PARLIAMENT

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 16, 13 October 1932, Page 10

PARLIAMENT

Government’s First Bill MOVE BY LABOUR Arbitration Law Revived OTTAWA REPORT TO-NIGHT . (By Our Parliamentary Representative) Sudden and unexpected life was infused into the business of the House of Representatives yesterday when the intrusion of a series of questions whose discussion was not foreseen from the arrangement of the Order Paper, saw the shelving of the Budget Debate until early in the evening. With other things to occupy it to-day and to-mor-row, it now appears as though the House will not be clear of the debate until well into next week. Nd one was prepared for a hitch in the formal setting up of the Select Committees of the session, and the House was taken aback when Mr. H. G. R. Mason challenged the usefulness of these bodies because of their meagre powers. This unusual expression of opinions wks followed by complaints by several members because they had been left off certain committees, and when the appointments had at last been made, Mr. J. McCombs aroused everyone by reopening a thorny question in moving the introduction of the Industrial and Arbitration Amendment Bill, designed to repeal the legislation of'last session and reinstate compulsory arbitration. He made what was almost a second reading speech, and thus set Labour speakers in action for the rest of the afternoon. The Minister of Labour, lion. A. Hamilton, was drawn into the discussion shortly before the tea adjournment and thus talked the Bill out, although Mr. McCombs intends to revive the measure so as to take it at least to the second reading stage. The Government sprang a surprise after tea by bringing down its first Bill, a measure to safeguard the Public Trustee from the withdrawal by local bodies of moneys placed in the Common Fund. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. H. E. Holland, was thus not able to resume the Budget Debate until eight o’clock. From then on, however, the debate assumed its normal course, and the House adjourned at midnight until 2.30 p.m. to-day. This evening has been set aside for Mr. Coates’s report on the Ottawa Conference, and the passing of the accompanying Customs resolutions, ’ RENT RESTRICTION .. Need for Extension Urged Attempts being made by Labour members to secure the extension of the present rent restriction law will receive the consideration of the Government, according to a statement by the Prime Minister in the House yesterday, in replying to a question on the point asked by Mr. R. McKeen (Lab., Wellington South), In association with Mr. P. Fraser (Lab., Wellington Central). SCHOOLS OF MINING No Immediate Closing Tlxere is no immediate intention by the Government of closing the various schools of mines throughout the country, in accordance with the recommendation of the National l Expenditure Commission. This statement was made by the Minister of Mines, Hon. C. E. Macmillan, in replying In the House yesterday to a question by Mr. G. C. C. Black (Ind., Motueka), who expressed particular concern about the Reefton school. L WHEAT IMPORTATION f-; Fowl Wheat Duty Free . “The recent importation of wheat by the Government for sale and distribution as fowl food has been brought in ‘as Government property duty free,” said the Prime Minister in reply to a question on the point in the House yesterday by Mr. C. L. Carr (Lab., Timaru). Mr. Carr asked if the shipment from Australia had been subjected to the full amount of duty under the sliding scale. • “The wheat has, however, been sold at a price’ of 5/3 per bushel, sacks in, ex ship’s slings, at North Island ports,” Mr. Forbes added. “This price, while more than a duty-free value, is less than a full-duty paid equivalent. Wheat to. which the honourable member may bp referring was recently also imported by the Wheat Marketing Agency Company, Limited, Christchurch, under special arrangements by which duty has been paid up to a basis of value determined by internal prices of wheat and flour. It is intended that the balance of the duty on that wheat will be covered by a vote on the estimates of the Customs Department.” SELECT COMMITTEES I Functions Severely Criticised t LABOUR MEMBER’S VIEWS. j Au unexpected attack upon the value of Select Committees set up by Parlia- f nrent each session to deal with petitions 1 a lid other questions before they are submitted to Cabinet for final approval, was made in the House yesterday by . Mr. 11. G. It. Mason (Lab., Auckland 1 Suburbs). He complained during the 1 setting up of committees for this ses- ' sion that the country was not aware 1 just how useless was the work of these 2 bodies which had no executive power, * and whose recommendations were 8 finally decided upon by the Government c without knowing what evidence had been given to induce them to reach cer- t tain decisions. i Mr. Mason said they induced the C country to believe that the Select Com- I mittees were of greater value than they o

