PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 129, 27 November 1909, Page 9

PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

RAILWAY SERVANTS. The House of Representatives spent a considerable portion of the afternoon yesterday in discussing an amendment moved by Mr. A. E. Glover in regard to the report of the Petitions Committee on tho claim of Mr. R. H. Hanson, of Auckland, for compensation for services rendered while in the employ of the Railway Department. The committee had no recommendation to make, and Mr. Glover moved that the petition be referred back to the committee. The member for Auckland Central explained that the petitioner had v been for twentyfour years in the service. Some years ago he met with an Accident at Frankton Junction, which led to the amputation of an arm. Later, while on duty in charge of a railway crossing, he was knocked down by a train in an heroic endeavour to save the lives of two people. The result was that he had been manned for life. The Government had granted him the sum of £300 as compensation, but (his had largely been spent in payment of doctor's fees. It was therefore desired that the Government should grant him a compassionate allowance. The Minister for Railways (the Hon. J. A. Millar) said he hoped the amendment would not be accepted. He resented the suggestion that a receipt had been held over the injured man's head in regard to the grant of £300 in full satisfaction of his claims. The Government was at present paying tho sum of £25,000 per year into the Railway Superannuation Fund, and if that land of thing was going to continue ha would ask the House to wipe .the system right out. The Railway Department had treated every man fairly, and if the depprtment was Jo be turned into a charitable institution* the sooner everybody knew it the better. It was evidently not tinderstood that this man had received the maximum amount payable to him by law. If he had gone to the courts he could not have got more. Mr. Buick, as a member of the Railways Committee, said he did not think there was the least use in sending the petition back to. the committee. Some of the members who had spoken knew less about the circumstances" than might appear to be the case. A Compassionate Allowance Committee should be set up in the House to consider the question, as no other committee could recommend more than fair play to both sides. Mr. T. E. Taylor, while agreeing that the committee could not have brought in any other report, 'urged that where a man was injured on duty, and his body shattered, he "should receive mor» than £300. He thought the law should be amended so that there might be a much higher maximum. When it was considered how cheaply lives, or at least some lives, were held, he almost shuddered with amazement, especially when he thought of the waste of public money, such as the expenditure of £10,000 on a new road leading to the Governor's residence. They were, he contended, living up to a standard that was false and artificial. The amendment moved by Mr. Glover to refer the matter back to the committee for further consideration, was carried. SENT TO COMMITTEES. The Shops and Offices Bill and the Factories Act Aniendment Bill were read a second time pro forma, and referred to the Labour Bills Com- ; mittee. The same course was adopted with respect to the Coal Mines Amendment Bill and the Mining Amendment Bill, which were referred to the Goldfield and Mines Committee. STATE GUARANTEED ADVANCES BILL. The Prime Minister moved to recommit the State Guaranteed Advances Bill for the purpose- of reconsidering clause 72, which was amended the previous evening, on the motion of Mr. Sidey, iv the direction of taking the control of local bodies' sinking tunds out of the hands of this Public Trustee (as provided by the Loans to Local Bodies Act) except in cases where the loans are guaranteed by the State. Mr. Herries, speaking to the motion-, said no doubt the Premier hoped to secure a catch vote, and reverse the decision arrived at on Mr. Sidey's motion. This, he_ submitted, was quite unfair. Mr. Sidey said the principle -of his amendment had been endorsed by the House on two previous occasions this session, and he regretted that Sir Joseph Ward had not seen -his way to • accept the amendment. He (Mr. Sidey) admitted that, some local bodies had received great assistance from the Government, but the Dunedin City Council was not one of these. Mr. Buchanan — as Mr. Herries did — objected to the Order Paper being interfered with in the way the Premier had done. It was not fair to members of the House, who depended upon 'the Order Paper. After Mr. Allen had added his protest, Mr. Malcolm moved as an amendment, by ivay of addition to the Premier's motion, that clause 68 should also be recommitted. Considerable discussion endued. Mr. Herdman contended that people compos ing local bodies were generally of sufficient business calibre' to deal with their own sinking funds, and he suggested that the desire of the Government was to so shape the law that it would be able to get the Public .Trustee to invest all sinking funds in Government deben- j tures. It appeared that the Govern- i ment had taken such large borrowing powers that it had to resort to these means to ensure the raising of sufficient money for its purposes. Mr. Malcolm's proposal to recommit clause 68 was lost by 34 votes to 22. The original motion, to recommit clause 72, was not further debated, but the Prime Minister had a few words to say. He characterised the afternoon's discussion as an