PARLIAMENT

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 September 1934, Page 4

PARLIAMENT

FINANCE BILE DEBATE. [PKB PBEBH ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON, September 4. In the House, this afternoon, the Public Petitions’ Committee, in recommending for most favourable consideration the petition of a relief worker who was injured, but who was unable to secure compensation because of a technicality, also recommended that the Government, should give serious consideration to amending the Workers’ Compensation Act, in the direction of extending the time in which notification of an accident should be given.

The recommendation met .with support from several speakers. Mr. Schramm said the Workers’ Compensation Act was framed for the protection of the worker, and should be free of technicalities as far as possible. Mr. MacPherson said it was the duty of the Government .to have the Act thoroughly amended. He contended that those who received premiums to discharge certain liability should do their part and discharge it willingly and generously. The report was tabled.

The financial debate was resumed

Mr. Jull said there were some objections to the Budget, and one of them was the question of making the restoration of old age pensions retrospective. He thought the Government might reconsider the decision in that matter. He expressed the opinion that there should be a compulsory contributory system of superannuation for all persons, not only those employed by the State. He submitted that the Government should consider electoral mattters, and urged the adoption of proportional representation in the four centres, and preferential votingin the rest of the Dominion. He critised the amount of public buildingworks in the cities compared with country towns, and criticised the spending of £330,000 on a Post Office at Dunedin. He referred to the expenditure of £30,000 on Milford Sound road, and said a suggestion was made that there should be a road right round the South Island. He protested against such expenditure. He thought the additional amount to be expended on the main highways and back block roads was an excellent thing.

Mr. Chapman said the Government should be given no credit for having over £600,000 in the Unemployment Fund. Jt would be deserving of more credit' if the fund had shown a deficit, and thousands of,people were not left to suffer hardship. No provision was made in the Budget for Britain’s' refusal to take all New Zealand’s surplus produce. Production had increased in recent years. Exports had also increased, and now the Dominion faced a position that Britain would impose a restriction on the amount of produce. She would ask what was to bo done with the surplus produce. Any reduction by. the Dominion's principal customer must have a serious effect. Land values would fall, and the effect of the slump would be accentuated if a restriction ivero placed on New Zealand produce. He appealed to the Governemnt to take steps to meet the position. The Budget was heralded as a bright document, but the Minister of Finance must realise that at the end of the year the Dominion was twenty million sterling more in debt than at the beginning of the year. To show a surplus, while increasing debt, seemed to him to be contradictory.

In the evening, Mr. Reid continued the financial debate, and said the time had arrived when the Government should hand all the highways, to the Main Highways Board, to relieve local bodies, and the money from the petrol tax should be paid to the Board, and none to the Consolidated Fund. Mr. Jones said the Budget was a step forward. The Government had overthrown the recommendations of the Economy Commission, and had followed the advicp of the Labour Party. The Budget was a step in the right direction, but did not. go far enough. It did nothing for the worker, who came under the Arbitration Court. He asked if the Government would, this session, bring down legislation to restore the wage cut to workers. He could not see that the Budget would help the farmer. The Mortgage Corporation would not be in operation for a year, so the farmers could look for some benefit, within two years, but did they not require help to-day? Farmers should be helped, and there was no reason for delay. Mr. Ansell thought the outlook was distinctly brighter, and that there was evidence the actions of .the Government had materially assisted economics. Mr. Ansell criticised the Government for the non-appointment of Mr. Tyndall to the Main Highways Board, although the Minister of Mines was willing to make his services available. He said that Mr. Tyndall knew more about highways and highway Ilnace than all the Government members on the Board. Mr. Ansell added that the Minister of Public Works should reply to the statement he (Ansell) made as protests had been made by motoring and other bodies. In view of the upward trend in finarfces, he suggested the Minister should give some relief to motorists, not in the way of taxation, but in road improvements, which would benefit motorists. He asked the Minister to consider the elimination of level crossings, and suggested that the Highways, Unemployment. and Railways Boards might co-operate to see if something could be done in that direction. Mr. Lee contended that in those days of quotas, boys should not be trained as farmers, but as artisans. Mr. Broadfoot congratulated the Government on the handling of the interest question. ,1-Ie said that many persons had been paying too high interest. He suggested the Government should fix the rate of interest. If the profits were limited, interveningcosts would be lowered, and the problem of purchasing power would be largely overcome. He complimented the Minister on the establishment of the mortgage corporation, which would lower interest rates, and benefit all sections of people in town and country. The debate was adjourned.