PENSIONS CUTS

Evening Star, Issue 21583, 1 December 1933, Page 13

PENSIONS CUTS

APPEAL FOR RESTORATION LABOUR FRUITLESSLY DIVIDES HOUSE [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, November 30. Progress with the Estimates in the House of Representatives was delayed by an amendment moved by Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) to the formal motion to enable consideration of the departmental votes to be resumed. Mr Parry moved that in the opinion of the House the time had arrived for the Government to take into favourable consideration the restoration of the cuts in pensions. He said that the reductions in the pensions bad created a greater impression on the people than any other action of the Government. Many pensioners were suffering acutely, and, were it not for the relief given to them by the hospital and charitable aid boards, their plight would be serious indeed. The Prime Minister seemed to be very optimistic about the future, and the rise in wool prices was being taken as a sign of returning prosperity. Thus, it was most opportune that pensioners should be reinstated at least to their former position. Mr H. G. 11. Mason (Auckland Suburbs) said that pension payments did not increase production costs, but they increased consumption. The money represented by pension payments went into circulation again. Mr F. Langstone (Waimarino) said it was essential that the circulation of goods should be increased through the medium of money.

Mr A. M. Samuel (Thames) said that surely the House should realise that there was a class of society which could not fend for itself, and that the House had. a responsibility so far as that class was concerned. He declared that the pension cuts had been uncharitable, unwarranted and unsound economically. “ This is a vote of no-confidence,” be said, “ and 1 do not suppose Government members will vote for it.” Mr R. Semple (Wellington East) said it had been stated that there was nomoney to restore the pensions cuts, ye.t £500,000 had been granted to the building schemes of rich concerns. Mr A. S. Richards (Roskill) said that sound economy did not mean that pensions should be cut down to a miserable level. , ~ Mr D. W. Coleman (Gisborne) said that the Government, in reducing pensions, had gone back on its election pledges. , Mr Carr characterised the reductions as most unwarranted. Mr J. A. Lee (Grey Lynn) said that aged people could live longer if they had that sense of security which came from a decent income. Mrs M‘Combs expressed the be hoi that the Government had reached that stage when it could no longer _ withstand the appeal for a restoration of the pension cuts. 'The whole country was asking for it. - Mr H. Holland (Christchurch North) submitted that old-age pensioners were

in a better position to-day than they had been ten years ago. After further discussion Mr Parry s amendment was defeated by 38 votes to 25, Messrs H. M. Rushworth, A. M. Samuel, A. *l. Stallworthy, and E. - Tirikatcnc joining the Labour mcmbeis in voting for it.