really were. He considered the House undertook a wrong and undignified procedure in setting them up. To the uninitiated they had large powers, but in reality they performed few useful functions. Committees went into evi- . deuce and submitted a report to Cabinet, However, the Government knew nothing of the evidence, for no record of it was kept. Yet the Government passed judgment on committees’ recommendations in ignorance of the evidence which had led to the recommendations being made. One questioned whether it was a wise or honest thing to set up committees under these circumstances. People were induced to go to a great deal of trouble to present their evidence, but the procedure was such that it was not calculated to pro- ’ duce results. It was the Government, through Cabinet, which decided questions in the final analysis. The Prime Minister said he did not think committee decisions were influenced by party considerations. He . said it had to be remembered that most , of the recommendations made involved expenditure, and he recalled that a re- ' turn recently prepared showed that if > the recommendations made by commit- . tees during one sesison had been carried out, it would have cost the country £1,500,000. As the Government had to provide ways and means, it would be realised that committee decisions had to be considered before they were car- , ried out. He admitted proceedings were often ! protracted, and something might be done to reduce the time taken in hearing petitions. The present system had worked well in the past, and unless some alternative could be offered, he thought it should remain for this session at least. NOT REAPPOINTED Members of Committees SEVERAL PROTESTS MADE. Curiosity as to why they had been left off Select Committees on which they had served in the past was sought by several members when these committees were being set up in the House yesterday afternoon. Information was also sought as to the method adopted in selecting the personnel of committees. In reply, the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, said he had no wish to deprive any member from serving on a committee if he wished to do so. In seeking the reason for the ansence of his name from the defence committee, Mr. A. M. Samuel (Govt., Thames) said there was nothing personal about the matter. He thought he could claim to be the senior military member in the House, but for some reason or other he had been left off the committee. He would like to know how members of committees were selected. When he first entered the House he was asked what committees he would like to serve on. That system, however, seemed to have been discarded, and now members were not even selected by the Minister. He was led to believe that whips made certain recommendations, and that not even Ministers knew who were to be appointed. When one saw on the committee the names of members who had not seen service, and others with military experience left off, one naturally wondered why these things were done. He was not suggesting that he was being penalised for anything he had said or done. Probably it might be considered he was too sympathetic to the claims of the returned soldiers. Mr. Forbes explained that he had no wish to keep any member off a committee. If the member for Thames desired to serve on the Defence Committee he would see if that could not be arranged. Information as to the reason he had not been re-appointed to the Lands Committee was sought by Mr. W. J. Polson (Govt., Stratford). He pointed out that he was keenly interested in the work of the committee. He had had a clash with the Minister in respect to the claims relating to lands. Now he found himself off the committee, but he hoped not in consequence of that clash. It was unsatisfactory to have one’s services dispensed with and not know the reason. At this stage Mr. D. McDougall (Govt., Mataura), whose name was on the Defence Committee, intimated that with the pleasure of the Prime Minister he would be prepared to withdraw from the Defence Committee in. favour of the member for Thames. He thought he could serve to better advantage on the lands or agricultural committee. Mr. Forbes said that in view of Mr. McDougall’s willingness to retire he thought the matter could be fixed up there and then, and Mr. Samuel appointed to the committee in his stead. Mr. J. A. Macpherson (Govt., Oamaru) pointed out that he had been left off the Agricultural Committee, and Mr. R. Semple (Lab„ Wellington East) considered a practical miner should be a member of the Mines Committee. He suggested that Mr. W. E. Parry (Lab., Auckland Central) be appointed. Mr. Forbes said he would be pleased to consider the various points raised. INDUSTRIAL LAW Reinstatement Sought LABOUR INTRODUCES BILL. With the object of restoring to the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act of 1925 all those provisions affected by the legislation of last session, an amendment Bill was introduced in the House yesterday by Mr. J. McCombs (Lab., Lyttelton), on behalf of the Labour Party. . The Bill provides that workers shall have all their legal rights restored as they existed before the passing of the 1932 Act, and that all industrial awards and agreements made under that Act are to be regarded as null and void. Through being talked out at" the 5.30 adjournment, the measure was not accorded a first reading. Mr. McCombs said that when the Government’s amendment to the Arbitration Act had been before the House it was pointed out that previous wagereducing legislation had proved disastrous to the Dominion’s industry and commerce. Those who were on the Inter-Party Committee of the House in 1931 would remember that representatives of wholesale, retail, and manufacturing firms had testified precisely to ' this effect. Yet legislation had been passed last session the object of which was plainly to give the Employers’ Association power to force down the wages of the workers. . ' Unemployment Increase.

