PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 8, 4 October 1927, Page 10

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

FIRST MONDAY SITTING •/ ATTEMPT TO BLOCK ESTIMATES FAILS TWO NEW GOVERNMENT BILLS The House of Representatives last night, in the presence of full galleries, inaugurated Monday sittings. Contrary to expectation there were no fireworks, Laboui* s protest against th'e alleged breach of faith on Friday being made quietly. Determination, however, to defeat the object of the Prime Minister in calling the House together took shape in a debate on the motion to go into committee on the the chief topic of discussion being the position of the Wellington Education Board some years ago. Two Government measures were introduced at the sitting, one relating to an amendment of the Land Laws and the other to an amendment oi the Apprentices Act. - At 0-19 a.m. the House went into committee and passed the Lands and Survey Department’s Estimates, after which it proceeded to other classes.

“STORM IN TEA CUP” k EDUCATION BOARD ACCOUNTS AUDIT RESULTS RECALLED MINISTER DEFENDS BOARD ••■"I submit that this really is an absolute storm in a teacup,” was bow the Minister of Education (Hon. R.. A. Wright) described a discussion which > took place: in the House of Representatives last night on the subject of the Wellington Education Board’s administration some years ago. , -Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Central) :■! opened proceedings by recalling that' last year the relationships between the Education Department and the Wellington Education Board were under discussion on the supplementary estimates, and i the Minister had promised to refer the file on the subject to the member for Wellington South (Mr. R. McKeen) and himself for perusal. He was sorry the Minister of Education was not present, as he did not wish to defer his remarks. - • The Minister of Education (Hon. R. A. Wright) : I am here. (Daughter.) Mr. Fraser: “I am sorry I did not notice the Minister.” Fie asked the Minister whether the full file of the correspondence had been placed before Mr. McKeen and himself, or whether there was one or more’important documents missing-removed from, it, in fact. ‘ Mr. Fraser proceeded to refer in detail to the file, and to read the correspondence. He understood that at the time the question of the board’s administration was under discussion, the present Minister was the chairman of the board. • The Minister of Education: I was not.:

Mr. Fraser: "At. any rate the Min-, ister was a prominent member of the board for many ' years.” Mr. Fraser read voluminously from the correspondence, and continued doing so until his half-hour ..was... nearly up. Concluding, he affirmed that tlie Minister must have been conversant with the whole matter before he took the portfolio of Education. Sir James Parr had previously declined to give the board any money to work up the amount they were behind in. The file contained no correspondence from April 22 to August 24, 1926. There was no report from the Director of Education or the secretary tp . the board on which the Minister could base his opinion; . but, despite that, he had recommended Cabinet to place a sum of £3OOO at the disposal of the board. The Minister . had overridden his Department on the subject. Mr. R. ; McKeen (Wellington South) said the file contained charges of muddlement and misappropriation of money.’ ■Certain important documents were-missing-from the file; The Statements. made by Mr. Fraser and himself would be borne out by the file dating, back from August 3, 1922, and of tlie date of the appointment of the new Minister of Education in 1926, and every word’he'had uttered he believed was .correct. The Hon. R. A. Wright affirmed that while he was Minister Sir James Parr had promised the board that he would ask Cabinet to grant a sum of between £BOOO ’ and £9OOO, on certain conditions,’ in order to enable them to, .adjust their, accounts. ‘Mr. McKeen: I said I would not have believed it unless the reports of the auditor had borne it out. The Mmister reaffirmed that there was a letter on the file stating that Sir James Parr was quite willing to give the board far more than he (Mr. Wright) asked Cabinet to give them to adjust their finances, on certain conditions that the board could not see their way to agree to, one being that the secretary of the board should be retired, and a receiver should be put in who should adjust the affairs of the board. That was why the negotiations fell through. The Audit Department had certified that the accounts were in order, and could he, as Minister, be blamed for accepting that certificate? While the member for Wellington South was a member of the City Council there were some defalcations on the part of the staff which were discovered by the Audit Office. Were the members of the City Council blamed for that?’ Certainly not. “Yet the hon. member by innuendo and indirect statement,” added the Minister, “led the House to understand that I was a member of the board when all this took place, and that I was liable for my share when this muddlement took place—l admit that there was muddlement—and therefore I have done something that is dishonourable. I say that no member whose opinion is worth while having will think of charging the Wellington Education Board under those circumstances with malfeasance There was no .charge against the officers of the board, or members, of having done anything improper with the money, and the statement made that there was misappropriation is, in my opinion, with all due deference to the Auditor, wrong It was misapplication—not misappropriation.” The accounts had been in a state .of hopeless muddlement, and the board had admitted it when the result of the investigation was known; but the auditors had said there was no charge of wrong doing, corruptness, or fraudnleney on the part of the officers of the board or the members of the board. “Does Mr McKeen suggest,” asked the Minister, “that the board did wrong in purchasing these sites in Berhampore—the hon. member’s district ? When I suggested selling some of them to pay off the deficit he said it would

