STAGE FURTHER

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 172, 16 April 1932, Page 13

STAGE FURTHER

Expenditure Bill SECOND READING ENDS Government Critics BLEA FOR AMENDMENTS The second reading debate of the (National Expenditure Adjustment Bill concluded in the House of Kepresentativea early last evening. Arguments used an criticism of the proposals in the aneaieure were replied to by the Prime Minisiter, Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, who said Ithat absolute necessity demanded that economies should be made. A division 'was called for on the second reading, 'Which was agreed to by 46 votes to 25. The House then adjourned until Tuesday afternoon, when it will go into committee to discuss the clauses in the Bill. Continuing the debate in the morning, Mr.. W. A. Veitch (Govt., Wanganui), said he agreed with the contention that ithe road to prosperity lay in the direction of economy. What was wanted, (however, was economy based on reconstruction. The way to bring relief to the people of the Dominion was to stimullate confidence. I Mr. W. Nash (Lab., Hutt), said overiproduction was not at, fault to-day. .There never had been more of necessities (of life available. The trouble was that 'Jack of proper distribution was leading Ito an inadequacy of supplies. “Electors Not Told.” ‘‘Public opinion in Npw Zealand has /outstripped the Government.” said Mr. IH. Atmore (Ind., Nelson). The Governl.ment, he added, had lost any popularity nit might have had at the recent general Selection. Had the electors known that (pensions were to be touched, and that ( the man on the bread line was to be i plunged below that level, they would not ■ have returned the Government to office. The science of production had outstripped the science of distribution. i There was no reason why there should ,be any fear of moderate inflation. Was it not more desirable to issue £10,000.000 of State notes, backed by the wealth of the Dominion, than to borrow a similar sum ou the London market, and pay I some £500,000 in interest? If they never went on the Home market it would be the ■first step toward national self-reliance for New Zealand. i The statement that he could not support the 10 per cent, cut- in salaries because it was not in the best interests of the country was imide by Mr. J. A. Nash (Govt., Palmerston). Every man in work should be willing and ready -to help his less fortunate unemployed fellow men. If they could see an upward tendency in the prices for primary produce it would go a long way toward solving the country’s difficulties. | The Government should be receiving a substantial sum from the oil companies, particularly .at the present time. The New Zealand duty on benzine was practically the same as that in the Old Country, and yet the price in the Dominionl was in the vicinity of 74d more. ) Someone was making a huge profit, and •it was’up to the oil combines to help 1 the country through its present crisis. i One of the things being said throughout the country with the object of discrediting the Government was that the Government intended to make a raid on the Post Office Savings Bank. He knew of people who had drawn their savings out of the Post Office as a result of those statements. To raid the Post Office savings would be the last thought of the present Government. Internal Credits. Mr. R. McKeeu (Lab., Wellington South) said it had to be asked whether it was an honest policy to raise a loan in London, part of which would be applied to public works, when £30.000,000 was “frozen” iu the banks of the Dominion. If it were good enough for other countries to raise loans internally, it was good enough for New Zealand. There was no need to go outside the Dominion for one penny piece. ■ It was admitted that the banks reinvested their deposits, but the question was whether the banks used this money to the best advantage of the country as a whole. No private corporation could be relied upon to maintain industries in a healthy condition. It was the duty of the country to see that its credit was used for the general welfare. "Something should be done to relieve the unemployment situation in New Zealand by raising an internal loan. The policy of reducing incomes was leading to the placing of men and women on the living standard of “coolie” nations. Mr. E. dull (Govt., Waipawa) pointed out that the Bill excluded the banks from interest reductions. No doubt the Government had sufficient confidence in

the banks to believe they would reduce interest on overdrafts, but if the rates on current deposits were maintained it would be against the spirit of the Bill. He joined with other Government members in urging a revision of the wage-reducing proposals, although ho did not intend to labour the point. Discussing what he termed the ‘'appalling bureaucracy” of the Dominion. Mr. dull mentioned the existence of the following boards: —Railways, transport, highways, health, trade, agriculture, meat, dairy, fruit, honey, local governments’ loans, town-planning, Public Works stores control, broadcasting, scientific and industrial research. State Advances, Public Trust investigation, rural intermediate credit. Government Life Insurance, State Fire Office control, superannuation, and Tongariro National Park. 'l'iie time had come when the Government should lake into serious consideration the modification of methods of administration in the Dominion. Members in the House could be used to a larger extent than they were at present, and committees under Ministerial control could be as <if*ective as all the boards at present operating. Amendments Needed. Mr. H. G. Dickie (Govt., Patea) said he intended to vote for the second reading of the Bill. He thought, however, a number of amendments would have to be inserted in the measure in the committee stages. He suggested that a tax on the low-priced tickets for amusements would bring in a considerable sum of money. Mr. A. M. Samuel (Govt., Thames) said he objected to a cut in the salaries of oue section of the community. To impose a i cut ou a section that was defenceless was not playing the game. The whole of the community was suffering from the cuts that had been made and were about to be made. He did not agree with the reduction in pensions. They owed a duty not only to the returned soldiers but to those who had grown old in the service of the 1 Country. It was a paltry thing to reduce the old age pensions. He hoped the Government would see the folly of foisting the legislation on the country. . ‘ Replying to the debate, the Primo Minister, Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, said the question of reductions was wrapped up with that of finance. Had be his way he would like to deal with one apart from the other, but of course that ' was quite impracticable. There was no I lack of sympathy among members of I he Government, but if they tried to run the | business of the country by the heart. | they would get nowhere at all. Unless ! there were the utmost prudence in the administration of the country's finances the Government would be unable to make payments at all. Demands of Necessity. It was absolute necessity that demanded that economies should be made. The action that had been taken was essential. He would like to take up an attitude that no further cuts wduld be made, and he had aa much sympathy wltb thoaa who would bu effected by the

