THE WAGE REDUCTIONS

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 67, 20 March 1931, Page 7

THE WAGE REDUCTIONS

STILL UNDER DISCUSSION

The debate on the second n effect to the wage-reducing polic tinued in the House of Represeni had been reached when the Hou: afternoon. An effort by Captaii Party, Bay of Islands) to mov< of the wheat duties was unsucc but by Mr. Speaker, but aj Labour benches suggesting a V, debate shows no signs of concludi

Mr. \V. J. Poison (Independent, Stratford) said that New Zcaiand consumed only 15 per cent, of her butter- and cheese, 40 per cent, of her moat, and only o per cent, of her wool. It was clear that prices must be governed by export parity, and recovery depended entirely on getting production, down in order to increase exports. Farms ■were beginning to go out of production already in the Dominion, and more •would go out unless costs were cut down Another serious aspect was the drop in the percentage of fertilisers used at present as compared ivith normal years, and the speaker considered that * the Government should arrange for tho farmers to be financed in order that they could buy fertilisers. The only reduction which could take place was in internal expenditure, and if that was reduced in an equitable way no one could complain. The farmer had already suffered, and so had the business man. The Civil servant wns in a better position, iv Now Zealand than he was in Australia. Furthermore, he was sheltered and ho had a pension when he retired. It was clear that in those circumstances ho was not being asked to make an undue sacrifice when called upon to bear a 10 per cent. cut. Other sections of the community were much worse off. Living costs had already fallen about 10 per cent, and would fall further after the wage reductions. According to the Economics Department of the Canterbury Univer sity College, wages made up 60 per cent, of; the production costs in New Zealand.

The proposals of the Government did not go far enough. There should be a review of the taxation system in order that the standard of living could be maintained, or even improved. Until a survey was made from this angle there was bound to be dissatisfaction. TOO MANY MOTOR-CARS. Mr. C. H. Cliukard (United, EotoTua) said that the Labour Party did not have a monopoly of the labour representation in the House. It was most desirable that a high standard of living should be maintained, but could it be maintained from a shrinking incomo? It was not humanly possible to give out in lean times the same benefits that were given out in prosperous periods. Thus in the caso of the Civil Service it was a question of curtailing employment or reducing wages, and the last thing they wanted to do was to discharge men.

The speaker advocated the stoppage of the importation of motort'ars for two years. There wore too many motor-pars in the country and too much being spent on petrol. The prohibition of importation might decrease the Customs revenue, but more mon would be given employment repairing the old machines. tt was better to reduce wages in order that all might obtain employment rather than worry whether the man in a job was getting enough while thousands were out o£ work. Increased wages did not mean increased consumption of our own productions, but rather increased consumption of luxuries. Mr. H. T. Armstrong (Labour, Christchurch East) said that Mr. Poison had Raid that the Labour Party would get the farmers nowhere, but the advieo of ilr. Poison and his friends had led them somewhere—many) farmers were verging on bankruptcy. The Bill had been framed for the purpose of making the poor people poorer in order that the rich might becomo richer. It was tho most drastic piece of legislation that had been brought before the House, and was giving to the Arbitration Court powers it had never had before. THE R3AL TROUBLE. Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Independent, Gisborne) said that no effort had yet been mado to deal with the main causes of the. situation. , The cutting of %vagcs was a small matter. Tho real trouble jfcras that the farmers were not organised, whereas the people who bought ijheir produce, were. . The trusts wore forcing the prices down. Tho Meat Board was not regulating the supply of the Home market, and unless the position was understood it would be worse next year. The past and present Governments were allowing trusts to operate. The Meat Board had been a jSrce since the day it was established ' and had aided the trusts and not the producers. Mr. B. Semple (Labour, Wellington Bast) said that tho Labour Party appreciated the task for the Government which was involved in a world-wide problem, but the difficulties could have been minimised. Instead, however, they had been aggravated. The world today was chock full of goods, the banks were chock full of money, but millions of people were starving. Such a position was a grave indictment of tho present commercial system. One of the factors contributing to the situation was the burden of war debts, and leading economists to-day were rightly advocating their cancellation. One of the difficulties of the present day was the monopolising of the world's credits. The banks exerted a tremendous and detrimental influence on international finance. There was a group of financiers trying to corner tho world's wealth, and as a result millions were suffering. There was more penury and want in the world to-day than ever before, and it made one think that civilisation might be in the melting pot. The Government was only tinkering with the question. We had lost ground in some of the markets of the, world, and the Government was now going to cripple the spending power of tho workers. It was the duty of tho Government to formulate a constructive policy which would develop the country's resources. NOT RADICAL ENOUGH. Captain H. M. Eushworth (Country Party, Bay of Islands) contradicted the statement of the Minister of Native Affairs that no one had predicted the present conditions in the Dominion, and declared that he personally had repeatedly endeavoured to call attention to the very stato of affairs that had now jirißcn. Ho quoted extracts from his speeches in "Hansard" to support his statement, and said he "did not blame the Government for not having taken notice of the opinions of an Independent member, but it had been distressfijg to see time being frittered away ■&ith nothing being done to nounfenirt ■Whirf was coming. The Bill lirfore tin:

MINISTERS ENTER THE FRAY

reading of the Finance Bill, giving ;y of the Government, was conitatives yesterday, and no finality ise adjourned at midnight until this in H. M. Rushworth (Country re an amendment on ihe subject ;essiul, as the amendment was ruled in amendment moved from the ;ax on incomes was accepted. The ling. - ■ House, in his opinion, did not go anywhere near dealing with the great problem facing the country. J.ts provisions might or might not provide a -iialliativ'e for the moment, but as surely as ; night followed day, if the present trend of events continued, it would not provide a solution. Something far more radical would have to be done.

