PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 143, 13 March 1931, Page 10

PARLIAMENT IN SESSION

Opening of Address-in-Reply Debate REFORM PARTY’S ATTITUDE DECLARED £• u ■ Revised Scheme of Working Hours With the declaration of the line of action the Reform Pwty will follow by the Leader of the Opposition, Rt. Hon. LG. Coates in the House of Representatives early yesterday afternoon, the Government has been assured, of: help rather than ■hindrance unon its major proposals and. incidentally presented with a fairly clear guarantee that legislation likely to benefit the Dominion as a whole will not be blocked during the emergency '“'’in a speech in which he sounded a national note, Mr. Coates, •the. only speaker from his party, indicated that the Opposition would sink party differences for the common weal. His declaration was received with more than ordinary interest by an attentive House, as his party held the key position between the Government’s proposals and Labour’s refusal to co-operate in putting through some of the most vital- measures. In extending his offer of co-operation, Mr. Coates reserved the right to criticise. He admitted the need for urgent action, and he agreed to assist the Prime Minister to make a start upon his major legislative proposals as soon as possible. On the other hand, the Labour Party is definitely set upon a different course of its own choosing, and it has already shown quite clearly that it will block the Government from carrying out its plans, particularly regarding wages reductions, as far as lies in its power. The Address-in-Reply having been moved and seconded yesterday •afternoon, Mr. Holland moved his no-confidence amendment and this occupied the attention of the House for the rest of the day, although most of the speaking came from the Labour benches. The Government will not attempt to conduct a regular debate at all, and the present indications, are that Reform Party members who speak will only touch briefly upon earthquake legislation. With speakers prac'tically confined to Labour members, the debate cannot be prolonged greatly, and the end of the week should also see the end of the .Labour Party’s resources. . One of the first this’s that the Prime Minister did was to introduce to members a revised scheme of working hours for the session. The House will sit until midnight from Monday to Friday and on ' Saturday mornings, and it is clear that Mr. Forbes is determined to waste no time in pushing ahead with the things that matter. The amount of interest in the session was indicated by full galleries all "day and until late last night, although the listeners were not rewarded with • anything very inspiring toward the later stages of the sitting. The day’s speakers included eight Labour members, three United members, the Leader of the Opposition and Mr. H. M. Rushworth, •the sole Country Party member. -• The House rose at midnight until 2.30 this afternoon, when the debate will be continued. < -

NEW HOURS FIXED ; r Oiily Government Bills -HOUSE TO WORK HARD A new schedule of working hours proposed by the Prime Minister, Right Hon. G. W. Forbes, and adopted by the House as -the first business of the day, gives a clear indication that it is the intention of the Government to devote the whole time of ■ the - session to the legislation it intends to bring down. The Orders have been superceded temporarily as far as hours are concerned. For the duration of the session the House will meet between the hours of 2.30 p.m. and midnight from Monday to Friday inclusive, and 10.30 a.m. and 1 p.m. on Saturdays, unless, the House decides otherwise on this day.. In explaining the alteration the Prime Minister said that in an emergency session ’ the idea was to get down to work and “Stick to it” as closely as possible. It seemed to be the general desire that the House should not meet on the coming Saturday, and this wish would lie agreed to, ..An important point was that Government business only would be taken during the session. ' The Leader of the Opposition, Right Hon. J. G. Coates, said the hours appeared to him to be reasonable. It had previously been suggested that the House should sit each day from 10.30 a.m; until midnight, but the revised hours seemed to meet the wishes of the . majority of members. He did not think,- however, that Saturday sittings would meet with general approval. The Leader of the Labour Party, Mr. H. E. Holland, said he. did not think members would be convenienced by Saturday sittings. He asked the Prime Minister whether he would take legislation dealing with the earthquake first. He thought the wages reduction issue should come after that. Mr; H. G. R. Mason (Lab., Auckland Suburbs), who had given notice the previous day to introduce five Dills, asked the Prime Minister if he would at least give time for the Local Elections and Polls Amendment Bill in view of the fact that the elections would be held soon. Mr. Forbes said they had met for an extraordinary session, and only special business would be taken. Replying to Mr..-Holland, he said the order of legisla-tiqm.-might, depend upon the outcome of the i division on the amendment to the Address-in-Reply motion. In any case, the legislation dealing with wages “cuts” would provide a elear-eut issue, and all the talking in the world would not .make any difference. ■ Mr. P. Fraser (Lab.. Wellington Centra).) : The House is unanimous about helping Hawke’s Bay. but there is a difference of opinion about the other matter.. ’ The Prime Minister said there was no reason why the Address-in-Reply should take much time. The Government did not. propose to carry on a fixed debate. He thought there was no reason Why the salary issue should not he disposed of in tweii'ty-four hours. (Laughter.) Sir., W. Parry (Lab.. Auckland Central)": You are optimistic. Mr.. Forbes said he thought they could get the wages question out of the way this week, and get on to the earthquake legislation next week. (Labour laugh- ’ • . ‘EARTHQUAKE RELIEF Further Assistance if Needed T.wb urgent questions bearing on the earthquake in Hawke's Bay were address qd to the Prime Minister by Mr. W. