ON MANY POINTS

Evening Post, Issue 87, 9 October 1936, Page 6

ON MANY POINTS

EXPLANATIONS WANTED

The Kt. Hon. J. G. Coates (National, Kaipara) said the Government had introduced' a Bill that involved an important amendment in respect of compensation for land taken under the Public Works Act. When introducing the Bill the Minister of Finance had slid right over the clause. The Minister: I explained that particular clause. Mr. Coates said the Minister had not been frank. He .had given no explanation when the Bill came, down. The country was entitled to'the clearest explanation when important principles were involved. Such •an amendment should first be submitted to the Law Society and the Judges for their opinions. The law had stood for more than 25 years. Then there was the proposal for the expenditure of £ 13,000,000. Was that amount additional to the proposals already before the country? It was already known that thfere was an expenditure of £10,000,000 and the House was not informed whether the £13,000,000 had to be added to that amount. How did the Minister propose to raise the money? There was no word of explanation. Because the Government happened to have a large majority it concluded that the country would agree without protest. What were the estimated costs in interest charges?. Dealing with the clause that allowed local .bodies' under certain circumstances to. raise loans without a ratepayers' poll if unemployment relief work was being undertaken, Mr. ! Coates said he understood that after the. Labour Government assumed office there were to be no unemployed workers —that there was no need for local bodies to help the unemployed. The Hon. P. Fraser: Never once. Mr. Coates said the . clause would make it easy and simple .for local Jwdies to raise money." RESERVE BANK APPOINTMENT. Referring to the clause validating the appointment, of a member of the Reserve Bank Board of Directors, Mr. Coates said the House was unanimous in 1934 that appointees should be British born. He did not wish to discuss Mr. Silverstbne.' No doubt he was a splendid citizen. Government members: He is. Mr. Coates: I know he has been a perfectly good man" at his job. Mr. W. P. Endean (National, Parnell): What job? Mr. Coates: I think he is a cabinetmaker. It is said that he has been closely associated with our international friends. That has been said over and over again. Mr. A. F. Moncur (Government; Rotorua): What about Sir Otto Nieraeyer? Mr.' Coates: I do not know what Silverstone's name was. Mr. Coates said the fact remained that the law was that a man could not be appointed unless he was a British subject by, birth. The Government was engaged iri a "white-washing proposal because the director referred to could not comply with the law. When the Reserve Bank Bill was before Parliament there was fierce criticism from the then Opposition and there was talk about collections of Jews and the Bank of International Settlements. The Labour members then said they would have nothing of that kind in New Zealand and that the Reserve Bank should be controlled by our own race and blood. If Mr. Silverstohe was the only man who could take a seat New Zealanders could not be up to much. "If they are not fit to take "a place "on! this Bank, God help them," he .continued, "We have to have a special: piece of ■ legislation to whitewash'and clean a person to take a seat on the- B"ank. It is not much to the credit of New Zealand." Mr...F. .W. Schramm (Government, Auckland East): ' What about Jesus Christ? " He was not bbrn in New Zealand. The Postmaster-General (Mr. Jones): ■Were all your appointments New Zealand born? Mr. Coates: All British. They complied with the law. COMPENSATION FOR LAND. Mr.' Coates Said that the law dealing with compensation for ' land taken under the Public Works Act had stood the test of time, and Sir Joshua Williams, a" distinguished Judge, had said that in his opinion the compensation was based on sound common sense. The present proposals had been suggested by the Crown Law Office previously, and the Government had turned them down. Mr. T. H. McCombs (Government, Lyttelton): Because you hadn't a sense of justice. ' Mr.' Speaker: Order! The hoh. gentleman must withdraw that. Mr. McCombs: I do. Mr. Coates protested against the amending of the Act just because in certain cases it appeared that the awards had been excessive. In a farm, for-instance, the farmer had to take into, account whether' the loss of a piece- of land would affect the economic farming of his property. Did the Gdvernment think it was fair that betterment should be set off against compensation? Under the Bill it was possible to set off betterment. Was it fair that one man should have betterment charged against him while his neighbours, whose land was not taken and who would benefit, should not have to pay betterment? The selling price of the land had. nothing to do with "the 'question; the point was, what was the land Worth to the farmer? The proposals in the Bill were radical, and were a change from custom that everybody in the country was used- to, just because of one or two incidents in connection with the Tawa Flat deviation. The proposals had always been turned clown before on the ground

that'if there was a doubt, the country was in a much better position to stand any vagaries in decisions rather than the individual.