I think the Minister of Native Affairs knew something, lie said, when he suggested that this is not the end of the trouble. I wish the Minister would take a larger part than he appears to be prepared to do at the present time in the councils of the Cabinet. I think it would be of great benefit to the country if he would do so. AN AMENDMENT FEUSTEATED. Tho speaker then announced that he proposed to move an amendment to the motion before the House —that certain words be added. " Mr. Speaker: "The hon. member will not be in order in moving an amendment." Captain Rushworth: "I submit to the ruling. The -motion is that tho Bill be read <i second time. I wish to amend that by adding certain words."

"It is not part of my province to point out how the hon. member may move his amendment," said Mr. Speaker, "but no words can be added to the words of tho motion. If he simply proposes to add words to the motion he will not be in order."

Captain Eushworth: "Well, I will move it straight out." Mr. Speaker:"! am .afraid that won't help you. If it is the wish of the House, I will allow the hon. member to indicate his amendment."

Captain Eushworth: "What I wish to move is "

But notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Bill, the provisions of this Bill shall not be pixt into effect until one calendar month after the import duties on flour and wheat -have been removed or reduced by at least 25 per cent. Mr. Speaker: "The amendment as it stands is certainly not in order, I will take the wish of the House as to whether I should advise the hon. member how to put it or not. Is there any objection?" . , Mr. P. Fraser (Labour, Wellington Central): "I object."

Mr. Speaker: "I am afraid I cannot advise him how to put the amendment. No words can be added, but there are other ways of proceeding." Captain Eushworth said ho regretted his inexperience, and added that ho would consider whether it was possible to move the amendment later. ' EXTRAVAGANCE ALLEGED. Mr. H. S. S. Kyle (Eeform, Riecarton) said it was an extraordinary thing that a Government widen was _ endeavouring to bring about economies was still spending an extravagant amount on the construction of railways and paying 14s per day on relief w&rks.

The Government could also reduce the number of Ministers of the Crown, as had been done in some of the Australian States, and there was further room for reductions in the staff of the High Cammissioner's Office.

The Prime Minister had stated that further taxation would have to be levied, but it was doubtful whether it could, be paid. The j proposed cuts would hit the lower i paid Civil servants very hard, and many would have great difficulty in carrying on. The speaker hoped that I when the Arbitration Court revised awards it would cut out some of the conditions attaching to awards. It was not so much the wages but the conditions embodied in awards that were affecting industry. NEW LABOUR AMENDMENT. Mr. Wi J. Jordan (Lab., Manukau) moved the following amendment: — This House declines to give a second reading to a Bill -widen fails to meet the Dominion's financial obligations by means of a graded system of payment by citizens in accordance with their ability to pay. Mr. Jordan said no effort was being made to place the burden of the country's financial difficulties on the shoulders of those best able to boar it. A reduction of wages and a reduction in the coat of living would mean that less money would be used, and there would be a lowering of the standard of values. If they went on in that way, they would reach the stage when they would be producing for nothing and getting nothing in wages. Mr. Jordan dealt at length with the question of petrol duties, and referred to the large revenue which could be derived from an increased tax. At present a huge sum of money waa being made out of the importation of petrol. Passing on to j deal with the depression, Mr. Jordan said that all that the people wanted was a feeling of security. They were suffering from, under-consumption, and it seemed an extraordinary thing that the world was so poor because it had too much.

Seconding the amendment, Mr. H. G. E. Mason (Labour, Auckland Suburbs) said that it should not be difficult to provide against the possibility of depression occurring in New Zealand. Ho believed wo could regulate our currency irrespective of what was happening in London. He did not see why everything should bo measured by exchange on London. We would never do anything for ourselves so long as we depended on London exchange rates. He knew of no reason why interest rates should not be put on an index figure in the same way as wages. POLICY OF DRIFT. Mr. A. W. Hall (Eeform, Hauraki) said the Prime Minister's second reading speech was pessimistic and gloomy, nnd had obviously been prepared by departmental officers. The Government did not seem capable of realising the seriousness of a position until it was right ,on them. It had brought the crisis on itself by a policy of drift. The members of the Cabinet did not appear to be very enthusiastic about tho proposals contained in the Bill, and he waa not at all sure that they were unanimous. He was one of those who thought that tho 10 per cent, cut was not equitablo, and that anybody receiving under £200 a year should be exempt. Parliament should not bo c.illed upon to fix t.hn salaries of Civil servants, hufc the whole matter should be referred to an in dependent tribunal. The Labour Party was protesting against reductions in uwnrd rates, but. wages tmtsido the