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier). In the first, Mr. Barnard asked whether in providing £1,500,000 for the rehabilitation of Hawke’s Bay the Government regarded this "as a first instalment of the amount available for - the work, and whether it was” proposed to make provision for an additional sum next year. He also inquired; whether in framing relief legislation ,’the State Advances Superintendent would be empowered at his discretion to grant the usual concession of interest of a-half per cent, in cases where mortgagors could not pay their instalments within fourteen days of the due date. Replying to the first question Mr. Forbes said the sum was a first instalment, and any further assistance required would be made the subject of further provision later on. Referring to the interest’concession on State advances loans Jiri Forbes said that provision was being made in the legislation to give the powers outlined by the questioner. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY Hawke’s Bay’s Plight LIVING COSTS ISSUE Means for rehabilitating the stricken area of Hawke's Bay were discussed at some length by Mr. A. E. Jull (TJ., Waipawa), who made his maiden speech in

moving the Address-in-Reply motion. He first expressed the people’s appreciation of the visit to the area of Lord and Lady Bledisloe. Turning to financial questions he said it was not long since the Financial Statement was presented to the House and a surplus was then expected. .How-, ever, so great had been the drop in the price of primary produce in the meantime that a deficit of about £700,000 was feared. The session had become a necessity, and the Priihe Minister had to be congratulated for the. way in which he had taken the country into his confidence at different times. In referring to the Hawke’s Bay earthquake, Mr. Jull said the people in the stricken area appreciated the prompt manner in which the Government had given financial and other assistance. The district had been dazed by the enormity of the tragedy, but they would always remember the manner in which New Zealand rose to the occasion and housed and fed refugees as well as offering monetary aid. The proposed 10 per cent, cut in wages, Mr. Jull said, was a startling illustration of the country’s needs. If reductions were made all round the cost of living would have to come down. The decline would then be more apparent than real. He had once flirted with the idea that a graduated scale of reductions would be better, but on the other hand the whole salary of higherpaid people would have to be taken if any good were to accrue. He believed real earnings would increase rather than diminish if everyone combined for a reduction of production costs. Discussing the question of local body taxation and amalgamation, Mr. Jull said he had already emphasised the need for amalgamation, particularly of county councils. However, the possible economies to be brought about by amalgamation were over-estimated. The size of a county was not synonymous with either efficiency or economy. There were important reasons calling for a larger field of administrative effort and he believed the local authorities should embrace the opportunity to do something. He believed a small committee set up with the idea of advising local bodies would be of more use than coercive legislation passed by Parliament. Mr. Jull referred to the fact that there were 53 departments of State, and he said he felt sure that there was some means of effecting economy among them. When the House was seeking to. improve the relationship of local bodies it should at the same time try to formulate some scheme to simplify the legislative machinery under which it worked. Wheat Duties and Bread Places. The seconder of the motion. Mr.-J. A. Macpherson (U., Oamaru) confined practically the whole of his remarks to the wheat question. In defending the protection duties he said that the wheat farmer was mailing only a bare living, but that there was an enormous leakage in transport and other costs. The time had come when there should be an investigation of the question at the right end. He wanted to see the Prime Minister tackle the question and see if bread could not be delivered more economically than at present, possibly under some co-operative system. In Wellington, for instance, bread could be- supplied to consumers by 20 vans, but under present conditions he supposed there were about 200 doing the work. He was not out against the baker, the flour miller, or anyone else, but there was no doubt that something would have to be done to stop the present tremendous leakage. Even with the protection duties the wheat-grower was getting little more than a bare living. The price of a ton of wheat practically doubled from the time it reached the baker until it was delivered to the householder. REFORM’S ATTITUDE Help, With Criticism POSITION OF FARMERS “It is not my intention to hinder but rather to help the Prime Minister in allowing him to present the business he considers necessary to the House, said the Leader of the Opposition, Right lion. J. G. Coates, in speaking to the motion. “I realise the problems ahead of the efiuntry, and in offering the Prime Minister assistance to get his business through the House we retain the right to criticise and improve where possible, but generally speaking those remarks- will be reserved until the measures come down. So far as this side of the House is concerned the Government can rely on our support in the work of rehabilitation and repatriation in Hawke’s Bay. Referring specifically to tlie special session, Mr. Coates said it had been made imperative in order that the Government might be in a position to meet the problems that lay ahead. No doubt some of the Government’s actions would be disagreeable, but it was essential that the Government should tackle the situation in earnest and that a definite line of action should be taken. The reasons for the calling together of Parliament were

urgent,, and those reasons demanded urgent action. . _ ' Bo serious had the Reform Party considered the cloud of depression that was passing over the country that it had, as an organisation, departed from the recognised road and traditional course that the official Opposition usually set itself. The party had gone further than that. So serious did it consider the outlook that it had made definite suggestions to the country and to the Government. * , wnt 1 National Interests First.

