A DREAD DISEASE

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 35, 9 August 1930, Page 6

A DREAD DISEASE

MINERS' PHTHISIS

MEMBERS PROTEST

The contention that if the Government did not want to give effect to the favourable recommendations of the Mines Committee of the House of Representatives in respect of petitions from miners suffering from phthisis, it should oppose the petitions when they came beforo the Committee was made by tho Leader of the Labour Party (Mr. H. E. Holland) yesterday after-, noon, and, as a protest against all the recommendations of last year being turned down by Cabinet, he moved a reduction of £1 in the estimates of the Legislative Department.

Mr. Holland maintained that the Mines Committee had gone thoroughly into each case, and had made its recommendations on non-party lines. Everyono knew of the terrible sufferings of the miners who had contracted the disease, and ho was sure the whole House was in sympathy with the sufferers and wanted to do thoir best for them. It was difficult to understand tho attitude of tho Government on the matter.

Mr. "W. E. Parry (Labour, Auckland Central) said that the move by the Leader of tho Labour Party was a timely . protest against the way in which the recommendations of Committees generally had been treated by past Governments as well as the present. Parliament was the final appeal for those unfortunate miners who were stricken with phthisis and, as the petitions were always referred to the Mines Committee, it was only fair that the recommendations of tho Committee should bo act^ed upon. Ever since he had been in the House he had' been struck with the thorough and businesslike way in which the Committee had carried out the valuable functions allotted to them. Ho trusted that members of the House would show in no uncertain manner thoir resentment with the way they had been treated. He believed that' the House was almost unanimous on the question. MIGHT COST TOO MUCH. Mr. B. A. Wright (Reform, Wellington- Suburbs) said he held no brief- for the Government, but he pointed out that it might not always be possible for the Government to meet the expenditure ' involved in giving effect to the recommendations of Committees. It was possible that the recommendations would involve the expenditure of a very considerable amount of money. Mr. A. M. Samuel (Reform, Thames) endorsed the protest which had ,been made by the Leader of the Labour Party. Tho decisions of Cabinet would have been different if the petitioners had come beforo them personally. The Minister of Railways (tho Hon. W. A. Veitch) said the Government was not denying pensions to miners simply on the score of economy. No one could have anything but the greatest sympathy' for sufferers from the disease. If the Government adopted the policy of granting a compassionate allowance in all cases, they would very soon reach a very unsatisfactory position. There was only one way out of the difficulty, and that was to amend the law. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour, Auckland West) said he had never known a man who changed his views so quickly as the Minister of Railways. Last year, Mr. Veiteh had supported the recommendations of the Committee. The Prime Minister (the Hon. G. W. Forbes) said if all the recommendations of Committees last session had been given effect to tho cost to the Government would have been £2,850,000, which was much more than the Gov> ernment could afford. Ho suggested that the petitions should again be referred to the Committees for further consideration. Mr. G. C. Black (United, Motueka) supported th» , case made out by Mr. Holland. The Leader of the Labour Party said there was some hope in what Mr. Forbes had said, but none whatever in what Mr. Veiteh had said. Tho Labour Party was quite prepared to force the matter to a division, but that would not; be done if. Mr. Forbes gave a promise that, he would have the petitions reconsidered. . ■ ~ MB; FORBES COMPLIES. Mr. Forbes said he would be prepared to look into the question of referring the petitions back to the Mines. Committee. The Government was quite prepared to consider petitions as favourably as possible. . V Mr; F. Waite (Reform, Clutha) asked what was the.'use of the matter being referred back to the Mines Committee. They wanted to know what the Minister's views were. He would' like to see the question go to a vote,: even if only the Mines Committee voted for it. It was only a waste of time to refer the petitions back. . Mr. R. Semple (Labour, Wellington East) said that as soon as a miner developed the disease he was under a sentence of death.

The Minister of Bailways said that he took all the responsibility for the recommendations that were made to Cabinet. It was wrong to suppose, however, that he was not in sympathy with the miners, as it was on his recommendation that amendments had ben made to the law governing the working of the mines. Hs had not been governed by Departmental officers in his recommendations, but had taken the course he did as the result of his own judgment. Mr. Holland: "Docs that mean that the Minister will oppose the recommendations when they come up again?" Mr. Veiteh: "I am not a member or the Mines Committee." Mr. Holland: "You are a member of Cabinet.'' Mr. Veiteh: "I am not the Government." The amendment was lost ou tho voices.