cuts as any one in the House. It was, however, the duty of the Government to arrange ita finances to enable it to meet its obligations, and it was only by rigid economy and careful administration of the national finances that that could be done. They had heard a great deal about New South Wales, but the Labour Government there bad cut the soldiers’ pensions. In New Zealand the returned men had had an economic pension added to the soldiers’ pension, and the reduction had been made in respect to tho former only. The whole matter was bound up with finance. “Can we allow our feelings to sway us against stern facts?” asked Mr. Forbes. The Government, Mr. Forbes continued, had been 'compelled to do what it had done. Even then it was doing the very minimum insofar as the situation was being met with an unbalanced Budget. Mr. Forbes concluded by saying that be appreciated the moderation that had been shown by members during their speeches on the second reading. In his opinion, the House should feel pleased with the manner in which the debate had been conducted. MEMBERS’ COSTS ~~ Burden of Office SALARY INSUFFICIENT An attack on the members of the National Expenditure Commission and the report it presented to the Government as far as the salaries and privileges of members of Parliament were concerned was launched by Mr. W. A. Bodkin (Govt., Otago Central) in the House yesterday. The report in this respect, he said, was worthy of the little men who had compiled it. . Mr. Bodkin complained of the proposal to cut the salaries of members, who he said were the poorest paid servants of the State. Notwithstanding this fact, there was an impression abroad that the member of Parliament was in a sheltered class —living in the lap of luxury and deriving all sorts of benefits and privileges at the expense of the State. These beliefs had been aggravated by the ridiculous and misleading report of the Economy Commission. Travelling Expenses. Any man who represented a large and scattered electorate was forced to draw heavily upon- his private income if he were to pay even his travelling expenses, an item which the commissioners had totally misrepresented. He wondered if the members of the commission realised that in order to get around an electorate such as his, which was the largest in the Dominion, one had to occupy 30 days calling at three villages every day and spending at least 20 nights away from home. It was impossible for- the average Parliamentarian, even those living in Wellington, to make both ends meet from the honorarium, but when outside members were forced to spend nine months of the year in Wellington on the service of the State without even the usual compensating expenses allowed an ordinary servant of a company, it placed them in an impossible position. The commission’s reference to travelling expenses was the most paltry, case ever placed on paper. Why was it, be asked, that every member who gave bis life and service to the State died as poor as Lazarus? If the Parliamentarians of this country received the remuneration received by the members of the commission they would be rich beyond the dreams of avarice. One city' member had complained to him that be was able to carry on his Parliamentary duties and attend the sessions only because the members of his family -kept the home going while be was away. (A Government member: Shame.) One found the economy commissioners gasping with indignation because members’ wives had steamer and rail privileges, but these in many cases were merely a book entry and never used. What about the thousands of miles of road which 80 per cent, of the members had to travel and for which they received nothing, making the railway pass of very little value? Gratuitous Insult. If ever there was a gratuitous insult offered members of Parliament it was the section of the commission’s report referring to Bellamy’s, which contained a dishonest and misleading statement that gratuitous services were received there. No service iu Bellamy’s was cheaper than the same service in the city. Some of them were dearer, but when the House was iu session Bellamy's showed a handsome profit. Cleaning and other charges were debited against Bellamy’s which had nothing to do with members’ privileges. As far as the stamp and telegraph allowance was concerned, the average toll account would not be met with the £2 a mouth allowance given members. “Surely this country is not going to lay it down that only a rich man shall represent a constituency in this Parliament,” Mr, Bodkin went on. “But this policy will bring that result about. If the system is not altered, many members will be driven out of Parliament by sheer economic necessity. If such a system had obtained right through the giants of the past—Seddon. McKenzie. Massey • —would never 'have had the privilege of serving as they did. The scene has changed and the distressing circumstances in which we live have made it impossible for members to live on the honorarium.’/ PUBLIC SERVICE April Salary Adjustments Arrangements for the payment, of April salaries to the Public Service were outlined by the Minister of Public Works, Rt. Hon. J. G. Contes, when replying to a question asked by Mr. J. Bitchener (Govt., Waitaki) in the House of Representatives yesterday morning. Mr. Coates called attention to that section of the National Expenditure Adjustment Bill which provided for salary adjustments to operate from April 1, 1932. “This principle,” he said, “is the same as that adopted last, year. Pending a final decision as to the graduated scales of reductions, all departments were instructed last month that in respect to the first half of this month, salary abstracts were to be prepared at. the then current rates of pay, and that adjustments arising out. of reductions as decided upon would be made in Ihe abstracts for the second half of April. Arrangements are in hand for this procedure to apply so as to avoid, as far as possible, any delays in payment or hardship occasioned by a delayed adjustment.”