be a silly thing to do.” The Minister added that one acre in the sections was now worth £3OOO, so that the board’s officers in misapplying the money had really done what the member admitted was a good service to the district. File Complete. There had been no hole and corner business about the £3OOO grant to the board agreed to by Cabinet. No attempt had been made to cover the matter up, the sum having been placed on the Estimates last year, when a full discussion took place. As far as he knew there was nothing missing from the file. There had been some question of surcharging the members of the board —an action the members would have welcomed in view of the fact that the balance-sheet had been found to be in order. He thought that in some respects the board had been rather harshly treated by the auditors. Another Labour Defeat. Mr. E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) expressed regret that the Minister should attempt to justify the muddlement and maladministration of the Wellington Education Board, of which he had been a member. He moved: “That in the opinion of this House the position of the Wellington Education Board should be fully investigated.” Mr. J. A. Lee (Auckland East) asked why, when the. bungling was discovered, the bunglers were not punished. Far from doing that, however, the Minister had not only defended those responsible for the maladministration but had gone out of his way to secure their retention in office.

On a division Mr. Howard’s motion was rejected by 36 votes to 15.

A Challenge.

Mr. T. Forsyth (Wellington East) explained his entry into the debate as being due to. a desire to defend the character of the? staff of the Education Board from the attacks made that night. Under the cloak of parliamentary privilege terms had been’used that would never be employed outside of the House; and he challenged Messrs. Fraser and McKeen to take the earliest opportunity to repeat their statements outside. It was most unfair that from the floor of the House public servants should be attacked. when they had no means of redress. “Why was the attack on the secretary of the board and not on the accountant?” asked Mr. Forsyth. “There must be some reason. Is the late accountant a member and supporter of the Labour Party? I ask them to answer that.” Some of the misapplication had been caused through the strong pressure brought to bear on Mr. Forsyth by Mr. Fraser. “The honourable member is not game enough to get up inr his seat and state the real facts of the case.”

.Mr. Speaker: The lion, member must withdraw that expression. Mr. Forsyth: I will withdraw that, Sir, and say the honourable member is not man enough Mr, -Speaker: That must be withdrawn by the honourable member, also. • Mr. Forsyth: Very well, I will withdraw that.- (Laughter.) I am only sorry- that Parliamentary language will not permit me .to say

Mr. Speaker again intervened, and Mr. Forsyth proceeded, amidst laughter, to other aspects of the case. Rising to a point of order, Mr. Fraser denied that he had charged servants of the board with defalcation or misappropriation. He said he had stated that he thought the term misappropriation, as used by Sir James Parr, was too strong, and that misapplication was the correct term. He made no personal attack on any servant of the board. Mr. Forsyth said he had never used the word defalcation during his speech. Mr. W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) said Messrs. Fraser and McKeen would have nothing to fear in repeating their speeches in public. MONDAY SITTINGS TO BE CONTINUED. Sittings of the House of Representatives on Monday nights are to continue for tlie remainder of the session. Today the Prime Minister will move a motion to that effect, notice of his intention to do so being given last night

LAND LAWS NEW REVALUATION PROVISIONS RIGHT OF PURCHASE ARBITRATORS IN DISPUTES Several important amendments to the law relating to Crown and other lands are incorporated in legislaticn introduced into the House of Representatives last night by Governor-General’s Message. The Bill seeks to overcome a difficulty that has existed in disposing of the land contained in streets and roads which may be closed by making it possible for adjoining owners to become entitled to possession Rangers of Crown Lands are in future to be called field inspectors. The provisions in the Land Act, 1921, relating tc the submission of disputes to arbitration, are extended by making it mandatory for arbitrators, when they decide to exercise their right to appoint an umpire, to select a Magistrate, the concurrence of the Minister of Justice to be obtained before any appointment is made As the law now stands lessees and licensees of lands held under the village settlement provisions of the 1921 Act, pastoral lands and lands the subject of mortgages under the State Advances Act, 1913, and the Discharged Soldiers’ Settlement Act, 1915, are exempted from the restriction on the assignment of their interest within twelve months. The amendment proposes to extend this exemption to all lands the subject of mortgages made by or on behalf of the Crown or anv Department of State. Another amendment makes renewed leases subject' to the encumbrances on the expiring leases. Among machinery amendments relating to the disposal by the Land Board of lands classified as town, suburban, or village lands, are proposals to restrict to two the number of allotments which may be acquired by one person on deferred payment, and it is laid down that the sections must be contiguous. Interest in such sections is not to be transferred before the completion of the purchase or the expiration of ten years from the date of the license—whichever is the less—except on the recommendation of the board and the approval of the Minister. Revaluations.

