"STONEWALL" ON FINANCE BILL

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 71, 25 March 1931, Page 9

"STONEWALL" ON FINANCE BILL

SHORT TITLE NOT YET PASSED

Labour's "sloncwall" on the Finance Bill, which gives effect to the. Government's wage-reducing policy,' has already assumed Maralhon-likc proportions without any inroads being made on the operative clauses of the Bill. The debate on the short title was resumed when the House of Representatives met at 2.30 o'clock yesterday afternoon, and it was still in progress when the breakfast adjournment was taken at 7 o'clock this morning.

The Leader of tho Labour Party (Mr. H. E. Holland) said that the Government, by reducing the subsidies to hospital boards, was going to compel the boards to cut down tho wages of nurses and attendants. If tho Government lived up to its promises in tho past it would be bringing down legislation to improve the wages and conditions of hospital employees. Mr. W. E. Parry (Labour, Auckland Central) dilated on this subject for some minutes, and it was also taken up by Mr. P. I'raser (Labour, Wcllinglun Central), who devoted a full tenjninulc speech to it.

"This c.l:iu.w 7," said -Mr. I'Vuscr, "is :i. must dangerous one for the Government. . •" • T"« Government will need all the nursing attention it can got in the country before the Bill fets through—all the nursing attention of the hospitals, the St. John Ambulance, and other such organisations. I am not sure that they will not need an undertaker, for it must be m the interests of health that an undertaker will bo required to inter the corpse of the Government/ Mr. Frasor wont on to chide the Government with remaining silent in face of the Labour Party's criticism. "There was in frequent use by membora on the Liberal benches years ago, no said, "a slogan, 'The strong, silent man. I admit the silence in the present case, but I am afraid it is not the .silence of strength, but of weakness, inefficiency, and ineptitude." At 3.45 p.m. the House was a very thin ouc. The Hon. W. Downie Stewart was the- solo guardian of tho official Opposition benches, while there wore only three Labour members present and seven members of the Government party. The United Tarty Whips wore caught napping, for Mr. W. J. Jordan (Labour, Manukau) was quick to draw attention to the state of the House, thus wasting a few minutes more time while the bells rang. BARE CUPBOARDS. "If the Bill goes through there will be a large number of Mother Hubbards with bare cupboards," said the Rev C. Can- (Labour, Timaru), 'and many-of the domestic dogs will go "mt^W E. Barnard (Labour, Napier) made a plea for the workers in the Hawkes Bay district. They had not only suffered material loss, but had also been subject to severe mental strain. Tho request that married Civil servants in Hawkes Bay should be exempt was a most reasonable one. Shortly after 4.30 p.m. the Labour members who had been carrying the talk on for the greater part oi the afternoon were reinforced by a batch of their colleagues, who had apparently been having a nap. The Leader of the Labour Party asked what effect the cuts would have on the price of our primary produce on the overseas markets. ' . "If the Prime Minister is going to b.alanco his Budget by means of this Bill" said Mr. F. Langstone (Labour, Waimarino), "then he is going to unbalance the budgets of thousands of people. If this is his method, the remedy will be worse than the disease. Later, when referring to the salary of the General Manager of Railways, Mr. Langstone said: "I don't blame the General Manager for taking £3500 a yoar. He knows a good thing when he sees one." Mr. G. C. Black (Independent, Motup,ka): "What will the Secretary of the Treasury have with his new jobs Mr. Langstone: "Some of them are holding dual positions, but I don t know whether they arc getting extra salaries or not." A POLITICAL GAME. Soon, after the resumption following dinner, the Leader of the Opposition (the Eight Hon. J. G. Coates) rose amid approving cries from tho Labour benches. . Mr. Coates remarked that the Prime Minister would agree with him that it, was about time they got on with the business, though the Bill required careful consideration. Mr. E. J. Howard (Labour, Christchurch South): "We are doing all we can." (Laughter.) . "We all know tho political game, retorted Mr. Coates, who conceded that the Labour members were doing well from their point of view, though perhaps the least said soonest mended. The Labour Party had failed to state reasons showing that the country's expenditure should not bo curtailed, and the Labour Party submitted no alternative except heavy increases in taxation. They must realise that' the country's spending power was down £20,000,000. "So where are wo going to get the money to keep up tho same rate of expenditure?" he asked. "Unemployment is increasing at a rate which is alarming to every thinking person." Mr. E. Se.rnple (Labour, Wellington East): "Will these cuts reduce it?" Mr. Coates: "That's the point. Can the Government maintain the volume of payment? Whan work is slackening off less business can bo done, and perhaps fewer men could do the job?" The Prime Minister (the Eight Hon. <J. W. Forbes) thanked Mr. Coates for the kind words, about getting on with tho business. Ho recognised the right of any section to make its protest, but haying done so it should permit the business to proceed. This was an emergency session, and the present proceedings were delaying the legislation relating to tho earthquake, the economic position of the farmers, and other matters. So he appealed to Labour members as reasonable men to allow tho business to go on. He had opposed the introduction' of the closure into the Standing Orders because he felt it sufficient to rely on the commonsense of members. Every day Parliament sat added to the expense.

