“LIABLE TO ABUSE”

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 255, 24 July 1936, Page 12

“LIABLE TO ABUSE”

Allowances to Travelling Legislators OBJECTION TO CLAUSE Criticism of a clause in the Finance Bill providing for the payment of travelling expenses and allowances to a member of Parliament travelling on public service in New Zealand at the request of a Minister of the Crown, was made by Mr. W. A. Bodkin tOpposition, Otago Central) during the second reading debate on the measure in the House of Representatives last night.

Mr. Bodkin described members of Parliament as the poorest paid individuals in the service of the State in New Zealand, but said he was not prepared to vote for the clause as it appeared in the Bill. It was liable to abuse in its present form, although he was satisfied that the Minister of Finance would not have introduced it if he believed that there was any likelihood of anything of the kind. But the danger was there. No doubt many members of Parliament would be making the journey to assist in the campaign for the Manukau seat, which would be rendered vacant by the resignation of Mr.-Jordan. Did the clause give authority for the payment of their travelling expenses on such a mission? he asked. 1 Government members: No, no. Mr. Bodkin: It gives authority, but I do not think the present Minister of Finance or the Prime Minister would permit its abuse. Voices: Why mention it, then?

Mr. Bodkin: Because I am prepared to vote for it if I have an assurance that it will not be abused. It is so wide that it can be abused. Mr. A. S. Richards (Government, Roskill): Say what is in your mind.

The Minister of Finance, Hon. W. Nash: The clause states specifically that the travelling expenses can only be paid to members on public business. Mr. Bodkin: If a political party is sincere that the policy it is advocating is in the best interests of the public of New Zealand, this clause is sufficiently wide to include the danger I have mentioned. Mr. Bodkin added that if the clause could be tightened up sufficiently so that it could not be possible for a member to travel for party purposes, he would support it. Mr. Nash: Read the clause. It is specific that members can only receive expenses if travelling at the request of a Minister and on public business. Mr. W. J. Lyon (Government, Waitemata), who followed Mr. Bodkin in the debate, said the object of the clause was to make for greater efficiency in the administration of the affairs of the Dominion by giving a Minister some relief from the ordinary schedule of duties when he could be much better engaged on business ot State elsewhere. He was sorry the Standing Orders would not allow him to say what he thought about Mr. Bodkin’s suggestion that a Minister might send an M.P. to Manukau to assist a candidate in the by-election campaign.

“I wonder if Ministers of the late Government who took part in the Motueka campaign drew Ministerial expenses,” asked Mr. Lyon. “I wonder if the memory of that has suggested to the member of Otago Central that the Labour Government might retaliate in kind. That is not a method the Labour Government proposes to imitate during its term of office.”