PARLIAMENT

Evening Star, Issue 21232, 13 October 1932, Page 6

PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BUDGET DEBATE DRAGS ON [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON. October 12. When the House of Representatives met, Mr E. T. Tirikatene (Southern Maori) asked whether the Government would take immediate steps to amend the electoral laws with the object of ' placing the Maori people on the same electoral footing as the pakeha so as to enable the election of Maori members to Parliament to be conducted on the same basis of secrecy as all other members.—Mr Forbes replied that the matter would be investigated when an amendment to the electoral laws was under consideration. Replying to Mr R. M'Kcen (Wellington South), Mr Forbes said the ques. tion of granting further extension of the protection to tenants under the rent restriction legislation was under consideration by the Government. Replying to Mr G. C. Black (Motueka), the Minister of Mines (Hon. C. E. Macmillan) said that Cabinet had not yet considered the advisability or otherwise of closing any of the schools of mines. He could give an assurance that there was no intention in the immediate future of closing any of them. Various sessional select committees wore appointed. Mr H. G. R. Mason (Auckland Suburbs) expressed the opinion that the time had come \vheii more power should be granted committees dealing with petitions. He said that under the present conditions the petitioners were induced to present evidence to a committee. but no copy was kept. The committee made its recommendation, but Cabinet, in whose hands rested the final decision, was not placed in possession of the evidence. He thought it was inexpedient to go through a procedure which could not be regarded as a serious procedure in relation to the business of the House.—Mr Forbes said the Government had to go into the question of finance. He had intimated that if effect had been given to all the petitions on which favourable recommendations had been made during one session the cost to the country would have been £1,500,000. It was essential for the decision to rest with Cabinet, which had to provide the ways and means. The Otago Harbour Board Empowering Bill (Mr J. W. Munro) was introduced and read a first time. The Workers’ Compensation Amendment Bill (Mr H. E. Holland) was read a second time pro forma, and referred to the Labour Bills Committee. A Bill to amend the Arbitration Act and the Sinking Funds Bill were debated. They are reported elsewhere. BUDGET DEBATE. Continuing the Budget debate, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E.. Holland) said the Budget disclosed a deficit of £3,635,044, which did not include the huge deficit in connection with the superannuation funds. The Government proceeded to raise money by mortgaging to the bank public securities represented in the discharged soldier settlement lands. In this way it secured advances amounting to £1,494,825, and the Government wrote this into its balance-sheet as income. This made it possible to present a deficit of £2,140.819 instead of the correct figure of £3,635,644. It would be seen that public securities were being used to meet a current liability. The bank issued money to the Government on the basis of these securities; in other words, with the backing of public credit, and would charge interest on the money so issued. Before the Government could utilise its own credit resources to meet a current liability it had to contract to pay a percentage tribute to the bank. He asked whether the Government could not have utilised its own credit resources to back its own issue of money without paying tribute to the hank? Furthermore, if a deficit could be made good out of reserves, those reserves could have been utilised long ago to provide remunerative work for the unemployed and the creation of additional values for the State. Dealing with the National Expenditure Commission’s recommendations regarding the State’s superannuation funds, Mr Holland referred to the statement that there was a total actuarial liability on the Government of approximately £23,000,000. He said the Act provided that in the month of January in every year the Minister of Finance should pay into the fund and out of the Consolidated Fund a sum of £20,000, together with such further amount, if any, as was required to meet the charges on the fund during the ensuing year. The Government had never honoured its obligations in this respect. So long as the present default continued the position would continue to become worse. Mr A. Stuart (Rangitikei) said he was disappointed that the Prime Minister was not taking further action to reduce interest rates, because at the present rates practically no one could afford to borrow, and it would take the country years to recover. Mr Coleman objected to the centralisation of Government departments, as recommended by the Expenditure Commission. He said that in any scheme of centralisation there would he the initial cost involved in the transfer of the staff and records. It would he a considerable time before any saving could he made, and in the meantime the public would be put to great inconvenience. Mr W. J. Broadfoot (Waitomo) expressed the opinion that hospital rating should he on a per capita basis and not on a laud basis. He said that under the present system people in boroughs and cities were receiving undue preference over those out back. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr W. J. Jordan (Mannkau), and the House rose at 11.45 p.m.