The party’s deviation from its usual course had been deliberate. It had not been made for the purpose of gaining credit, nor was it intended that party interests should be placed before national welfare. He could not say whether the party’s action was approved of or not, but he did think that the country looked to the Reform Party to help and guide it during the emergency period and th,e difficult times through which the country was passing. • . Shortly after the return of the Prime Minister from the Imperial Conference, Mr. Coates said, he had issued a statement containing the proposals ot the Opposition upon various important issues. Quoting from this he said he considered that some reduction should be made in the burden of rates at present pressing very heavily upon farmers and others. There should be a determined effort by means of derating to bring down the costs under which the primary producers were labouring. In addition, where tariffs had an effect upon the cost of production it was essential that some relief should be granted. , , Another important question related to the level of valuation, and Mr. Coates expressed the opinion that a complete revaluation should be effected throughout the country. This would probably taKe some years, but in any case it was necessary that the review should be applied to farming lands. Another question which entered into the present economic .situation was tnat of the Public Service. The country could not afford to maintain a large Uni Service at such a time, and a review in this direction was of importance. Railway Policy. Touching upon railway construction works as they affected national expenditure, Mr. Coates said the Reform Party considered there should be a complete review of the question in view of the present situation. Road transport should also be investigated, for it was bound up with the problem of the railways, and they should be treated simlutaneously. All work on new lines should be suspended unless it could be proved definitely that they would pay their own way when completed. It was also suggested that the decision of a railway policy was one for a body of men entirely independent of politics. • , • In his statement to the country before the session the Prime Minister had covered much of the ground already traversed by the policy of the Reform Party, but there were serious divergencies between that statement and the attitude adopted by the Reform Party, especially concerning the primary producers.. The primary producer was still the mainstay of the country, and as such he had to receive the full attention of the Government. This year he was in a difficult position, as the fall in the price of primary products on the overseas markets had totalled about £26,000,000.' This was going to have a far-reaching effect, and its repercussions would extend through the whole social fabric. The Prime Minister had spoken of balancing the Budget and of meeting the prospective deficit of £4.500.000 next financial year. While the necessity of balancing the national Budget was fully conceived, there were thousands of other budgets throughout the country that Parliament could not afford to overlook. They concerned the individual business man, companies and wage-earners. They were the concern of the House, and would have to receive the consideration of members when the whole question of national finances was being investigated. Farming Interests. Mr. Coates said he believed that the people of the country recognised more than ever at present that they very existence and welfare were wrapped up in the prosperity of the primary producers. He did not think the Government had given full enough consideration to the man upon whom the country depended for its mam source of wealth. Whereas the Prime Minister was anxious to balance his Budget and avoid a deficit of £4,500,000 next Tear, he should first direct his attention to the drop-of £26,000.000 in the primary producers’ returns. When Sir Joseph Ward took office, Mr. Coates said he had promised him support upon certain considerations. He realised the difficulties that were ahead, but the offer of support was not treated kindly, and he added that he thought Mr. Forbes had rather ignored the Reform Party’s willingness to help the Government along broad-national lines. However, even now one could overlook the manner in which some of these suggestions were received, as the condition of the country was such that it demanded keen attention. . Stating that he would not criticise the Government’s proposals■ in detail. Mr. Coates said he was making some personal sacrifice in order to expedite the business at the moment. He said he would wait until the Government’s measures were introduced. and deal with them as they were brought down. Each one would be treated on its merits. Interest Rates Burden. Mr. Coates said interest rates in several European countries were much lower than they were in New Zealand, having come down considerably since the war. Mr. F. Langstone (Lab.. Waimarino) : Three per cent, in England. Mr. Coates was .of opinion that the country would yet have to reduce interest charges. He was not suggesting that legislation should be introduced compelling those who loaned money to take no more in interest than a certain amount, but he thought that if the Government reduced its rates others would have to fall into line. The mere fact that the Government was charging 5$ ner cent. made, it difficult for farmers to receive the assistance they wanted at a rate anywhere near what they were able to pay at present. He believed that private mortgagees were doing their best to meet the position, and he paid a tribute to the State Advances Department. which was being as helpful as it could. One of the best ways to' help the small farmer of the country would be to place a good sum at the disposal of the Rural Intermediate Credits Board. A great difficulty wns being experienced in securing fertilisers, ns the farmers were not in a position to make nurchases. Unless the . farmers could obtain fertilisers for their lands in normal supplies, the whole country would suffer in the long run. Mr. Langstone nsked nt what level the speaker would place interest rates. Mr. Coates said that under the Reform Administration interest rates had been round about 5 per cent., although they had risen as high as 51 per cent. _ He concluded bv saying that the Opposition desired the House to got down to business as quickly as possible, and its members would not take up time on the Address-in-Reply debate. Although it was usual at that stage to refer to the omissions and commissions of the Government. he thought Parliament’s work lay ahead. The Prime Minister said the Government was guilty of no omissions. Mr. Cortes said that was a matter of opinion. In any ease he was nti’-inus to ret the real measures before the House.’ LABOUR CRITICISM No-confidence Motion The Leader of the Labour Party. Mr. 11. E. Holland, spoke on the lines of his address at the Town Hall on Wednesday evening and which was reported in yesterday’s “Dominion.” He considered that when a Government won the Treasury benches on a specific policy and then departed from that policy it was only fair that the House should express its opinion on such action. When a party changed its.policy as the United Party had done it was its clear-cut duty to obtain an expression of opinion from the country as to whether its change in policy was justified. “The present Governmi nt came in de- . Glaring for no wage reduction, pledging

its existence that there would be no reduction in wages,” said Mr. Holland. “With the sole exception of the South Island Main Trunk railway it has surrendered to the Reform Party on almost every item in its programme. I think it is most serious that honourable members on the Treasury benches depart from their election pledges and calmly think that they can remain there.” The present Government s change seemed to him to be a yielding to two influences. It was a yielding to the demands of the official Opposition and a surrender to the dictation of the financial institutions in Great Britain. “The present party has been in office too long, declared Mr. Holland. “You'kept them in,” interjectec a Reform member. “That is true,” replied Mr. Holland. “We had pledges that wage rates would not be reduced; we also had the assurance of the Reform Party that wages would be "reduced if it had the opportunity of tackling the question. We were prepared to put the United Party out if we could take its place, but we were not prepared to bring about wage reduction by putting Reform back.” Labour, said Mr. Holland, was in favour of balancing the Budget, but believed in doing it on the principle of equality of sacrifice. The Civil Servants were to be called upon to make up one-third of the deficit of £4.500.000. Where was the equality in that? The Labour Party contended that the way to balance. the Budget was by a surtax on the' bigger incomes and a substantial increase in the death duties. By cutting the wages of the working men the farmers’ local market would be depreciated. Mr. Holland then formally moved his no-confidence amendment. Mr. E. J. Howard (Lab., Christchurch South) seconded the amendment. MINISTER SPEAKS Country’s Interests First “I did not expect that the Leader of the Opposition would express any other sentimen-t,” said the Minister of Lands, Hon. E. A. Ransom, in referring to what he termed Mr. Coates’s promise to accord the Governmemt general support in facilitating the business that was to come before the House. Whatever legislation ca/me down, said Mr. Ransom, should be considered in the light of what was in the best interests of the Dominion as a whole, and not in the interest of any one party in the House, or any one section of the community. No one could say that the programme enunciated by the Prime Minister was designed to eatch votes or increase the Government’s numbers. The Government was gratified to know that the Leader