The restriction in the Act of 1924 which prohibits Crown tenants from applying for a revaluation of their lands within three years from the commencement of their leases or licenses or after six years is to be partially removed, while the right to apply for a revaluation is to be extended to cover the holders of land under the various Land Acts now in existence. A notable addition in this respect is that lands purchased on deferred payments may be revalued, any reduction which is made to be with respect to the purchase price and not with regard to the rate of interest. Appl’cation for the. right to exercise the privilege of having a revaluation made within three years or after six years is to be made to a board consisting of the Under-Secretary of Lands, the Valuer-General, and the Land Purchase Inspector. The Bill seeks the repeal of the clause which makes it compulsory to pay into the National Endowment Trust Account the value of any inferior lands which are taken from the national endowments for special settlement purposes. The right of licensees to occupy Crown lands with the right of purchase is to be extended until 1930 instead of expiring this vear. Provision is also made in the Bill’ for adding to the price of Crown lends for disposal the cost of subdivision and public improvements carried out by the Government before the land is offered for sale. Soldier Settlement. Several amendments are made in the Discharged Soldier Settlement Acts. Authority is to be given for the remis, sion of rent in the case of land disposed of to a discharged soldier, but which is now held by some other person Lands boards, with the consent of the Minister, are to be empowered to remit in cases of hardship the whole or part of the interest pavable by discharged soldiers with respect to their mortgages on land held under the Discharged Soldiers’ Settlement Act, 1917. The benefits of the Deteriorated Lands Act, 1925, are to be extended to soldiers holding land under the Act of 1917. The Bill was read a first time and referred to the Lands Committee.

PROPORTION OF APPRENTICES

REMOVAL OF COURT’S

POWER

Removal from the Arbitration Court of the right to fix the proportion of apprentices to journeymen is proposed in the Apprentices Amendment Bill introduced into the House of Representatives last night. Existing orders, unless sooner cancelled, are to hold good until February 1 next.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

ALLEGED BREACH OF

FAITH

LABOUR LEADER’S PROTEST

PRIME MINISTER TAKES FIRM STAND

straight-out allegation that the Prime Minister had broken faith with the Opposition over an.agreement as to the order of business to be taken by the House of Representatives late on Friday night was made last night by the Labour Leader (Mr. H. E. Holland) when speaking to the motion that the Speaker leave the Chair in order that the House could go into Committee of Supply to consider Estimate classes, irrespective oi the rest of the House; only Government business was going to be considered now.

Replying after midnight, the Prime Minister indicated that-the Government intended to push legislation through “I want to advance the strongest opposition,” said Mr. Holland, “to this motion, which is the outcome of the Government’s breach of faith on Friday night ” Mr. T. W. Rhodes (Thames) : Oh!

The Speaker: Order. Mr. Holland stated that the Government had entered into an arrangement with the Opposition Whip on Friday night, but no sooner was it entered into than the Prime Minister proceeded to submit to the House his motion, which could onlv have been designed to break faith with' the Opposition. The arrangement was that only the Railway . Estimates would be taken. The Railways Statement had been discussed from earlv in the afternoon until after midnight. Mr. H. Atmore (Nelson) : Who initiated the discussion?

My. Holland: The Opposition were prepared to allow the Prime Minister’s motion relating to the Railways Statement to go through without discussion, and then to have the discussion on the Estimates, but a Government member opened up the discussion, and from time to time Government members rose —at times as many as three Government members following each . other without a member of the Opposition intervening. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) : The second speaker was a member of the Opposition. Mr. Holland said it-could not be held that the Opposition had dragged the debate out. The fact remained that after midnight on Friday it was within the power of the Opposition to prevent any Estimates from being taken, but negotiations were entered into with the Government, and it had been agreed that the Railway Estimates only would be taken.

Mr. J. S. Dickson (Parnell) : Not as far as the Whips were concerned. . Mr. Holland: I am talking about the arrangements made between the Prime Minister and the Opposition Whip. It is unfortunate if the Government Whip did not come into the picture! Mr. Dickson: I did not.