The House was told then, as before, that wage reductions would solve the problem of unemployment. The first wage reduction had trebled unemployment. When the amendment to the Arbitration Act was before the House the number of unemployed was 42,000, and to-day, after six months’ operation of the amendments, it was 76,000. “The legislation passed last session took away the right of appeal to the impartial tribune of tlie Arbitration Court,” Mr. McCombs continued. "The position is now that under the system of so-called compulsory conciliation, the

employers are in a position to dictate terms.

“I repeat that the legislation of last i session reduced the Arbitration Court 1) legislation to a farce. The author of - that law, the late Hon. W. Pember - Reeves, foresaw what would happen v unless he included in the legislation 1 provision for compulsory arbitration, t He said he could not bring in a weaker - Bill without knowing that it was a hollow sham.” , The Prime Minister: When was that? 1 Mr. McCombs: That was 40 years ; ago, and the Prime Minister has now\ - thrown us back 60 years by repealing j the legislation of that day. t 3 On that occasion the Liberals fought exactly the same arguments as the Prime Minister to-day stands ’ for. “I hope his Liberal colleagues are t not still proud of their legislation,” ■ Mr. McCombs ended. - Mr. R. McKeen (Labour, Wellington t South) listed the awards cancelled • since the passing of the amendment. ■ The Government, he said, had gone - from conciliation to dictation, forem- ■ ployers were now able to dictate pre- ■ cisely the terms which they wanted to ’ be accepted. ’ The Minister of Labour, Hon. A. • Hamilton: You are not expressing the • atmosphere of the Conciliation Council. The Prime Minister: Certainly not. Mr. McKeen said the employees of the 1 country had been delivered right into • the hands of the Employers’ Association, which, after years and years of agitation, had had its wishes carried ’ out by the present Government. Feeling in Country. , Mr. C. H. Chapman (Lab., Wellington North) said the actions of the Government were rapidly recreating the evil conditions of 40 years ago. Legislation was having a distinct effect in preventing recovery. The fall in the national income mentioned by the Prime Minister had nothing whatever to do'with the principle of arbitration. In the past the court had raised and lowered wages as the barometer of national prosperity rose or fell, but this ; right of an impartial body to adjust . wages an<i conditions had been removed. Industrial harmony in New , Zealand was in jeopardy to-day. Enj gineers, boilermakers and metal workers were on strike in Wellington today as the result of the harsh conditions being imposed on them by employers. Was this the harmony spoken of by the Prime Minister? Mr. R. Semple (Lab., Wellington . East) said that the value of the legislation could be judged by its results. . The Government should prove that the community, had prospered as the result of the destruction of the trade . union movement. Farmers confessed ! they had not. benefited in the slightest. They knew it was not wages but interest charges and high land values . which were at the root of their problems. It should not be overlooked by the Prime Minister or his colleagues that the arbitration system was actually created in lean times. Yet because we were suffering to-day in common with the rest of the world, the Government saw fit to destroy the system. The Prime Minister had not said one word about the advantages which had arisen from the legislation. There was discontent all over the Dominion and murmurings of revolution in every part of the country as well as in the rest of the world. People would not stand the position much longer. NECESSITY’S DEMAND Defence of the New Law OPINIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT. A spirited defence of the Government’s attitude toward the new industrial and arbitration law was made by the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, in replying to Labour speakers. The Prime Minister said mention had been made of the Hon. W. Pember Reeves, the father of; the original arbitration legislation. “I say without hesitation,” said Mr. Forbes, “that had he been in New Zealand when we passed the amendment and seen the position I was in in regard to carrying on the government of the country, he would have done exactly as I did.” Labour Voices: Never. Mr. Forbes said Mr. Reeves was not a rigid conservative like Labour members, who declared that because a law was passed 40 years ago it should not be tampered with or brought up to date. The charge brought by Mr. McCombs was that the Government had amended legislation which was 40. years old, but great changes had taken place since the measure was first passed. He remembered the passing of the original Act, and he had then been fully in accord with its provisions. Conditions Improved. To-day, however, greater consideration was shown to employees by employers than ever before. In the old days workers in factories were certainly treated badly, but conditions existing then, could not be compared in any way with those of to-day. Mr. McCombs: But we are rapidly getting back to them. The Prime Minister said Mr. McCombs had stated that retailers before the Inter-Party Committee had stated that their business had fallen off as the result of wage cutting. But. none of them had said they would be able to maintain the wages they were then paying. s Mr. McCombs: Yes. they did. Mr. Forbes said it was known that wage reductions had been made inevitable through the falling-off in the national income. No difficulties whatever would have been experienced had the Government been able to borrow money, which would have gone into the retailers’ shops. But everyone had to share less, and the retailers, like everyone else, had felt the effect. It was ridiculous to suggest that reductions in wages and the removal of restrictions upon employment had been responsible for bringing about about an increase in the number of workless. It was well known that employers complained bitterly that they were unable to do many things for fear of prosecution, and the number of cases brought against employers showed that while there was an appearance of industrial peace' the feeling throughout industry was that restrictions and prosecutions were not creating a harmonious feeling. ' Mr. McCombs: Is there harmony at ; the present time? Difficult Period. “How can there be harmony when ' reductions are being brought about?” the Prime Minister asked. “The hon- ' curable gentleman knows that there '] was an harmonious feeling between ( the Government and the Public Service until we had to reduce salaries.” No one with any common sense would deny that, no matter how unpleasant it had been to do many things, they had been most necessary. If the employers said to-morrow that they would v increase wages, there would be agree- t ments in aU cases in dispute, but it I