Labour had made its protest clear to everyone in and out of Parliament. It had said much about hardship, and he was just as sympathetic as anyone. But as Minister of Finance he realised that if- those measures were not taken the only alternative

must be drastic retrenchment,

Mr. 0. H. Chapman (Labour, Wellington North) said he could sco nothing ia the Bill -which limited the reduction in respect to hospital boards to subsidy moneys for salaries only. Only that day he had been informed that the Wellington Hospital Board was to malcrs a reduction of 10 per cent, in charitable aid rations. The reduction to boards would be serious, and the. balance on expenditure jvould have to bo made tip from local rates. "This Bill is an illonwmed Bill so far as the Government i ' % -ccmcMed, "JThere is

every possibility Uiat the Government, which apparently is in despair, will not be permitted to carry on, and that others will step into tho breach." PLEA FOR LOWER-PAID MAN. Remarking that he did not wish to prolong the debate, Mr. J. S. Fletcher (Independent, Grey Lynn) asked if the Government was prepared to make no concession so far as the poorer people affected by tho cut were- concerned, especially the lower-paid married men. Ho appealed to the Prime Minister's Cabinet" colleagues, and to the Prime Minister himself, to reconsider that aspect, and he again suggested that tlio Government should make- up its revenue by means of an increased tax on liquor instead of imposing a nil. Mr. Fletcher also as!;eil if the railway | workshops apprentices wcrv \o be exempted from the Bill, iis well as apprentices who were affected by the Arbitration Court.

"We are prepared to exhaust the privileges of this House, and also to exhaust ourselves," said Mr. If.. Semple (Labour, Wellington East), "in registering our opposition to this, the most unfair, most inoquitablo document that has ever been introduced into the Parliament of this country."

It was at this stage that the Leader of the Opposition made certain suggestions (as reported elsewhere) to the Prime Minister for relieving hardship, and that Mr. Forbes intimated that he intended to provide for a hardship tribunal. •

"I would like to know what has happened behind the scenes," said Mr. E. J. Howard (Labour, Christchurch South), alluding to the speeches of Mr. Coates and Mr. Forbes as "a little byplay." "Either tho Leader' of the Opposition has now got to retreat or the.Loader of the Government has got to retreat, and I personally hope tho Leader of the Opposition will stand to his guns and stand by what ho has told us to-night. He and his party are responsible for the legislation now before the House. Having forced the Prime Minister to a certain point to bring down this legislation, it looks to me as if the Leader of the Opposition is now playing with the Prime Minister and treating him very lightly indeed. I knew we would catch them drifting, and I think •oii this occasion wo have got them all right."

Speaking at 11.30 p.m., Mr. T. D. Burnett (Beform, Temuka) said there was no doubt that New Zealand was facing a very serious crisis, brought about by causes over which they had no control. The House had to consider how it could help the Government to distribute the available money equitably, and it was a matter for regret that the Prime Minister had not taken tho people more into his confidence at an earlier stage.

Mr. H. Holland (Reform, Christchurch North) said tho Government was faced with the necessity of making cuts, or effecting retrenchment. "I believe a . small cut to be preferable to dismissals," said Mr. Holland, "and for that reason I must vote for the Bill against my own wishes."

Mr. Howard said that during the debate they had seen "a lot of whales weeping crocodile tears." (Laughter.) The debate was carried on steadily, but uninterestingly, by members of the Labour Party No. 2 team, which was holding the fort while tho No. 1 team was securing a measure of rest. Pour Ministers of the Crown, including the Prime Minister, were endeavouring tj secure some sleep on their benches. There was a diversion at 2.30 a.m., when Mr. J. O'Brien (Labour, Westland) declared very few of the Government members dared to oppose the Bill. Mr. Chapman, a fellow Labour member, raised a point of order, asking whether the word "dared" was in order. The Chairman of Committees said he would rule the word used in that connection was out of order. "When the gong, sir, sent me to my corner in the third round," said Mr. Semple at 3.40 a.m., "I was reading a letter from, a lady to the Government Statistician.." Mr. Semple followed Mr. O'Brien, and was nearly caught napping by the Chairman of Committees, who seemed very anxious to put through the short title. "Olf, Mr. Chairman, I am sorry, Sir, if I interrupted you as you were just going to put the question," said Mr. Howard, who followed Mr. Semple. AN AMENDED TITLE. The No. 1 team assembled at 3.5 a.m., and Mr. F. Langstone (Labour, Waimarino) introduced the first amendment to the short title of tho Bill. He moved that the word "finance" be deleted and substituted by the words "salary and wage reduction." "I want to bring this Bill beforo the House under a proper designation," said Mr. Langstone. "The words 'wages and salaries' are mentioned more than any other words in the Bill, and it is only right that they should appear in the title. It is only proper that anybody who wishes to refer to our legislative onactments should have h.j little troubl» as possible in finding wltat they require." Ho said that there were so many Finance Acts that another would only lead to confusion.

Members of the Labour Party continued to debate the virtues of the amendment, dwelling on the desirability of the Bill being given a title more in keeping with its object than that suggested by the Government. At 4 a.m. the Labour Party No. 1 team had left in search of sleep, and a House was being kept by Government members. One recumbent figure adorned the Beform benches. There wore seven stalwarts, all of the stroiiger sex, in the Public Galleries. At 4.50 a.m. the Minister of Education took over from the Prime Minister, who retired from the Chamber for a well-earned rest. "Ifc is an entire departure from hoary precedent to bring under the title of a Finance Bill a reduction in wages," said Mr. Carr. Mr. Barnard said that at the present time it was necessary to have the Statutes annotated. The Chairman: "I rule that out oh the grounds of tedious repetition.' Mr. Barnard said that he was speaking for the first time, and was endeavouring to show Mr. Chairman: "Order, order!" Mr. Barnard: "I abide by your ruling. ' '

Mr. W. Nash (Labour, Hutfc) also referred to the difficulty of referring to an Act that was designated a finance Act, but was ruled out on the grounds of tedious repetition.

Members fought wilb considerable difficulty against (he determined intention of the Chair man of Committees to restrict the debate ns far ;is possible. Ik order to overcome the difficulty Labour members resorted to