PARLIAMENT. THE OLD AGE PENSIONS BILL.

Evening Post, Volume LVI, Issue 76, 27 September 1898, Page 2

PARLIAMENT. THE OLD AGE PENSIONS BILL.

ANOTHER NIGHT WITH THE BILL MORE AMENDMENTS. "When the House of Represnlatives resumed at 7.30 last evening Mr. Guinness took the chair ou the Old Age Pensions Bill in Committee. Captain Russell immediately rose to a point of order. He submitted that the sitting of the House was not continued from midnight on Saturday, but that it was a fresh sitting, and the Speaker should therefore take the chair. IC' the sitting was a continuous one the Chairmau should have resinned the chair at 1 a.m. on Monday morning. The question was one of importance, and he suggested that the opinipn of tho Speaker should be taken ou the point. The Premier said he had expected this point to be raised, but submitted that as progress had not been reported on Saturday night the sitting was a continuous one. He was quite willing to liave the Speaker's opinion on the subject. After a little discussion on the point the Chairman explained his reasous for resuming the chair, and expressed his willingness to obtain the opinion of Mr. Speaker thereon. This course being agreed on, Mr. Speaker was called in, and upheld the ruling of the Chairman that the silting was a continuous one. On resuming consideration of the Bill, Captain Russell explained the attitude of the Opposition in connection with the stonewall of Saturday, pointing out that up to 2 a.m. SjnSaturday morning there had been no needle is opposition shown to the Bill, but when at ifat hour, with members worn out, physicajjy and mentally, the Premier insisted on going on, they felt it their duty to* prevent consideration of the Bill being proceeded with until members we»G\in ay fit state to give the Bill proper attention/ They considered it a grave danger to the State to attempt to deal with so important a measure under such conditions. They had been accused of wasting the time of the country. This was not so. What they had done was to sacrifice their own time. The House did not usually sit on Saturdays, but the Opposition, after a long and arduous week, bad devoted an extra day of their own to the interests of the country. Now they were rested and were quite prepared to go ou with the Bill. Their criticism would be full, but it would be fair, and he hoped it would receive the same consideration from all parts of the House. It was no use the Premier asking them to go on at unreasonable hours. They were prepared to work reasonably during reasonable hours, hut not after. The Premier said he had no objection to the Bill being critically examined, but objected to the time being taken up with second reading speeches. The remarks of members should be confined to the clauses under consideration. He accepted the assurance of the Leader of the Opposition that there was no intention of blocking the Bill, and also his assurance that there was a desire to proceed with the business of the country. Mr. Pirani thought the motives for the obstruction of the Opposition were good, but denied that the Left Wing had taken any part in the obstruction. He would point out that the Premier had " obstructed " as much as anyone, his record having been 40 speeches on the Bill. Sub-clause 2 of clause 8, dealing with the term of residence, was then passed. Sub-clause 3 was then considered. It read as follows :—": — " That during the period of 10 years immediately preceding such date he has not been imprisoned for four months, or on four occasions, for any offence punishable by imprisonment for 12 mouths or upwards, and dishonouring him in the public estimation." Mr. Buchanan moved to make the term 12 instead of 10 years. This was carried by 39 to 16. Mr. Montgomery moved to strike out the words " on four occasions," in order to insert them at the end of sub-clause. As the clause read, it provided that a person could receive a pension even if he had been imprisoned three times for serious offences. This amendment would prevent any person from receiving a pension who had been imprisoned for any offence pupishable by imprisonment for 12 months or upwards and dishonouring him in the public estimation. Also, any person who had been convicted on four occasions for any offence. The Premier objected to this. Any person who was imprisoned for any offence whatever on four occasions would be debarred from receiving a pension. Mr. Bollard pointed out that a man who had been sent to gaol on four occasions in 12 years for drunkenness could not get a pension if the amendment was carried. Other members pointed out 1 the many trivial offeuces a man might be imprisoned for and yet he deserving of a pension. Eventually the amendment was negatived by 29 votes to 25, although in a modified form the Premier had agreed to accept it. Mr. Moore moved to amend the clause so as to prevent any person who at any time had received a sentence of five years' imprisonment or upwards from receiving a pension. The Premier said he could not accept this. Mr. Smith expressed astonishment at this. A man who had been thrifty and saved £540 could not receive a pensiou, while one who had been sentenced to five years' imprisonment could. Was this what the Premier wanted ?. After some discussion Mr. Moore's amend'raeut was altered so as to provide that any person sentenced to five years' imprisonment " during the 25 years immediately preceding" his application for a pension could not receive one. As so amended it was agreed to on the voices. Sub-clause 3 was then' passed. Sub-clause 4 was then considered. It provided that no person could receive a pension if during the period of five years immediately preceding date of application claimant has for 12 months or upwards, if a husband, deserted his wife or without just cause failed to provide her with adequate means of maintenance, or neglected to maintain such of his children as were under the age of 14 ye?irs, or if a wife deserted her husband or such of her children as were under that age. Provided that if the pension certificate is granted no attempt can be made to upset it on the grounds above stated unless the proceedings are commenced within twelve months. A warm of amendments was immediately brought down. As the sub-clause finally emerged it provided that if a husband deserted his wife or failed to provide for the maintenance of his children (or if a wife acted in a similar manner) at any time for a period of six months he or she, as the case might be, could not receive a pension. The proviso was also altered so that in case of any person who had not complied with this condition obtaining a pension certificate it could be taken from him on tho fact of such disqualification being proved to the satibf action of a Stipendiary Magistrate. Sub-clause 4, as amended, was passed. Tho next sub-clause (5) made it necessary for a person to be of good moral character, and leading a sober and reputable life. Mr. O'Regan moved to strike out the words of good moral character. He could not see how good moral character could be ascertained. This was negatived by 45 to 10. Captain Russell moved to amend the subclaube so as to provide that the applicant must have been leadiug a sober and reputable life for five years preceding his date 1 of application.

This was agreed to on the voices and the sub-clause passed. Sub-clause G, providing that no person should receive a pension whose yearly income with his pension amounted to more than £52 a year, provoked discussion, some members expressing the opinion that this limitation should be reduced, so that no person could receive, with the pension, more than £26 a year. Mr. Sligo moved this amendment with tljp object of reducing the number of pensioners, aud so enabling the Premier to increase the amount oE tho pension without increasing the total cost. On division the amendment was negatived by 31 to 26, and the sub-clause passed. At sab-clause 7, providing that no person holding more than £540 worth of accumulated capital shall reoeive a pension, the Premier stated that with the object of facilitating the passing of the Bill he would move to reduce this amount by one-half. Captain Russell now (1.10 a.m.) suggested that as this was a very debatable matter the adjournment should now be taken. The Premier urged that this sub-clause should be passed. He would adjourn at 2 o'clock. Eventually it was agreed to strike out the word five (from the words five hundred and forty, leaving the actual amount for further consideration), and this being done, progress was reported, and the House rose at 1.20 a.m.