was very much more difficult to secure harmony when reductions were being made.

“I do not want to see low wages in this country, because, if the employers - are able to give high wages, it shows the country is prosperous,” said Mr. Forbes. Low wages, however, had been brought about by the state of the country, and they could not be avoided. No Outside Influences. The Minister of Labour, Hon. A. Hamilton, who was the last speaker before the debate was talked out at 5.30 p.m., said that unless something new was to be brought up he did not consider the discussion of material value. It was just the same “old song.” The amendments of the I.C. and A. Act had not been made at the dictation of the Employers’ Federation or of Mr. Bishop. Mr. McCombs: They have been agitatiiv' for it for years. Mr. Hamilton: The amendments were not wen altogether supported by the Employers’ Association. The legislation was created by the Government, which considered that the country’s industrial situation warranted it. Compulsory arbitration was not altogether the main factor of the Act. The main part of the Act was the agreement to work under awards, and that still remains. The only alteration is the method of arriving at that agreement. The Minister went on to criticise the fallacies upon which he said the opposition was arguing, notably the claim that the amendment of the Act was responsible for the increase in the numbers of unemployed. He was interrupted by the adjournment of the House. WORK IN COUNTRY Policy During the Summer CITY RELIEF FOR WINTER. The desirability of placing as many unemployed men as possible on developmental works in the country was stressed by the Acting-Minister of Employment, Hon. A. Hamilton, when replying to urgent questions asked by Messrs. A. Harris (Govt., Waitemata) and A. S. Richards (Lab., Roskill), as to whether it. was the policy of the Government to send married men with families into camps. “The class of work now being carried out under No. 5 scheme in urban areas is becoming more and more unsatisfactory from the point of view of valuable return for the money expended,” said Mr. Hamilton. “Indeed, the local authorities are finding it increasingly difficult to find sufficient work. This can be remedied only by transferring the men from the cities and towns to developmental work in the country, where the monetary return is better to the man on the average and the work carried out will unquestionably give a better return to the country.” There were already a number of married men in camps, the Minister continued, and a number of county councils were prepared to establish camps as soon as they were assured that men were available. It was desirable that the men should be placed on development works as fas as possible, thus reserving icity works for the winter. Mr. Harris asked what was the position when local bodies in the city were prepared to find work. Mr. Hamilton: It is for the Unemployment Board to say what is the most valuable class of work. ' Mr. E. J. Howard (Lab., Christchurch South): Are you not chairman of the board? Mr. Hamilton: Yes, and I am speaking as chairman of the board. It is desirable that men should be placed on summer work in the country. They will be better off there on the average. Mr. Richards said hundreds of married men had been circularised to report to the Labour Department at Auckland to go into camps. Several had large families and permanently injured children, and to send these men to camp would create hardship. “Quite a lot of married men have had to leave their families in the past to get work,” replied the Minister. “Generally that should cause noi particular hardship: and if any hardship is caused consideration will be given to those cases.” LOCAL BODY FUNDS Investment in Public Trust PREVENTION OF WITHDRAWALS. In order to safeguard the Public Trustee, from heavy withdrawals of moneys 1 held by him in the common fund, the Ix>cal Authorities’ Sinking Funds Bill was introduced by the Government in the House of Representatives immediately after the resumption in the evening. An official explanation of the Bill given after the first reading stated that the Public Trustee was the sinking fund commissioner for a large number of local body loans, and he had been giving them the benefit of the Common Fund rate of interest which, up to recently, had been 5£ per cent. The Common Fund rate of interest had been reduced to 4 per cent, some time ago, and the result was that some local bodies wanted to withdraw their funds from the Public Trustee.

