would always be found with the progressive party in the House, irrespective of its title. He considered the Budget the most progressive for many years past, and he would heartily support it. Referring to the labor problem, he held that what the workers required was the right to work, not charity, and an unemployment insurance scheme did not fully cover this matter.

Mr Allen (Bruce) argued that the Opposition, so far from being dead, would come back from the country a strengthened Reform Party. Mr Russell (Avon), replying to. Mr Allen, said that his speech might be characterised as a fault-finding and nagging one on minor details. He was convinced that the country was sound and prosperous, which would not be the case with a change of Government. The Budget was generally optimistic, with a supreme confidence in the people and a broad humanitarian view of all matters. Opposition members were calling out "What is the land policy?" "Why," said Mr Russell, "it is all in the present law. That is the policy." To point his remark he mentioned that for the year ended March last 1,412,742 acres had been taken up by 2267 settlers.

Mr Herdman_ (Wellington North) traversed the previous sneaker's statement regarding land settled, pointing out that 644,000 acres of the amount stated comprised pastoral runs, which had been renewed. Ho declared that the whole statement regarding Treasury bills was slippery. Ruling on a point of order raised by Sir Josenh Ward, the Speaker said that thn word "slippery" was used,only in a political sense. Mr continuing, declared that the cost of railway construction

had materially increased between 1906 and 1911, the difference being £4BOO pee mile. The Budget he described as a I deliberate attempt on the part of the Government to rehabilitate itself. It showed nothing as to how native lands were to be settled, nor was any reference made to that "expensive superfluity," the Legislative Council. He contended that the general trend of legislation and the manner of taxation were having a disastrous effect on the working man. He would, lie said in reply to interjections, repeal the Arbitration Act to-morrow.

Air Laurenson (Lyttelton) maintained that the Budget contained more farreaching and humanitarian proposals than had ever been put before the country in any previous Budget. He denied Mr Massey's contention that the Government was to blame for the increased cost of living, saying that the Government had taken the duty off practically tho main imported foods. As to Mr Okey's contention that the leasehold should be a stepping-stone to the freehold, he reminded him that the Government had legislated for posterity, not for this decade. In regard to the increased cost of railway construction, it had to be borne in mind that more precipitous country had to be opened now than formerly. He urged the Prime Minister to concentrate his attention upon the proper education of the young to lit them for tho world of usefulness and self-reliance, and to concentrate also upon a sound land policy with an increased graduated tax.

Mr Fisher (Wellington Central) characterised the Budget as an electioneering one pure and simple. It provided for everything except lunatics and collectors of moa bones. Dealing with taxation, ho asked if the high rents which were due to enormously inflated land values were not taxation ? Were monopolies not si form of taxation? Jt had been suggested that the oil and iron industries should be nationalised to-prevent them from getting into the hands of monopolists. Why, he asked, was not the Union Steam Ship Company nationalised? The Budget was full of inaccuracies, and was rubbish. The Government would find when matters were straightened out that the profits from State industries would not pay even the Defence Bill for the year. The House rose at 11.30 p.m.