attempt to delay proceedings — (Mr. Allen : That is not so) — members of the Opposition being under the impression *that some members were leaving for the South that evening. Tho proposal to recommit was. he urged, quite in accordance with the usual procedure, and he had, before the House met, indicated his intention of so doing. As to the proposals in the Bill, he pointed out that tho amount of the sinking funds was used for further loans to local bodies, and any who voted against the proposals in the Bill were taking action which would reduce the amount available for local bodies' loans. Local security of past loans was not affected in any way. The provisions in the Bill only applied to future loans. He urged that it was better for the zateoayers to«have sinking funds investod in an undoubted security than for a local body of commissioners to invest the money in any way it thought propsr. The proposal that had been made was merely made on behalf of the four centres. No security was so good as Government stock, backed up, as it •was, by the whole of the Dominion. No recognition was made of the value of the loans to local bodies, but instead, an effort, was made to conserve the interests of a few people who received a twopenny-halfpenny commission on sinking funds invested. The Governjnent was preparing to lend a lot more than half a million a year to local todies, and in return the charge was made that it desired to obtain for its

own purposes the sinking funds resulting from the lending of such moneys. The motion to recommit the Bill was carried by 31 votes to 26, and tho House then went into Committee on the Bill. The Prime Minister moved to restore the clause to its original position, before it was amended on Mr. Sidey's motion the previous night. Replying to previous remarks by the Premier, Mr. Herries said members would do well to bear in mind that the local bodies had not received pny moneys by way of loaa from the Public Trustee. Mr. Sidey suggested that the Prime Minister should compromise by agreeing to exempt the larger local bodies from this clause, and so relieve them of a position which they felt to be vexatious. Mr. Baume objected to tho principle of partial legislation. If the thing was wrong, it was wrong right^ through. Mr. Fisher said that in' many cases Sinking Fund Commissioners made their investments with the Public Trustee. He pointed out that there would in many cases be a saving oi expenses and charges by investing with the Public Trustee. Mr. Sidey had said the Dunedin commissioners had got as high a return as 8 per cent, on their investments, but this high rate showed that- the security was not of a dass that sinking ; funds should bo invested in. The whole position had been misunderstood by the local bodies from the beginning. The then Mayor of Wellington had sent a telegram inviting the chief local bodies to join with Wellington in protesting against a Bill they had never seen. A Member : Yo» have let the cat out of tho bag. i Mr. Laurenson said that in a Southern city one of the Sinking Fund Commissioners was chairmavt of the City Council's Finance Committee. Mr. Fisher said it was the same in Wellington. Mr. Luke said that at the end of last financial year the Wellington City Council had set aside a sum of £156,033 by_ way of sinking fund, and he gave details of the way in which it was invested and the rate of interest yielded, which was up to 5£ Del cenu on mortgage security. There was not a bad security in any of the City Council or Harbour Board investments. He did not believe in curtailing the powers of local government. The division again resulted in a victory for Mr. Sidey by 2 votes, the clause as amended on his motion the previous night being retained by 27 votes to 25. The division list was as follows : — For the motion (25) : Buddo. Carroll, Colvin, Davey, Dillon. T. Duncan, Ell, Fisher, Fowlds, Graham, Hcgan, Hogg, Laurenson, Lawry, R. M'Kenzie. Millar, Parala, Poland, Reed, Ross, Smith, Stallworthy, Ward; Witty, Wright. Against the motion (27) : Allen, Anderson, Arnold, Baume, Bollard, Buchanan, Buick, Buxton, Dive, Glover, I Guthrie, Hardy, Herdman, Herries, Hine, Luke, M'Laren, Malcolm, Mander, Newman, Nosworthy, Okey, Phillips, Poole, Scott, Sidey, G. M. Thomson. Consideration of the report was postponed until next sitting day. HOSPITALS AND CHARITABLE AID. On the motion of the Hon. G. Fowlds, the Hospitals and Charitable Institutions Bill was recommitted for the purpose of adding new clauses relating to the Ashburton Old Men's Home, so as to put into the measure the result of an arrangement arrived at between representatives of the Christchurch Hospital Board and the Ashburton Hospital Board. The amendments were agreed to, and the Bill finally passed its committee stage. LAND AND FINANCE. The Prime Minister moved the second reading of the Land Settlement Finance Bill, which is designed to enable persons desirous of taking up land to do so under terms laid down by the conditions imposed by the Bill, so as to get the guarantee of the State. In speaking to the Bill, the Prime Minister, addressing a "thin" House at j.1.30 p.m., said the object of the Bill was to assist, by the advantage of a State guarantee, those who were not in a financial oosition sufficient to warrant them in purchasing land in the open market. The procedure under the Bill would enable full publicity to be given to proposed transactions. He believed it would tend to subdivision of estates and settlement of land held by private persons. Provision was made for