11l receiving instalments of sinking funds, the Public Trustee allowed interest from the time the sums were paid to him. This meant they commenced to earn interest immediately, whereas if the sinking fund commissioners invested them themselves they would have to wait for a suitable investment, especially if the sinking fund were a small one. Regular Interest Rate. The placing of sinking funds in the Common Fund gave local bodies the benefit of a regular rate of interest irrespective of the securities in which the common fund moneys were invested. At the present time the losses on mortgage investments were met out of the Common Fund, but the local bodies did not lose the principal. They were only suffering {he reduction in the rate of interest, whereas if their own sinking fund commissioners had invested in mortgages, their losses would probably have been heavier. The Public Trustee had arranged for sinking funds to be released at the date of the maturity of loans. The action of local bodies in asking for the release of sinking funds at the present time meant that the Public Trustee had to realise on his investments in order to accede to their demands. At the present time, however, he could not realise on these investments on account of legislation in the Mortgagors Relief Acts and the National Expend!-, ture Adjustment Act. The present Bill was therefore designed to enable him to refuse io pay out sinking funds until the expiry of the relief legislation on April 1, 1935. Two principal questions are dealt witli in the Bill. Clause 3 imposes the temporary restriction on the rights of local bodies to withdraw sinking funds

- from the control of the Public Trustee, g Clause 4 states that where any local body has appointed or appoints the i Public Trustee as the commissioner of s any sinking fund, and the appointment s has been expressed by deed or resolu- •_ tion to be irrevocable, or to be revoca able only on certain specified condii- tions, the appointment shall be irrevocable except in accordance with any specific conditions provided for. Changing of Securities. 1 Clause 5 relates to the changing of ) securities. At the present time a local v body can apply for an Order-in-Coun-i- cil to have its securities taken out of the Common Fund and separately ine vested. The clause provides that no 1 such Order-in-Council shall be granted e at any time before April 1, 3935. The Prime Minister said the Public Trustee would be enabled to deal with i- the question of securities apart from the legislation which would expire in e 3.935. ' „ e Mr. .1. A. Lee (Lab., Grey Lynn) :If i- local bodies wanted to withdraw their t funds from the Public Trustee, would i’ the Government have to take steps to 1- create the necessary credit to enable r the Public Trustee to remain solvent? n The Prime Minister said the Public o Trustee had been investing funds in >- rural securities. Some local bodies e said they could get a higher rate of int terest if they withdrew from the Public e Trustee, but his position under recent legislation was circumscribed by the a fact that he could not realise the money. ;- Mr. J. A. Nash (Govt., Palmerston) : i- Will there be any increase in interest I > The Prime Minister (smiling) : There will be no increase in the rate of interest. The Bill will just place the Public Trustee in the same position as mortgagors until 1935. Mortgagor’s Obligations. Mr. H. G. R. Mason (Lab., Auckland Suburbs), said he did not see the necessity for the Bill on the explanation given. Why should local bodies be put in a position of servitude to the profits of the Public Trustee Office? Surely it was sufficient that the Public Trustee .. should flourish by voluntary methods and that his services should not be g thrust on local bodies which thought ;. they could do better otherwise. Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Lab., Avon) said >- as the matter was of such grave im- - portance the Bill should be referred s to the Local Bills Committee so. that local bodies could make representa- - tions. 