FARM APPRENTICES

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 309, 23 September 1920, Page 6

FARM APPRENTICES

BILL CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE OBSTRUCTION BY LABOUR MEMBERS The House last night went into Committee on the Master and Apprentice Amendment Bill, which proposes conditions for the indenturing of lads, to be brought by the Government from the Uld Country, in order to learn farming in New Zealand. The opposition -of ,the \ Labour members to the passage of tho Bill was by no means unexpected, as MrHolland and l his colleagues had already said during tho second reading! debate that thev meant to resist the measure. Mr. Holland 1 told the House! that the Labour Party proposed to fight the Bill on account of "something akin to slavery" underlying the, proposals. The Labour members would move an amendment to almost every clause. Ho hoped that the amendments would be met. with ntgumcnt and not with abuse. Tho members of the party would ask that the apprentices indentured under the .Bill should be paid at union rates. They objected! to the proposal that the consent of parent or guajdian to an indenture should not bo required. They would divide the House on every principle contained in the measure, because there were bo many clauses tending- to the destruction of personal liberty and to tho disadvantage of the apprentices. ■Mr. G. Mitchell (Wellington South) believed that tho lads apprenticed on the farms would be far better off in New Zealand than they were at Home. He was pleased to note that tha Minister had dropped the clause giving power to inflict three days' solitary confinement upon boys who committed certain breaches of their indenture. He agreed with Mr. Holland that the consent of parents or guardians should be obtained before a lad was indentured. Omission to require this would almost mean kidnapping. ■Mr. M'Combs (Lyttelton) pointed out that the power to impose solitary confinement was given by the Act of which the Bill was an amendment. He would not be content to seo the Minister merely strike out from tho Bill all reference in this connection to the principal Act. The Bill and the Act were to bel read conjointly; and he wished to see it mad? clear that the provision in the principal Act was not meant' to apply. "The talk of the Labour members about white slavery is buncombe. The boys, are to be given the chance of their life," said Mi. W, D. Lysnar (Gisborne), who, though he also had changes in the Bill to suggest, supported the measure generally. Members who believed that the boys to be brought to New Zealand were going, to suffer by the change were very far out in their reckoniijg, said Mr. L. M. Isitt (Christclmrch 'North). Mr. Isitt described the terrible surroundings from which British lads might be rescued through the operation of the Bill. He thought that to insist on the consent of parents to the indenture might close the door to lads who ought to be helped to get away from unworthy parents. Mr. A. D. M'Leod (Wairarapa) did not think that the Labour membars would get a great deal of support from the successful young farmers that were to be reared under the Bill. He indicated that he supported' the Bill generally, though he was glad that tho penal clauses were to be withdrawn. Mr. M'Leod told tho House of Scottish boys who had come to New Zealand farms under extremely hard conditions and had "made . good." in. splendid fashion. General discussion on! the provisions of the Bill occupied several hours. During that time it was not' open to members to move amendments, as tlie clause nominally under consideration was clause 1, which contained merely the short title of the Bill. Mr. R. Masters (Stratford) said that the Labour members, whilo they claimed to be -fighting for a great principle, were merely pursuing their intention to prevent immigration of any kind. Mr. I'. Eraser (Wellington Central) denied this, and said that the Labour Party would be glad to have tliQ'ljoys brought in, provided that they were brought in free and not indentured. Dr. A. K. Newman (Wellington East) opposed the penal clauses of the Bill. He claimed that some of the clauses were far too drastic, and ha several times applied to the boys who were to be indentured the term "half-slaves." He thought that the Minister might havo brought down a more humane measure. The first division was taken at 11.10 p.m., when the short title was carried by 48 votes to 14. Amendments Rejected. Dr. Newman moved that tlie minimum ago of apprentices at the timo of indenture should be sixteen, instead of fifteen, years., The amendment was defeated by 33 votes to 26. Mr. Holland moved an amendment requiring the namo of the employer lo be stated in tho indentures before tho prospective apprentice signed up. The Minister of Agriculture said that the State would take care of the boys on the way to New Zealand, and when they arrived would probably place them on one of the State farms until it had been 1 decided, to what farmer they should be apprenticed. The amendment was defeated by 51 votes to 10. Mr. Eraser moved that tho wages to bo paid apprentices should be those provided for in the agreement made between the Rural Workers' Union and the rural employers. This amendment was defeated by 40 votes .to 20. The Labour members continued to movo amendments and divide the House after midnight. ; kaiwarra'reclamation ME. MASSEY PROMISES INFORMATION. Information regarding the ICaiwarra reclamation scheme and tho proposed new railway yard was sought by Mr. GMitchell South) in the House of Representatives yesterday. Mr. Mitchell mentioned that a statement already made to the House by the Prime Minister I had been contradicted outside. t Mr. Massey replied that 'he had) been , informed by the Railway Department i that material was being collected by the Harbour Board's engineer, with the oh- | ject of proceeding with tbe work. He [ was aware, of course, that plans had i been prepared. He would obtain full information and place the facts before tho House. • - FORESTRY - LAW i | NEW LEGISLATION IF REQUIRED. Mr. G. Mitchell (Wellington South) asked in the House of Representatives if tbe . Government intended to bring down forestry legislation during the present session. The Prime Minister replied that the point had not been decided by Cabinet. Provision would be made in tho Supplementary Estimates for the finance of tho " Forestry Department, and if a Forestry ! Bill was required it would be brought " down hefojre the end of the session. Mem--1 bers were likely to be busy with more ' urgent work for several weeks yet. There ' was some forestry law at present on the " Statute Book, in the Finance Aet of 1916, ' t and that might be sufficient. If it was, " not he would bring down a Bill towards ' the end of the session. | A QUESTION~OF TRUST " "The Labour members havo. said that ' they will not trust the farmers unless I they havo the conditions set down in c black and white," said) Mr. R. Masters 1 (Stratford), in tho Houso of Representa--5 tives last night. "I can tell tho JionJ ourablc members that tlie farmers will ' not. trust tho extreme labour party even 1 when it is written down in ' block ? and white, because past experience has t taught tbem that they caniiot do so." LOCAL BILLS IN THE COUNCIL The following local Bills received by the Legislative Council from the Unuse H - ere yesterday rc»d a first time and referred to local Bills committees:—Taurauga Harbour Board Empowering Bill, Waimakariri Harbour District Empowering and Amendment Bill, New Plvmouth Recreation and Racecourse Reserve Amendment Bill, Christclmrch . I Tramway District Bill, Whakatane Har- ' bour Amendment Bill.