WAS IT TOO MUCH?

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 52, 29 August 1925, Page 13

WAS IT TOO MUCH?

COST OF VESTEY COM-

MISSION

MEMBERS' CURIOSITY

PRIME MINISTER ANALYSES THE BILL. ' The amount set down on the Agriculture Department Estimates in respect to the cost of the Lysnar Commission aroused the curiosity of members of the House of Representatives last night. Opposition speakers contended that the Bill was altogether too high.

Regret that the Government should allow £35Q0 to be spent on the Vestey Commission was expressed by Mr. G. A. Lee (Auckland East). To make such a grant in order to permit certain individuals to speak for five or six days appeared to him to be a mistake, when the money could well liave been spent on something useful, such as experimental plots. It would have been better to do that than to make an allowance for the cleaning up of dirty linen.

Mr. E. A. Ransom (Pahiatua) agreed that the money had been absolutely wasted in whitewashing the Minister of Agriculture.

The Hon. Mr. Nosworthy: " I did not require' whitewashing." "It looked like it," replied Mr. Ransom. '-' It was nothing but a family quarrel on the Reform side of the House. One of the members had the audacity to criticise the Minister of Agriculture, and at once the Prime Minister demanded an inquiry so that the Minister might be whitewashed. If he had the ability to have the Depart' ment of Agriculture placed in his hands, surely he should not have had to be whitewashed. Any ordinary man would have been capable of dealing with it. . . . I feel it is a gross waste of public money." The Minister of Lands (the Hon. A. D. M'Leod) considered Mr. Ransom* remarks were entirely unfair. The question involved was whither the Meat Board was functioning in a direction beneficial to the producers. The Leader of the Labour Party (Mr. H. E. Holland) agreed that tefiorxa charges should be inquired into, but h« said one began to wonder when a Commission of such short duration coat £3500. He would like to have details of the bill. All that had been proved was that the statement's of the member for Gisborne were not correct.

"A PETTY FAMILY SQUABBLE"

'" We are getting to the stage now when we will have to set up a Royal Commission to investigate the cost ol Koyal Commissions," said Mr. Vv. A. Veitch (Wanganui). Parjjament Bhould deal with such questions itself, and members should be prepared to sit on recess committees so that Parliament might function properly. The sum involved was an appalling one. Although the Commission had been set up to in' vestigate charges made by Mr. Lysnar. it was not long before Mr. Lysnar himself had .been on trial. It had been merely a petty family squabble in tho Reform Party, and no one outside waa interested.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. G. VV. Forbes^ asked for details of tho 'vote of £3500, which he thought an extraordinarily large sum of money considering that the Commission had sat in Wellington.

The Minister of Agriculture (the lion. W. Nosworthy) said he had not the details of the cost yet. The amount had been set down in anticipation of what the inquiry would cost. The Commission was not in Wellington all the time, for it had had to sit also in Gisborne. It was not intended that the item should cover the expenses of the member for Gisborne, the bank, and the Meat Control Board. The vote was merely in anticipation of what the Government might have to pay in expenses. Mr. E. Masters (Stratford): "It may be more than is provided for?"

"I don't think it will be; it may be a good bit less," said the Minister.

Mr. Masters: "Who is paying tha expenses of the member for Gisborne?"

Mr. Nosworthy said he took it he would be paying them himself. The object .of the Commission was not ttf whitewash himself. He took upon himself the responsibility of setting up tha Commission to inquire into the charges made. The member for Gisborne drove him into setting up the Commission, and the late Prime Minister backed him up in his action. A FOREGONE CONCLUSION Mr. Masters said he was not satisfied with the Minister's reply. • He should have some knowledge of the detailed costs. They had the extraordinary position of the Government paying £3500 to defend itself against charjes made by a member of its own party. The Minister knew before ho started out that the result of the Commission would be that ho would be whitewashed. That was always the case with Commissions. The Government of the country was done by Commission. The latest Commission was in connection with agricultural banks, about which the Government should have had all the information available at its finger tips. Agricultural banks had boon in existence in other parts of the world for years, and the Government, if it had known its business, should have been satisfied about them. Mr. Noswortliy: " The lion, gentleman has been before the country for years, and lias not satisfied it yet. 1' ' " The hon. the Minister has been before the country for years, and everybody is satisfied about him," retorted the speaker. The Minister had actually set up a Commission to defend himself, for which he asked the people to pay £3500. As a protest Mr. Masters moved that the amount of'the item be reduced to £1000. FARCICAL PROCEEDINGS Mr. H. Atmore (Nelson) said the Minister should disabuse his mind that the charges were personal. The chairman of the Commission was not the gentleman sitting in the chair, but two counsel dictated the course of the proceedings, which were a farce. The member for Gisborne had foolishly allowed himself to be put on trial, and he had not received a fair hearing. It had 'been said by the Government that no trust would be allowed to entef the Dominion, and on that point Mr. Lysnar had proved his case, and should not have to pay his own expenses. It was right that members should protest»against the cost of the Commission. Because of a weak chairman, Mr. Lysnar had been put on trial for alleged inconsistency, and he was foolish not to have protested. Three (>f "1C strongest counsel wen' there fo defend the Government. The Government's policy on trusts had been reversed, and the House was entitled !.n an explanation. A fuin of £3500 was tuo large a sum to pass without further cx|>li! nation. The Tvinie Minister stated that the Crown was paying for the services of only ono counsel. Mi 1. Masters: "Where docs tho £3500 crrnio -in?" Ui x puiitu replied tliftt .Uip Cwasu*-