1 The Prime Minister said local bodies • would have the opportunity of seeing the Bill before the second reading, and ■ the necessity for sending the Bill to a 5 committee could be determined later. The Bill was read a first time. ‘ “CRADLE TO THE GRAVE” I Expenditure Commission’s Work ; CRITICISM BY MR. H. E. HOLLAND Recommendations of the National Expenditure Commission were criticised by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. H. E. Holland, who spoke when . the Financial Debate was resumed in > the evening. Mr. Holland devoted practically all his time to a discussion ■ on matters arising out of the report . of the Commission, making a brief reference to the Budget at the commence- . ment of his speech. He described the . Commission’s report as “a sloppy, slovenly and misleading document,” and added that the commissioners had carried their vendetta “from the cradle to the grave.” In opening, Mr. Holland said the Budget disclosed a deficit of £3,635,644, which did not include the huge deficit in connection with the superannuation subsidies. The Government proceeded to raise money by mortgaging to the bank public securities represented in discharged soldier settlement lands. In this way it secured advances amounting to £1,494,825, and the Government wrote this into its balance sheet as income. This made it possible to present a deficit of £2,140,819, Instead of the correct figure of £3,635-, 644. Use of Securities.

It would be seen that public securities were being used to meet a current liability. The bank issued money to the Government on the basis of these securities, in other words, with the backing of the public credit, and would charge Interest on the money so issued. Before the Government could utilise its own credit resources to meet a current ■liability it had to contract to pay a percentage tribute to the banks. Could not the Government have utilised its. own credit resources to back- its own issue of money without paying tribute to the banks? asked Mr. Holland. Furthermore, if a deficit could be made good out of reserves, those reserves could have been utilised long since to provide remunerative work for the unemployed, and for the creation of additional values for the State. Superannuation Funds. Dealing with recommendations of the National Expenditure Commission in connection with the State superannuation funds, Mr. Holland referred to the statement of the commission that in the Public Service Superannuation Fund, the Teachers’ Superannuation Fund, and the Railways Superannuation Fund there was a total actuarial liability of the Government of approximately £23,000,000. In view of the commission’s general unreliability none of its figures could be accepted without reservation, but that statement was probably as near to the truth as any other portion of its report. When the Superannuation Act was passed the Government’s liability to pay a lump sum was converted into an annual payment. It was because of this antecedent liability that the Government undertook to subsidise the Superannuation Funds. The Act provided that in the month of January in every year the Minister of Finance should pay into the fund, and out of the Consolidated Fund, the sum of £20,000, together with such further amount, if any, as would be deemed, in accordance with the report of the actuary, to be required to meet the charges on the fund during the ensuing year. The Government had never honoured its obligations in this respect. “Position Becoming Worse.” So long as present default continued the position would continue to get worse. He had heard it, said that if its antecedent liability were not there the fund would maintain itself on the contributions paid. The deficiency, whatever it was, should be openly and honestly shown in every Budget. A large portion of the superannuation funds had been loaned to landholders at low rates of interest. Reference was made by Mr. Holland to the recommendation of the Commission that the grant of £l5O to the Cawthron Institute for experimental work on pakilii lands be reduced to £75 this year and then discontinued. Professor Easterfield had advised him that the Commission had made no investigation

