MEMBERS’ SALARIES

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 54, 27 November 1929, Page 12

MEMBERS’ SALARIES

ANOTHER REFUSES THE INCREASE MR. POLSON STATES HIS POSITION By Telegraph.—Press Association. Stratford, November 26. The bonus to members of Parliament will also be refused by Mr. W. J. Polson, member for Stratford. In a statement to his supporters last night Mr. Polson said that lie had unfortunately been absent with influenza when the question came before the House, but that he had previously intimated his opposition to .the proposal at a meeting of members held during the short session. At that meeting, which was. for the purpose of considering salaries, he had stated that he was. pledged to oppose any increase, and since then the first knowledge he had of the Government’s intentions was contained in the Press report that the bonus had been agreed to. He had every sympathy with the Civil Service in their disappointment, and, as his district contained few Civil servants, he could claim not to be influenced by political considerations in supporting them. As a matter of fact the restoration of the 1922 cut was impossible because of the great changes in the personnel of the service since that date, but a reclassification and regrading, which would remove the injustices and anomaly and give the service a square deal, was imperative. In this connection the superannuation question should also be considered to. enable wives to receive half their husband’s superannuation in the event of the latter’s death. On return to his electorate Mr. Polson informed his supporters of his intention to consult the election committee before making any statements declining the bonus. A largely attended and representative meeting was held last night at which Mr. Polson’s attitude was endorsed, and a unanimous vote of thanks for his work in Parliament and continued confidence in him was passed. “POLITICAL ADVERTISING.” By Telegraph.—Press Association. Auckland, November 26. Mr. W. E. Parry, Labour member for Auckland Central, commenting on the decision of the Leader of the Opposition not to accept the £lOO, said that any member could please himself in the matter, but it did seem extraordinary that the Leader of the Reform Party should make such an announcement immediately before the Hutt by-election. “It looks to me suspiciously like a £lOO worth of political advertising,” said Mr. Parry. “It is grossly inconsistent for Mr. Coates to adopt this attitude, because when he was Prime Minister he favoured an additional remuneration for members. We all understood that the members of the three parties were unanimously in favour of the extra payment to members, Mr. Harris having reported that the Reform party was in favour, and Mr. Smith reporting on behalf of the United Party, while I ascertained the Labour attitude. It was a great surprise to hear Mr. Wright and Mr. Coates object when the £lOO bonus was brought forward. Mr. Wright, too, is inconsistent, for is it not a fact that he drew £2OO house allowance, annually for three years when Minister for Education, despite the fact that he was living in his own home?”