payment of the principal cost periodically. The State guarantee diminished year by year as the land was developed, until ifc reached almost a vanishing point The Bill did not suggest that any loan money should be raised, but it made provision for the grouping of the interests of all parties concerned. It would make available for settlement a large area that could be cut up into freehold farms ; in fact, it afforded the easiest system possible of acquiring the freehold to those who desired that form of tenure. There were some ten million acres available for utilisation under the terms of the Bill, and there was no chance of an owner being enabled to dispose of 'his land at a price beyond its proper selling value. Something less than thirty members (out of a House consisting of eighty) were present while Sir Joseph Ward' developed the details of tho Bill, the main principles of "which have" already been explained. The point of the proposal, he explained, was that it would enable the individual settler .to obtain land without harassment. Jt was calculated that under the proposed provisions some" 30,000 acres, valued afc £1500 an acre, would be settled, and that 200 new holdings would be created apart from tho ordinary land settlement policy of the Government. The principle was that it. enabled land owned by private persons to be taken ud by people who wanted to go on the "land and who did not possess the necessary capital, and he looked forward to a big development of land settlement under the provisions of the measure proposed. Mr. Jameo Allen thought there was real need for, the measure, but thought that the only opposition would como from those who were absolutely addicted to the leasehold principle. The Bill provided for the sale of large freeholds and for smalL settlements, with the assiitanco of the" State. The only difficulty was for the purchasers to agree, together as to the terms, and then to persuade the owner as to their ideas, A good point was that the Bill provided for legitimate settlement, with the aspect of speculation eliminated. He hoped the Prime Minister would have no difficulty in regard to the Bill, but the success of the measure would greatly depend on its administration. If administered fairly and justly, he believed it would be a great success. The danger would be that transactions might be influenced by political considerations. At twenty minutes past midnight there were eighteen members in the House, and Mr. Buchanan had a few ■words of caution to address to those present. He did not want members to be too optimistic. A great deal depended on the quality of the land and its situation, and also on the quality of the settler. Mr. Davey would not support the Bill, on the ground that it would not .■be productive of any useful degree of land settlement. He believed that the Bill as a whole was impossible, and that it could not possibly bo a success. The •whole of the conditions Ja-id down by the Bill were such that whilst the Government guaranteed the purchase price of the land the settler would have to pay some 7 or 8 per cent, on the value

of tho land before he entered into occupation. If the State had sufficient money to buy land for closer settlement, the Dominion as a whole should participate in the resulting benefits. But under the Bill they said that if the tenant could not pay the State would, and After three years speculation would be the easiest thing in the world. He asked members to 'ook at the Bill carefully. He could call it nothing but an absurdity. Mr. W. Fraser said Mr. Davey wotild j have approved of tho Bill if jt had been ' proposed to buy land and. dispose of it on leasehold. Mr. Davey admitted that this was so. He wanted to give everyone a chance — not a mere association. Several clauses of the Bill .vould require to be carefully considered when the measure was under committee. Mr. H. G. Ell thought the Bill would create many difficulties. The taxpayers money should not be ased to purchase land for private individuals. The land should be leased. Mr. Hogan warmly approved the Bil'. The measure simply means converting large freeholds into small freeholds — not converting leasehold into freehold. The debate was continued with an average attendance of about fifteen (out of a House of eighty). Mr. G. Witty condemned the Bill because it was too cumbersome, and because there was nothing in it. They would not, he argued, get people interested in such ventures as were proposed to take up the land. The Bill should have gone to a committee. In its present ehapo it was cumbersome, and would never Toe -practicable. In replying, just before 2 a.m.. the Prime Minister pointed out that inmost cases, when land was up at the ballot, the claims were .greatly m excess of the supply. The Government could not possibly meet that demand, and it was surely a reasonable thing to assist people of small means to obtain land from private owners. The Bill was intended to finance people to get on to costly land in small areas. There were thousands of people who would be only 100 glad to get on to the. land under jjhe conditions imposed by the Bill. At present there were more estates offered to the Government for acquisition than they could possibly look at. In most cases the value was too high. The Government hid a few hundred thousands of 'acres under offer during the past year. That sort of thing had gone on ever since the Act came into operation. The second reading was carried by 35 votes to 4 (Messrs. Laurenson, "Ell, Witty, and Davey). The House rose at 2.35 a.m.