“In the past,” continued Mr. Holland, “these arrangements have been honourably observed. . . . When the arrangement was made it was made with the implication that the House would meet on Tuesday, as usual, and that members could get away without having their arrangements upset. . . . “I don’t think Government members were consulted with respect to this breach of faith. ... If the Prime Minister had had it in his mind all along that the House was goinp to meet on Monday, surely it would have been a fair thing to give the Opposition notice of that. I cannot help thinking that the Prime Minister’s action was taken as a result of heat, in view. of incidents that had taken place in that debate. I want fo insist that whenever arrangements are made with Opposition Whips, through the Prime Minister, or Whips of the Government party, we want that arrangement honourably observed ”

Mr. T. W. Rhodes (Thames) : Was it not?

Mr. Speaker: Order! Mr. Holland: We don’t want anything in the nature of what might be called tactical sharp practice. (Hear, hear.) We want the arrangement kept in the letter and spirit, as we have always done. The Government cannot point to one occasion when the official Opposition has broken faith when an arrangement has been made. . . . I hope it will be a long while before we will have another experience such as we have had in connection with this matter. The Nationalist View. The Leader of the Nationalist Party (Mr. G. W. Forbes) said that he thought the Government’s tactics were the result of some strained feeling between one or two of the members. The Prime Minister was, no doubt, feeling a- little sore, and moved that the House meet again at 7.30 on Monday. He did not think the circumstances warranted such an action. The estimates would go through more smoothly if there was no attempt to bully. Members felt that they were being treated as children That was not The way to conduct the House. There was no doubt that a good deal of time had been wasted this session. Government members: Hear, hear! Mr. Forbes continued to talk at some length, but was pulled up by Mr. Speaker, who said he was not ad-

dressing himself to the motion. Mr. Forbes added that the Government had not played the game. Prime Minister’s Statement. ■ The Prime Minister, speaking after midnight, said the Government bad hoped on Friday to dispose of the Railway, Lands, Education, Industties and Commerce, Marine, and State Advances Estimates, but they had not been able to accomplish it. The motion which permitted of debate on the Railways Statement had been moved to enable members to place fully their views on record, the Minister of Marine having assured him that on the appearance of the Statement it had been arranged to defer the debate. _He learned for the first time last night that the discussion was to be • taken in Committee. He thought it bad been clearly indicated that (lie Leader and other members of the Opposition rather resented the time Government members occupied in discussing the Statement. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) : You gave a full day to it in the past. The Prime Minister: Giving a full day to discussion of the Statement is a somewhat recent innovation. Proceeding, Mr. Coates said that during Fridav night negotiations had been in progress, backwards and fortyards, al! the tjme, and what reached him as final was a written intimation from a member of the Opposition that it was agreed that the classes to be taken would be Lands, Valuation, and Industries and Commerce. Mr. H. E. Holland: Is that in my handwriting ? The Prime Minister: I thought it was. Mr. Holland: I think it is in my handwriting. The Prime Minister: I am not sure whether it is in your handwriting or the handwriting of one of your colleagues. That was the position till 11.30. Mr. Howard: Later than that. The Prime Minister: Then the Chief Government Whip informed me that there was a difficulty. I pointed out to him that difficulties had occurred all the way through, that there had been opposition to 'the Government getting tlie Estimates through, that our Bills were bailed up, that there was talking until 12.30, so that no fresh business could be introduced, that Government business had been delayed, that we must get on, and that unless we could make more rapid progress than we had made, although I would be pleased to work with the’ Opposition if they would agree to speed up, I would have to endeavour to find means to get through our work much faster than we had in the past. Mr. Howard: That was at 11.30.

'The Prime Minister: About that time. The whole tiling' fell to the ground after that. Everything went by the board until somewhere before ten minutes to 12, when the Chief Government Whip said he could not make any headway, and he was finished. I said, “Very well; let it go!” Mr. Coates said he had had a discussion, with Messrs. Lee and Howard, and he thanked them for assisting. “I am not making any charge against any member on the Labour benches, or against any other member, for that matter,” added the Prime Minister, “in regard to deliberately baling up the estimates. 1 did notice Mr. Fraser beckoning his men up on to their feet. ... I saw him beckoning to Mr. Mason.” Mr. Fraser: That _ was when negotiations were pending. The Prime Minister: As far as I was concerned,, the negotiations had finished.