of the Opposition could give an assurance that it could counit on the support of the Opposition in giving effect to the proposals designed to restore tbq country baek to normal times. He fully appreciated the remarks of Mr. Coates when the latter reserved the right to criticise any legislation and improve, if possible, by additions and subtractions. Revaluation of Farm Lands. Dealing with the revaluation of farm lands, Mr. Ransom said that any proposals in the direction of bringing, that about should be approached cautiously. If it was proposed to revalue on presentday values, they were going to wipe out the equity many farmers believed they had in their holdings. At the moment there was considerable reluctance on the part of financial institutions to lend money on rural security, and any step to readjust on present values might lead to disastrous results by the withdrawal of loan moneys. Every effort should be made to see that the people who had worked ou their farms for n long number of years to perfect them were retained on their holdings. . Mr. Ransom said that it was the desire of the Government to back up the primary producer, and to bring down measures aimed at placing him in a sound position. Had it not been for the drop experienced in the values of primary produce, a drop lower than had been experienced for very many years past, the necessity for considering reductions m the wages of civil servants and other workers would not have arisen. Referring to the suggestion of the Leader of the Opposition that assistance might be given to farmers by way of a reduction in interest rates, - Mr. Ransom said that that was a question to which the Government had given a good deal of consideration. He did not think that anyone would expect the Government to take any action that would amount to a breach of contract. Arresting the Drift. He had always held that it was not reasonable to ’ask the wage-earners to make a sacrifice unless an equal sacrifice was made by capital. .It had been stated by the Leader of the Labour Party that Parliament had simply been called together to reduce wages and that wage reduction , was the feature of the Government’s proposals.. The question of wages was no doubt one of the features of the proposals to be discussed, but it could not be regarded as the allimportant question. Parliament had been called together to arrest the drift that had been developing. Mr. Ransom recalled that at the end of last. session he had mentioned that it might be necessary to call. Parliament together earlier than usual. It could not therefore be said that Parliament had been called to bring about wage reduction. . “It is not a question of changed policy but of changed conditions,” said Mr. Ransom when commenting on the statements by the Leader of the Labour Party that the Government had jettisoned the policy on which it was elected by bringing down proposals to reduce wages. “What the Government proposes to do is to meet them in a manner that will benefit not only the primary producers hut all the wage-earners and those unfortunate people who have no employment at all.” remarks by the Minister on the question of reducing Public Servants’ salaries are reported elsewhere on this page. OTHER SPEAKERS Production and Prices Mr. W. Nnsh (Lab., Hutt) referred in particular to the Prime Minister’s statement made before the session. He said he was satisfied that the Prime Minister lacked imagination, and he was sure that if his proposals were carried the ’country would take a backward step. World production had broken all records in quantity, and, compared with population increases, production had gone up by 15 per cent. The adoption of the Prime Minister's plans would give less access to this production by the people. The result would be a decline in consumption instead of an increase comparative with production. It was estimated that Customs revenue would fall by about £2,000,000 this year. This decline was expected to be traced chiefly to a fall in luxury imports, yet the. Prime Minister proposed to balance the position by taking the difference from the workers. There was nothing more unfair than to take one-third of the sum recifi-ed to balance the Budget, from the Public Servants. ns wns proposed by means of the 10 per cent, wages cut. Payments for work should be made in return for work done, and it was unfair to reduce the Ij-agcs of single men on relief works by about 40 per cent., from 14/- to 0/- n day. Differentiation of payments did not apply in the professional sphere, and there was no reason why the unmarried labourer should be penalised just because he happened to be single. It had been suggested that the Minister of Health should be placed in charge of food and clothing distribution, and the giving of shelter to those who could not pay for themselves. There was no greater indictment of the administration of the Dominion that that such a scheme should have to he brought about in one of the world's most fertile countries.

