DEFENCE SYSTEM

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 74, 24 September 1927, Page 7

DEFENCE SYSTEM

CAMP TRAINING

PAYMENT Of WAGES

QUESTION IN HOUSE

- Several questions concerning the administration of the Defence Act were raised in the House of Kepresentatives last night.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. H. E. Holland) asked if the Minister had had brought under his notice the case of a young divinity student in Auckland, the son of a Presbyterian "clergyman, "who had been prosecuted twice for failing to attend drill. The boy was of a most exemplary character, a hard working student, and a credit to the family to which he belonged. When Dr. Mott came to this country the boy came under his influence, and aa a result he decided that it was against his religious, beliefs to have anything to do with militarism. As a result the boy was fined first £1 and then £10. On the second occasion the Magistrate who heard the case made an extraordinary statement. "Give him a job cleaning latrines, or something like that," the Magistrate had said. "He is only a humbug!" That language was more suitable for the gutter, and it was such that a resolution of both Houses with respect to the conduct of the Magistrate would be justified. Mr. Holland said that it would be quite a fair thing and in the best interests of the country if the boy, were granted exemption. Mr. Holland asked what the position would be if the boy did not pay his fines.. Would' he be thrown into prison? If that was done it would not be to the credit of the country.

Mr. J. A. Lee (Auckland East) supported the statement of Mr. Holland. He did not see why a man who opposed military training should be regarded as a humbug. There was no doubt, he thought, about the sincerity of the boy referred to. Magistrates might administer the law with less harshness than had been shown by recent happenings in Auckland. The Minister 'of Defence would probably not believe that the Labour Party were humbugs over their attitude to military-service, as tha members of the party were sincere in the views they expressed. PAYMENT OF TERRITORIALS. Mr. W. J. Girling (Wairau) asked the Minister whether he did not think that the Defence Department should compensate employers for having to pay the wages of men who had to attend camps. There seemed to be an anomaly in the pay of the Director of Air"' Services, who received • less thau certain officers serving under him. Mr. J. M'Combs (Lyttelton) hoped the Minister would not accede to the agitation being raised by the employers in regard to the wages of men undergoing training. Some section of the community should bear the burden. The apprentices should receive their wages, and it would.be only fair if the j burden were thrown on the community. The Employers' Federation could get over the difficulty by joining with tho Presbyterian Church and the Labour Party in seeking to end conscription. Mr. T. Forsyth (Wellington East) considered that tho expenditure of £4000 on the branch of the Defence Department disposing of surplus stores was excessive.

The Leader of the Opposition said that -while the employers had a grievance, there were boys who had a greater grievance. He knew of cases where boys earning £3 a week received only 4s a day in camp because the employers did not have to pay their wages when they were in camp. The fairer way would be to charge the whole,cost againat the community by way of taxation. MINISTER'S REPLY. The Minister of Defence (the Hon. F. J. Bolleston) stated that he was inquiring into the Auckland case. In regard to the payment of wages, tho position was difficult. Territorials in camp did not have to pay board and lodging. He believed that in tho majority of cases tho employers paid wages to the men in camp and allowed the men to regard the 4s paid by the Defence Department as so much pocket money. The Department could not differentiate between cases where wages had or had not to ho paid, and could only treat all alike by paying 4s a day. It was a matter for tiie Arbitration Court to decide, and the Government could not be expected to dictate to the Court as to what it should do. The point raised by Mr. Girling in reference to flying officers' pay.was answered by the fact that men who did actual flying- duty received more than those at headquarters, who did no flying. The Department was investigating the position regarding the sale of surplus stores to see if some more economical system could not bo devised.