“It has been stated throughout this country,” said the Prime Minister, “that the Government is not getting through its work.” Mr Holland: Very truly. The Prime Minister: The Leader of the 'Opposition says “very truly,” and it is true because the Opposition have held up the business of the country on every possible occasion. Mr. Holland: Give a specific Bill. The Prime Minister: I say here emphatically that Bill after Bill has been held up. Mr. Holland: What about the Summertime Bill ? The Prime Minister: Bill after Bill has been held up. The bon. member himself has refused to go on. We have endeavoured to make satisfactory efforts to go ahead. Mr. Holland: Name the Bills held up. The Prime Minister - The Shops and Offices Bill has been held up. Bill after Bill has been held up. Mr. Holland: Who held up the Sum-mer-time Bill ? The Prime Minister: I am not counting that. The opposition to that Bill was such that the House well knew it would be forthcoming. We have tried to work with the Opposition—we have done our' best—but they have managed to push us off. The day of reckoning has come, and it means now that the Government are going to push legislation through irrespective of the rest of the House. We are only going to consider the Government’s business now. As far as we can arrange with the Opposition we will do so; if they like to help us by all means let them do so; but I am not going to be placed in the position, nor my party, of being side-tracked. We are accused of being too quiet, because that is the interpretation which has been put upon our generous action, and the consideration extended to the House, bv the Opposition. I refer now to tlie Labour Party in particular. I am not now talking about the Nationalist Party, because the Leader of that party has' done all he possibly could to get on with the business. Nir Holland: You said on Friday night you du? not blame the Labour Party.

The Breaking Point. The Prime Minister: 1 say that the Labour people in tlie House have bailed up the business and delayed the progiess of legislation. That may be, and now is, their game. With that I have no fault to find, but 1 do say tluj; we have uow reached the breaking point. Mr. J. A. Lee: You have only five Bills on the Order Paper. The Prime Minister: We have made every effort to persuade them and point out the difficulties, and we have told them from this side of the House again and again that we must get on with the business, but notwithstanding that every opportunity is taken to prevent the Government bringing their work before Parliament. ... If I ask members to curtail their remarks, then the Opposition may say that it is against the business of Parliament to do so.

Mr. Fraser: The Opposition have a responsibility.. The Prime Minister: They are responsible lor the delay in carrying out our business.

Mr. Howard: Mention one case where we have delayed business.

The Prime Minister: I can give quite a number—a lot of "ccasions.

“I take the full responsibility for having moved that the House meet on Monday evening,” added Mr Coates. “I am quite satisfied to take the estimates we had down for rriday—Lands, Valuation, and Industries and Commerce. My decision was not the outcome of 'malice or pique. Mr. Howard: Just irritation. Mr. Coates; No, not even that. I do not bear malice. Once we have had a bust-up that is the end of it. I did not tell mv colleagues who were beside me that I intended to move the motion. The House went into committee "at 12.19. THE MAORI WAR ‘A VETERAN’S PETITION. An echo of the Maori War is contained in a petition presented to Parliament. Robert Bennett Brickell, of the War Veterans’ Home, Auckland, states that he arrived in Auckland in September, 1863, being then a boy of 15, and was met by recruiting officers and ordered to report on the following day at the Defence Office, for military service, the Maori War being in progress. Petitioner was passed asjnedically fit, and posted to the 2nd Waikato Militia. He served at the siege and-capture of Orakoti, throughout the war, and in the Bay of Plenty campaign, being .continually under fire. Subsequently petitioner served in the Taranaki War,- in the Urewera Country, and in the Lake Waikaremoana expedition. After returning to Napier an application to be discharged from the Armed Constabulary was refused, the reason given being that only men of inferior character and training were being discharged. The application had been made on account of urgent domestic reasons, petitioner having a young wife and infant child. A few days later the division joined an expedition for Taupo, and after the first day’s march, when they were at Petane, twelve miles from Napier, the petitioner felt that after having, served liis adopted country well from the age of 15 years to 21. J, his next .duty was to his wife and child. He therefore broke camp that night, and rejoined his wife and child jn Napier. An application for the Maori War pension had been declined on the ground that petitioner had deserted from the forces. The statement is made that a free pardon was granted to ■ all ■ deserters about 1913, and a veteran of the' 18 th Regiment who had also been a deserter had been pardoned, and subsequently granted a pension and war medal. Petitioner asks that he also should be generously treated. He adds that he is ~in humble, circumstances, is SO years old, and has reared a family of 14 children. He has 44 grandchildren, and four great-grandchildren. Four sons served through the Great War.