sion itself and the "paraphernalia" had to be paid for. (Laughter.) It was incorrect to Bay that the State was paying for all the counsel engaged. Mr. Coates thought it unfair to describe the chairman of the Commission as a weak man. Mr. Alexander was a man of high character, the president of the Auckland Law Society, and ha was admitted to be fair. Mr. Lysnar had not been badly advised, as his counsel was a very able lawyer. Whether anything would be done in connection with Mr. Lysnar's expenses he was not prepared to say, but it had to bo remembered that a public man should be careful in his statements. Regarding Vestey's license, it was not the issue of a new license that was in dispute,' merely a transfer. Mr. Coates concluded by saying that Mr. Lysnar had only read up to page 43 of the report so far.

Mr. P. Fraser (Wellington Central): "It's to be hpped he won't speak if it has taken him that long." (Laughter.) Resentment was expressed by Mr. F. F. Hockly (Rotorua) at Mr. Atmore's criticism of the chairman of the Commission. Mr. Atmore's remarks were unfair and unwarranted.

The only fault Mr. Veitch could find with the amendment was that it did not reduce the amount enough.. Ha thought it -should be cut down to £1000. The Minister should say what amount was going to counsel. What was the rate per day of the solicitor who defended the Government ?

Mr. Lee: -'The basic wage." (Laugh, ter.)

ENAMEL—NOT WHITEWASH

"No one can say that this is a whitewashing business," remarked Mr. A. L. Monteith (Wellington East). "Whitewash ia fairly cheap, and this was a costly business. I say that .the Minister might have put a little bit of enamel on it, You could whitewash the Minister quite a number of timed for half a-crown." (Laughter.)

"Was it eyewash?" asked Mr. Fraser.

Mr. Monteith: "There was a considerable amount of eyewash the morning I attended, at any rate." The Minister should say how the estimate of £3500 was arrived at.

The Prime Minister said the secretary of the Commission had supplied . him with certain information, which was approximate only. He was not able to give the legal fees, as the AttorneyGeneral had them, neither could he say what the accountants' fees would be. There were three commissioners, whose fees would work out at £8 8s a day each. The usual charge was £10 10s.

Mr. Monteith: "They could muddle along on that all right."

"Pardon me," replied Mr. Coates, "but it is not right for Parliament to go on in that way. The Commissioners are not here to defend themselves. Parliament has a certain amount of dignity."

Mr. Monteith: "I meant that they could exist on it."

Continuing, the Prime Minister said the chairman worked for 80 days from 8 o'clock in the morning until midnight on the average. His fee would be about £700;

Mr. Fraser: "Including overtime?"

Mr. Coates said it was expected that one commissioner would get £380 and another £412. There wero six reporters engaged at 31s 6d per day, plus overtime at 4s 6d an hour. Their fees would amount to about £500. The secretary's fees would come to about £260. The secretary thought the cost would come to a little over £3000 'all told. That did not include Mr. Atmore'a suggestion that Mr. Lysnar's expenses should be paid by the Government. Mr. Atmore said it was satisfactory to' know how unsatisfactory the' thing was. Had the fees been less than eight guineas a day, he presumed that the Commission would have been concluded much earlier. The chairman had shown undue deference to the opinions of counsel, who should have been subordinate to him. When the full figures were available It would be shown to be a most expensive Commission for the people of the Dominion to pay for. Mr. O. J. Hawken (Egmorit) declared that the principal ones concerned in the charge were the Meat Control Board, whose reputation was at stake. If in no other way, then, the Government had done a service to the farming community by setting up the Commission. He knew the Opposition felt annoyed that they could not tell the country that the Government had not been proved by one of their own supporters to support meat trusts. (Dissent.) ' The Hon. J. A. Hanan (Invercargill) said he had no doubt the people of the Dominion would express themselves very forcibly concerning the cost of the Commission. Members would not _ be doing their duty in passing the item without feeling they were justified in doing so. He suggested that the Government should make a clear breast of all the expenses, and let the people decide whether it was right or wrong. "I am sorry," said Mr. Coates, "but I have given all I can to-night. I couldntt give any more figures if I tried." He said ho would give them all wlion he had them.

After the matter had been thrashed out at greater length the division on Mr. Masters's amendment was taken at 12.30 a.m. The amendment was defeated by 27 votes to 21.