Untitled

Evening Star, Issue 17393, 1 July 1920, Page 4

The Government have acted .wisely in introducing at Payment of Legislators. the outset of ' the first session of the new Parliament tentative proposals for an increase in the honoraria of legislators. They have adopted the right and proper course: the taxpayer has bean given a full opportunity to discuss the proposals, and a subsequent charge of political ‘’stealing’’ (ns in the case of the Federal Parliament of Australia) has been obviated, or at the least rendered groundless. , Little or no exception will be taken to the plea of the active politician that parliamentary -salaries should be increased to meet the oppressive change? in econom-’c conditions. It is scarcely reasonable, to expect that the aggressive unionist and the adroit profiteer should get all the pleasures in life. The /nan who makes the laws pleasant for them both is entitled to some consideration. Perhaps the only gad feature in. the universal struggle for a bigger share of good thing; is the plight of the shy worker whb has to look to the nest world for an adequate reward.

It is really not an occasion for gentle sarcasm, even though it may he very difficult not to say more in sorrow than in anger, that while Parliaments all over the world demand and secure higher rewards for their services universal government was never worse than it is now. Beyond, any possible doubt whatever, the payment of the members of the Mew Zea land Parliament is quite inadequate. It is unjustly inadequate. It will be found, ,we anticipate, that the Government's proposals are still pitched too low, though it is fair to note with appreciation the nice delicacy of thought that suggested the comparatively modest scale in the new Civil List Bill. The main proposal .is to increase the honoraria of members of both House? and {hose dt the Speaker and Chairman of Committees in each by £IOO a year. Put in that form it looks an adequate increase, but if the total honorarium in each case is compared with the scales of payment in other countries tbs increase is exceptionally modest. Yv'hv make two bites at a- cherry ? It is already hinted that members will press to amend the scale, raising the total to £SOO in tire case of the House of Representatives and to £4OO in respect to the Legislative Council. These may be over generous to certain types of politicians who have always been very well paid all along, but are certainly very reasonable in the case of men who are capable of rendering good parliamentary service for their country. So far ■ there is no suggestion of increasing the salaries of Ministers of the Crown. Ls it fair to leave them out of the new measure of encouragement ? Can any reasonable man defend the~Prhne Minister's honorarium as being adequate ? Mo man in the country carries a higher responsibility to-day than that cabled skilfully and well by Mr Massey. That much will be granted even by . Lis most aggressive political enemies. Parliament ought to give full consideration to the question of increasing Ministerial salaries while they are voting an increase to their own.

. Ibe Mew Zealand scale of parliamentary honoraria compares badly generally with those in other countries. The following scales should be of interest:— —Federal Parliament,— From opening to ISO 7, £4OO. From 1907 to June, 1920, £6OO. From June, 1820, £I,COO. —State Parliaments, — Mew South Wales, from £SOO to £SOO. Victoria, from £SOO to £4OO. Queensland, from £SOO to £SOO. Western Australia from £2OO to £SOO. South Australia, £2OO. Tasmania, £IOO, then £l5O. next £250, npw £3OO.

• —Other Parliaments.—. British House of Commons, £4OO. • United States of America... first £I,OOO, now £1,500. % . Argentina. £1,500. ■ , Canada, £I,OOO, plus all travelling expenses, plus services of a typiste. Union of.. South Africa,* £I,OOO. 'South Africa pays her Cabinet Ministers—£6,ooo to the Prime Minister, who has -two official residences, and £4,000 to each’ of her" other ’Ministers’; hut during the war all .Ministers voluntarily surrem dered £I,OOO a year.European Parliaments have recently increased their soaks of Ministers’ ’ and members’ salaries in order to meet the increase in the Cost of Living. In popular jargon “Everybody’s doing it.” There is one obvidus weakness in the new Bill introduced to the New Zealand Parliament. That is the provision exempting’ Ministers’ and members’ salaries from taxation. Such .a principle is even challengable as regards its application to the salaries of the King’s Judges. It is a bad principle, and establishes a dangerous

precedent. It would be • far better in every way to increase the salaries in each case to an adequate standard without concessions that must prove vicious in practice. Left-handed increases are never satisfactory, and should not be encouraged by Parliament. The better system is to pay adequate salaries', and let each letup ent conform to the laws of the country, and make provision like ordinary folk for their future and their families. It is to be hoped that Parliament will delete from the Civil List Bill the provision respecting freedom from Income Tax..