at and asked for no Information from the Cawthron Institute. Cost of Grassing. Pakihi investigations under the direction of the institute, had proceeded at Westport during the last few years. The statement of the Commission that 60 acres had been grassed at a cost of £lOOO, and that it could never be expected to become a commercial proposition if grassing were to cost approximately £2O per acre, was false and unreliable. Even were the statement that grassing cost £lOOO correct, that would have worked out at £l6/13/4 per acre. He had sought information from the Minister of Lands, and ascertained that the actual cost of establishing grass on the 60 acres was £521/7/8. That worked out at £B/13/9 per acre. The Minister had explained that the balance of the expenditure of the £lOOO authorised was made up of implements, permanent improvements, fencing, roads, and drains, and the expenditure was not confined to operations on the grassed area only. The commission, without taking trouble to ascertain the facts, charged all these items up as cost of grassing the 60 acres. It was very evident that the commission made no investigations whatever with regard to this experimental plot. How could such a report be regarded as other than worthless? Attack on the Child. “The Commissioners attack the child even while it is being born and pursue it to the grave,” said Mr. Holland. "They demand a reduction of £7OOO in maternity allowances, and recommend that the cost of a certificate of birth be increased from 2/6 to 5/-. The Commissioners attack the baby in its cradle and demand wholesale reductions in Plunket Society grants. They follow the child as it grows and demand the total abolition of the family allowances. They follow the child to the school and the Child Welfare Department, bang the school door in the face of the five-year-old, and bar and bolt the school door behind the child when it reaches the age of 14 years. “The youth arid maiden are followed to the altar with a demand that revenue be increased by raising the marriage fees. The Commissioners follow the Invalid to the sick bed. They want to drive patients out of the hospitals at the earliest moment. They propose the fees payable should be assessed while the patient is in hospital and the patient should be required to pay in full unless he makes a confession of pauperism. They carry their demands to the brink of the grave and demand that the cost of a copy of the certificate of death shall be increased by 100 per cent. Their demands are carried even beyond the grave, and they make reference to a saving of £15.375 on the maintenance of overseas graves.”

LOWER INTEREST RATE Advocated by Mr. A. Stuart Regret that the banks had not been brought into line with other moneylenders was expressed by Mr. A. Stuart (Govt., Rangltikei), when complaining of the high Interest rates charged by the banks during the Fnancial Debate. Mr. Stuart said that cheaper money was required. Unless finance could be obtained at cheaper rates than at present it would be detrimental to the prosperity of New Zealand. “More people in this country die of being over-fed than from under-feed-ing,” declared Mr. Stuart, in defending tile standard of living. The New Zealand standard, he added, was high, and 'good enough for anyone.

STAFF CENTRALISATION Labour Member’s Protest Objection to the centralisation of Government departments as recommended by the National Expenditure Commission was expressed by Mr. D. W. Coleman (Lab., Gisborne), when speaking during the Financial Debate. In any scheme of centralisation, said Mr. Coleman, there would be the initial cost involved in the transfer of staff and records. This would involve expense, and it would be a considerable time before any saving could be made. The convenience of the public should be considered. In his opinion, it was not wise to have everything centralised in one office. HOSPITAL RATING

Per Capita Basis Advocated The opinion that hospital rating should be on a per capita basis ,and not on land was expressed by Mr. W. J. Broadfoot (Govt., Waitomo), when speaking during the Financial Debate in the House of Representatives last evening. Under the present system, people in the boroughs and cities were receiving an undue preference over those “out-back,” he said. Discussing the recommendations of the National Expenditure Commission, Mr. Broadfoot said he was quite confident much could be done by way of an amalgamation of departments. He could never understand why the Departments of Lands, Agriculture and Forestry were ever separated. He was glad to see Forestry had' been merged with Lands, and he hoped to see Agriculture similarly merged. The Minister of Lands should be given greater freedom of action. If the recommendations of the Commission in respect to the appointment of boards . were carried to their logical conclusion, Ministers would become a mere shadow with no control over their departments. So far as his district was concerned, the small farm plan was i>roving a success.

MAORI ELECTIONS An appeal to the Government by Mr. E. T. Tirikatene (Ind., Southern Maori), for an amendment of the electoral law providing for the conduct of Maori elections on the same basis as those for European members of Parliament, drew a promise from the Prime Minister, Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes, in the House yesterday to the effect that the question would be considered when an alteration of the law was contemplated. Mr. Tirikatene asked that Maori elections should be conducted with the same secrecy as European elections. He said the present system of election was unjust to the Native race in that it made no provision for a secret ballot, which had the effect of making elections extremely farcical.