Reverting to the Public Service. Mr. Nnsh said it '' T as inequitable that the Public Service should bo singled out for a wage reduction, for its members would have to pay in two ways—by moans of the ent. and by taxation. He understood the secretary of the Post and Telegraph

Department received £1360 a year. He would lose £l3O by the “cut,” and although he was not standing up for the man with the big salary, Mr. Nash said, he did not think it right that such a man should lose that sum and be asked to pay income tax also. The Prime Minister said there had either to be general wage cutting or wholesale retrenchment. _ If there were Public Servants not earning their money or doing necessary work, they should be put off in any case. The men and women of the Public Service were doing good work for the country, and it was unfair to cut their salaries. Mr. W. E. Parry (Lab., Auckland Central) said it had been stated that the Government’s economy measures were only temporary. The same thing had been said in 1922 when the wages of the Public Services were reduced, but no effort had been made to restore the cut. Mr. W. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier) confined his remarks to the earthquake in Hawke’s Bay. Whatever political differences he might have with the present. Government, he said, he gave it credit for what it had done in connection with the earthquake. It had done all that could have been done by nny Government to assist the people iu Hawke’s Bay in their darkest hour. Mr. Barnard thanked those who had cone to the aid of the stricken people. The sum of £1,500,000 which was to be available for reconstruction would go a very little way toward restoration. It was useless to think that the bulk of the money needed could be lent to the Hawke’s Bay people. A lot of the money for restoration purposes would have to be made available as a free grant. He hoped that members would not rest content until the district of Hawke’s Bay had been brought to a level with the rest of the Dominion. Reference was made by Mr. W. L. Martin (Lab., Raglan) to the wheat duties. This, he said, was a burning question, and one that had to be fad’d this session. The standard of living could not be reduced until that universal commodity, bread, was reduced in price. Mr. Martin was satisfied that the Prime Minister’s economy statement had not helped the country. What was wanted was confidence and not pessimistic utterances sent out by the Prime Minister. The Ministers had lost faith in the country and the country had lost faith in them. , „ Mr. H. M. Rusliworth (C., Bay of Islands) said the present economic turmoil throughout the world appeared to have developed unconsciously along undirected lines. Troubles seemed to have arisen as a result of the transfer of gold in an endeavour to settle the question of war debts. Gold had gravitated largely into two countries, in which it was impossible to put it all into potential circulation. He believed the cancellation of war debts would eventually provide a solution. Mr. J. O’Brien (Lab.. Westland) moved the adjournment and the House rose. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Tributes to Dead Members When the Legislative Council met yesterday afternoon Sir James Allen gave notice of his intention to move the Address-in-Repl.v to-day. Motions placing on record the distinguished services rendered by the late Hons. T. Shailer Weston and John Barr, and expressing the sympathy of the Council with their relatives, were passed. Referring to the death of Mr. Barr. Sir Thomas Sidey, Leader of the Council, said that the deceased was well-read on social and political subjects, and was an earnest and eloquent speaker. It was to him the speaker had entrusted the Daylight-Saving Bill on three occasions on which it came to the Council from the House. Mr. Sidey said he could not have placed the measure in better hands. The Right Hon. Sir Francis Bell said that Mr. Barr was always listened to with respect and attention. One could not help but be impressed with his honesty of purpose and his sterling character. The deceased had the confidence, of his fellow-men at all times. Other speakers who paid tributes to the deceased were the Hou. D. Buddo, Sir John Sinclair, Sir R. Heaton Rhodes, the Hon. R. Moore, the Hon. E. H. Clark, Hon. Colonel G. J. Smith, Hon. G. J. Garland, and the Hon. W. Earnshaw. Referring to the death of Mr. Weston, Sir Thomas Sidey said that the news of his passing came as a great sorrow to every member of the council. Mr. Weston had a distinguished scholastic record and was regarded as one of the ablest members of the council. Sir Heaton Rhodes said that Mr. Weston made his weight felt in the debates, and had he lived he would have taken a still greater part in their discussions. His motto was “service,” and he gave his services to his country freely and well. As a mark of respect to the memory of the two deceased the Council adjourned until this afternoon. HAWKE’S BAY TRIP Members of Parliament About 50 members of Parliament will pay a visit to the earthquake-stricken area of Hawke’s Bay over the week-end, and arrangements have been completed for a special train to take the party. The train will leave Wellington at 2.15 on Saturday afternoon as part of the Main Trunk express as far as Palmerston North. The party will return to Wellington on Sunday night. SPEAKER’S TIME Mr. McDougall is Firm The opposition of Mr. D. McDougall (U., Mataura) to the extension of time allowed speakers remains as strong as ever. A pointed indication of his unchanged attitude was given by Mr. McDougall in the House last evening, when he refused to agree to an' extension of the time of the Minister of Lands, Hon. E. A. Ransom, who was speaking for the Government in the Address-in-Reply debate. Mr. Speaker had ruug the bell indicating that Mr. Ransom’s half-hour had five minutes to run when Mr. J. Bitchener (Ref., Waitaki). Senior Reform Whip, moved that his time be. extended. It is necessary for the House to give its unanimous agreement to an extension of time, and when Mr. Speaker asked if there were any objection Mr. McDougall voiced a loud “No I” The question was again put by Mr. Speaker, but Mr. McDougall stood firm, in spite of the surprised look of his own party members. No other course offered hut to refuse to allow Mr. Ransom more than his halfhour. "I quite agree.” Mr. Ransom said with n smile. “At a time like this ’one should not speak for too long.”