PARLIAMENT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 966, 5 November 1910, Page 7

PARLIAMENT.

THE COUNCIL. • NOXIOUS WEEDS. When the Legislative Council" assembled at 2.30 yesterday afternoon, the Noxious Weeds i Amendment .Bill was received from the House of Representatives, • and . .was read a' first 'time. The second reading Was set down for next' sitting day. . COMMERCIAL TRUSTS. The adjourned debate on the second reading of tho Commercial Trusts Bill was continued by , The Hon. W. BEEHAN (Auckland), who remarked that ono thing that concerned the peoplo especially was the fact that .fish wero. omitted from the schedule, There was a fish combine in A'ickland. The' Hon. J.'E. Jenkinson': Is. that ; why ' we- don|t get' trout down here? (Laughter.) • A few' years*' ago, continued'. Mr. Beehan;':it was possible, to get fish in plenty ,m Auckland, but now they had Become, almost a luxury, notwithstanding . that there ' was' better equipment all round as far as. procuring the fish was 'concerned. Ho thought '.fish should lie included in the'schedule-so that we might get them cheaper. Hon. • Dr. Findlay: What is their method of combination? Mr. Beehaa.said they, mads arrangements .with tho net and line fishermen for .nearly all the fish, and then they regulated , the ' price. Wherever the Government conld ..possibly do'it, they should compete . with " monopolies and break them down. ~ The Hon. J. BARR (Otago) questioned whether the Bill would attain the,objects. it set out to.',attain. He welcomed the Bill as. au.attempt to.do something, but how that something was going; to,- be done , was not clear: to him at present. • -

The Hon. J. R. SINCLAIR (Otago) said there need bo.no.fear that there ; will be' such interference with, the carrying on of any combination unless those who ,w£re -about to move wero satisfied that it was in the. interests, of the consumer. . He thought'there, need be' no fear in passing the Bill. At its worst the Bill' would .at least be a statutory notice to all whom it might concern that it was an active part of the policy of the not to allow the- people to be; exploited by Tho Hon H F WIGRAM. (Canterbury)' welcomed the Bill, and hoped that it would be effective. - ' The Son. Dr. I'INDLAY, : in.reply, Baid' the' evil .of/trusts, had not. grown in New. Zealand' as it had done in Ame;" rica, &nd what wo wanted to do was to proTcnt it doing so. The scope of the Bill; was limited to the five or sis comihodities mentioned in the schedule, but'whathe believed'was.the essential justification, for..' all anti-trust legislation was that the monopoly and the trust could tax us without representation. As time passes and we have proof that there is likely to be a monopoly in'"shipping freights or anything else, said Dr. tfindlay, additions could be made to the schedule. The sefcond reading was agreed to,and the Committee stage'was set down for.;next sitting "day. . • STONE QUARRIES BILL. Tho-; ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved the third .reading-, of tho Stono Quarries Bill. • . Tpo*Hon J'.T. PAUL (Otitgo) again, protested' against ;the. actibn / af' the Council 1 in," rejecting.. certain amendments had -.been moved in Committee,' He sajd he was bound, to protest ■'against /rejection; of .' such amendments .'simply because'.,.members, feared'that" the- passage of' the Bill through "another place" would have been,--jeopardised. '• The Council surely had a clear duty before it iu such mattorsV"—' ' - ; • "

, The lion. .W. C. F. CARNCROSS (Taranaki); said it was absolutely, necessary to movo'slowly in snch:'matters : as this/ It. tfasi better to'take half a loaf than to get none. ; ' The Hon. Dr. FINDLAY contended that the attitude adopted by the majority of , the Council was quite justifiable. On behalf of himself and, those who voted with, him, he entirely disr sented from the suggestion that there had' been any sacrifice of' the' Council's independence in what had been donb; They genuinely believed that that was the only way in which they could get a measiire»of reform, ' He did not think members of the Council- should charge it with; lack of independence ■ when they had; so imany; critics throughout '' the vthem" for. - that Very -thing." ' The'. Council's, reputation would not be improved iiKthat way. The--Bill , was'' put. through ■ its ' filial stages'and passed. ■- OPIUM AMENDMENT. The second reading of the' Opium 'Amendment Bill—was agreed .to without., discussion. - KAIAPOI RESERVES; lii-moving the second reading of the' KaiSpoi Reserves'Bill, Tho' "ATTORNEY-GENERAL indicated. that-some' amendments. would' have to Be made in The second, reading" was carried without, discussion/ - INSPECTION OF MACHINERY^ In moving the iscond' reading of the Inspection ol Machinery Amendment . lie ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained -the' various clauses seriatim. The amendments, said- Dr.--Fiiidlajy' had been- impressed'on the Hoii. J. A. Mil-lar-'ia; order to'give freer and fairer working : of tho inspection of 'machinery. The. Hon.-'J. RIGG (Wellington) said he had been a:sked by the Stationary Engine-Drivers':Union to point to the necessity of drivers of motor-cars and taxi-cabs holding.. certificates- .of efiiciencyi'-, - -

The-ATTORNEY-GENERAL said ho thought there might-bo much to bo said, in favour -of at least careful consideration ■of the. proposal. For- purposes if; safety, of * the public the driver of a, motor-car for. hire required to know something"about the. macnino and how to driye-it.

The .-second reading, was agreed to without-debate. //':...

The Council rose at 4.30 p.m.