RAILWAY PRIVILEGES.

Greymouth Evening Star, 22 July 1916, Page 3

RAILWAY PRIVILEGES.

WEAILTKY MAN’S CHEAP TRAVELLING.

STRONG COMMENT IN PARLIAMENT, ■ M [Our Parliamentary Reporter,J WELLINGTON,-This Day. It'may nut be generally Known mat suns aim ol members of me Legislature, no matter how old, are übic* to travel on the railways at reuuced rates. The matter was brought out- by a question to the Hon. Mi'. Hemes from Mr. Isitt. tvho asked if it were true that u railway ticket at. a reduced fare from -Napier to Wellington was recently issued to a married gentlemen .of uoout hlty years of age oil tlie ground that he was the son of a member of the Legislature, The Minister. in replying, said a railway ticket at reduced rates was issued to'the son of a member of the Legislature on the llth hist. ‘‘This is in accordance with the regulations of tiro Railway Department,” lie said, ‘‘and the arrangement has ibeen in force for many years. There is no ago restriction so far as concessions to the sons and daughters of members'' of the Legislature are concerned. In the case in question the gentleman presented the usual certificate signed by his father and was given the concession to which he was entitled.” ’ Mr. Ilindmarsh, commenting, on the answer, took strong exception to a concession ticket being issued to such a man, especially at this time. - Mr. Wilford: “Who is it?” Mr, Ilindmarsh: “Young Ormond.” He added that the incident was a scandalous abuse of the privilege given to members of Parliament and it was

his duty to call public attention to it, especially as the member of the Legislative Council concerned was the Hon, J. D- Ormond, one of the wealthiest men in the country. He if there was any patriotism amongst the people of Netv Zealand, particularly sheep farmers in Hawkes Bay, the man would be boycotted and made to feel his position. He could not imagine a worse bit of bad taste than for one of the wealthiest men in the Dominion, whom years ago lie had. heard held up as a. statesman though the (the speaker) knew that it was a lie because he had no statesmanlike qualities about him — Mr. Speaker called attention to the rule that members of .the Upper House could not.be referred to like this. Mr. Hindmarsh retorted that he had pleasure in putting on record the name of a man who did such a mean and shabby act. •• Mr. Speaker ordered the Labour member to resume bis seat, ■ Mr. J. Vigor Brown later remarked that he wished to refer to the question. He had not heard Mr. Hindmarsh’s speech. He did not know another member except Mr, Isitt who would ask such a question. He liked to be a sport. That man was entitled to his ticket and the member asking the question would be sorry he asked it. Mr. Isitt said he had hesitated some time before asking the question, but thought as it was an abuse of privclege and a very grave departure from the spirit of the concession for any married man in an independent position, to get the concession to attend races or do business in the city. He felt sure tlic Minister of Railways and the majority of members agreed with him that the concession ought to be limited. The Hon. Mr. Herries, Minister of Railways, said he would not like to go about like that. Nothing extraordinary had been done by the ’Railway Department. The ordinary privileges were open to Mr. Ormond and all requirements had been carried out. He quite agreed that the concession was not intended for such cases as those alluded .to in the 1 ’ question. It was .difficult to draw a line, difficult to .put down conditions which would not be open to some utilise. He did not think Mr. Ormond should have asked for the concession fur his son. but a clause to prevent that might well prevent a. 'genuine application that ought to be granted. ' He must therefore leave it to the good taste of members. He thought, however, that Mr. Isitt would have done better had ho come to him privately without giving so much publicity to tha matter.