SUPERANNUATION QUESTION

Evening Star, Issue 21317, 23 January 1933, Page 2

SUPERANNUATION QUESTION

TEACHERS’ ALLOWANCES GOVERNMENT'S AMENDING Bill [Special to the ‘Stab.’] INVERCARGILL, January 23. Expressing tlio view that notwithstanding it owed a duty to protect .the 400 odd teachers in its employ, such obligation was outweighed by patriotic interests towards a harassed Government, and the Southland Education Board at its monthly meeting decided by a majority vote not to support a resolution by Mr F. G. Stevenson that a protest be entered against a certain provision in the Government Superannuation Funds Amendment Bill particularly as it affected the teaching profession. The text of the motion was as follows That in view of the fact that teachers are compelled to contribute to the superannuation fund on the terms drawn up by the Government, this board enters an emphatic protest against the provision in the amending Bill that allowances of those who have already retired or who may retire before the Bill comes into force shall be recomputed and thus break the bond the Government compelled its employees to enter into.”

In moving tlie adoption of In's resolution Mr Stevenson said that the board represented 400 teachers, and it was its duty to protect them. It might bo said that this would be embarrassing to the Government, but Mr Stevenson reminded his listeners that since _ the last board meetings the Prime Minister had offered New Zealand’s contribution to the British war debt, an offer which had not been accepted. “In the same breath wo have the Prime Minister repudiating a contract with his own kith and kin,” ho said. Mr J. Campbell, who seconded the motion, stated that in his opinion the Government had forced the teachers to contribute a certain amount and had promised a certain amount in, return. He felt the Government should not repudiate its contract and break the promise already entered into in good faith hv the teachers under its care.

Mr P. A. dc la Ferrell, M.P., said he regretted ho could not support Mr Stevenson’s resolution. Knowing what he did of New Zealand’s present circumstances, he felt he would not be justified in doing so. The Chairman (Mr S. Pice) said lie would have to support Mr Perrelle’s objection. Now was the time to'make sacrifices, and it was nothing short of a patriotic duty to assist the Government in its present desperate state. The teachers must make their sacrifice. Mr Pico said he was sorry Mr Stevenson felt so strongly on the point because all must make a sacrifice for the common weal. For an object lesson he referred his hearers to the .Old Country, where

the people had sacrificed interest in tha raising of the new big loan. Mr Rica said, personally, he was distressed ta see that morning that the rate of exchange had been raised, but it just had to be accepted. Mr Stevenson said that in reply to Mr Perrelle he would ask why a special concession should be given to a small minority; and in reply to Mr Grieve ha would point out that the purchase of war bonds had been optional. Mr J. C. Thomson: No, they were compulsory. Mr Stevenson. declared that tha superannuitants had been forced into the scheme. The motion was put to the meeting, and was declared lost, Messrs Stevenson, Campbell, and Smith voting ia favour of it. When Mr Stevenson called for £ division, Mr Thomson remarked that the board required to discuss the whole question of superannuation very) thoroughly indeed. The contributions to the fund in the first case had been' so low that it was remarkable the loss had not been greater. A blunder had been made in the first instance of making too low a charge. Secondly, there was no limit to the amouflt of superannuation a superannuitant could receive. The whole fund was unsound,Repudiation was not contemplated, he declared, the word being misused. What the Government contemplated was an alteration of the terms. He personally was against interference in the matter when they were not in possession of all the facts. Mr Campbell: My objection is to tha Government altering the terms of thq contract and making it retrospective. Mr Stevenson claimed that the Government was responsible for the action of its servants and should take them to task for their failure to make tha promised contributions as laid down in the contract. Mr Perrelle made reference to tha present financial position of the Government, and said that in order to meet the circumstances every section of tha community had to suffer. The Government had no desire to cut down wages —it had to divide equitably what money was at its disposal. Mr Stevenson: The civil servants ara going to have 20 per .cent, cut off. On the chairman’s suggestion tha meeting passed on to consideration of “ next business,” Mr Stevenson’s concluding remark being: “ I have dona my duty.”