LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 72, 26 March 1931, Page 15

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY

The Legislative Council met at 2.30 p.m. to-day. The debate 011 the Address-in-Eeply was resumed' by the Hon. R. H. Jl'lntyre, who stressed the greater extent of the Napier earthquake as compared with Hint of the West Coast. Dealing with the Napier ruins, he said that some of the architects were fortunate that they were not in the dock for manslaughter. It had been clearly shown that many people had been killed by "icing sugar," ornaments, and future buildings, while there was no reason why they should not be attractive, should be so built that people could live through an earthquake in them. Napier had proved that artificial harbours were expensive, and it might be better if its produce were railed to Wellington. "The Government should look into the safety of buildings in Wellington with regard to an earthquake. Such buildings as experience ,has proved cause loss of life in earthquakes should be removed, immediately," said Mr. M'lntyre. "Unless the Government is going to lake steps to.reduce the cost of living,] instead of leaving it to Providence, I shall be opposed to the reductions of wages proposed. Unless the Government acts, there will be an industrial upheaval which, following two earthquakes and a fall in produce prices, it will tnke the country years to recover from." If the workers were much further reduced, they would become desperate. He congratulated the Hon. Sir Francis Bell, who had dared to be a Daniel (laughter) and stand alone. It was rare to find one of the experience of Sir Francis Bell and holding his views, one who was recognised as one of the few New Zealand statesmen, becoming what might be called an extremist in expressing the views lie had. Nobody would doubt the sincerity of his opinions nevertheless. Mr. Mass'ey had had grave doubts as to the success of the 19 per cent. cut. He got the money, but was the result satisfactory? They should endeavour to find other sources of .'revenue. They could save £35,000 by deferring the Prohibition referendum for three years. The Dominion could not afford to carry Prohibition at present. The Government would have to find £2,00.0,000 more in revenue, and the local bodies would increase their rates. (Proceeding.)