ADDRESS IN REPLY

Grey River Argus, 2 July 1914, Page 6

ADDRESS IN REPLY

DEBATE IN THE COUNCIL. (Per United Press Association ) WELLINGTON, July i. When the Council met at 2.30 p.m. Hon.. W. Earnshaw congratulated the Government upon the Speech from the Throne. There were things in it with which he disagreed, but it was worthy of the Government, which made good its promises. Hon. H. F. Wigram expressed approval of the defence scheme, but did not approve of the local" navy. He suggested an alteration in the death duties to encourage men to cut up their estates amongst a ' larger number of relatives. « ■ ' -.- . Hon. J. Duthie endorsed the Speech The people were never so properous arid happy. The cost of living was regulated by supply and demand. Hon- J. Barr briefly replied. The Address was agreed' to. Hon. F. H. B.Bell proposed to con tinue business on Thursday and' pos sibly Friday, when they could 1 decide if a lengthy adjournment Avas necessary. , The Council adjourned at 4. 10 p.m. DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. THE MEMBER FOR HUTT. WELLINGTON, July 1. Mr. T. M. Wilford (Hutt) continuing the. debate on the Address-in-Reply. H.e admitted that the Dominion was prosperous and tracing the probable effects of the opening of, .he Panama Canal predicted an era of even' greater prosperity than we had ever experienced. A notable omission from the speech of the Minister for Defence was a straight-out declar ation that he was not in favour of .a local navy. Personally he regarded the lc-al navy scheme as one of the maddest ever promulgated. Our danger lay in the direction, of Japan So long as the agreement between Britain and Japan held good, we need ' not fear invasion, but the moment ! that agreement lapsed / we were at the mercy of the Yellow race. The lor.al navy was no solution of the danger, but, there could 1 be no doubt that this f was the policy of the Government, and the people should . clearly recognise, the fact. Unless this was so what was the use of importing at a high salary a navali adviser who other wise would have nothing-, to advi?upon? He defended the finance of the Ward Government, contending that ample funds remained in the A<-\ vances Department to meet all claims by simply transferring the surplus from one branch to another. Mr. Wilford strongly- condemned the -methods employed by the Public \ Service Commissioners in dealing j with public servants- He advocated the abolition of the Legislative Council. The proposed appointments were being- made to block future Libernl legislation. There was nothing in th<-' Speech for the poor man, who was never wanted by the. Government party exfcept at election time." The big man' Was the man for the Govern ment, and that fact was declared by 1 the class of candidates they were norn mating for the coming election. He m.ade a plea for a bursting up tax. He claimed that use was- now being made by the Government of Liberal legislation to aid their? settlement poldcy. This was one of the finest testimonies to its sterling character, and a complete answer to all their de nunciations when in. Opposition. MEMBER FOR WAITEMATA. Mr A. Harris" (Waitemata) contend ed that the Ward Government had never given any thought to the needs of the mass of the people. The Massey.jGovernment had during two years passed more truly, liberal measures than, the Ward party had done in 20 years. He proceeded to enumerate these measures, and branded the Op position as comrades in arms with the Red Federation by whose aid they only could get back into office. MEMBER FOR AUCKLAND EAST. " Mr A. M. Myers (Auckland East) dealt at length with naval. . defence matters,, and' confessed a difference of opinion with the Leader of the Opposition.. He would aot treat the defence question as a party one. The trained personnel , for the navy was the most valuable contribution they cfeuld makfc. He (believed' Ijhat the forming of a local navy was sound. There was no reason why the youth of New Zealand should nbtr be utilised as a naval reserve- tie wanted to see each . component part a source > . of strength to the Empire. ' Touching on financial matters he traversed much of the ground previously covered by S;r Joseph Ward and Mr Allen. He objected to mem bers of the Government going about the. country claiming that they were •-esponsible for all the prosperity and good legislation of the past 20 years. The Government had not reduced ex penditurei or borrowing, as promised MEMBER FOR DUNEDIN CEN TRAL. When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr C. E. Statham (Dunedin Cen ral) continued the debate on the Ad dress-in-Reply, contending that Sir Toseph' Ward was in error when he saiS' that the people had hot contributed one penny toward the cost of the Dreadnought, claiming that they had done so through the railways and 'ustom house. The Government had fulfilled as many of their pledges as rime permitted. He referred to the platform of the Reform Party prior ;o last election, claiming that they had reformed the finances of the country. MEMBER FOR WAIRAU. Mr R. McCallum (Wairau) described the visits made, by * Ministers 'o his district during the past few; months,, declaring that twenty millions would not be. sufficient to redeem all. the promises made < by* the Premier, while Hon. J. Alien had insulted the intelligence of his constitjienrThy the

inaccuracies he made in his speech at Blenheim. He . characterised his (Mr Allen's) reference to surpluses quoted in the London prospectus as one ct the most shocking cases ot public immorality ever known in "the Doinin ion. His half truth so freely spread through his speech had done him no good in. the. eyes of the audience, while his deliberate statement that not one penny had been spent on small settlement in Marlborough^ the liome of the small settlementy had shocked even his own friends. His principal reason for not reposing con fidence in' the Government was the bungling manner in which they handled the strike of last year, and the incompetence of the Minister, for Jus tice in dealing with the lawlessness which arose out of the strike. The real object of the Government was *o smash the labour organisation with which they had no sympathy and did hot understand. They had repeated )y declared that one of the best reasons for a change in Government was that the Ward Ministry pampered the workers." The Opposition regretted the strike, because it injured the work, ers naoTe than Capital and, that was just the difference between the two parties. The Government was worry ing about purse strings, while the Op position was anxious for the happiness of the people. 'There were many reasons for voting for the amendment Amongst them he enumerated the fact that there was ho reference ip. the Speech from - the Throne to the adjustment of taxation, or the imposition of a higher graduated tax. There was also the abandonment of the second ballot, and the jerrymandering of the electorates. He. would support the amendment. .

MEMBER FOR WAIPAWA

Mr G. Hunter (Waipawa) said that the people on the, land had confidence in the administration as the k export figures showed. He quoted figures 1.0 show that the Government had carried out its promises to push land settlement. The land tax had induced the cutting up of estates. He looked for proposals to reduce the cost of livingGood result swould come from the ap pointment of an Agricultural Board.

MEMBER FOR HURUNUI.

Mr G. W. Forbes (Hurunui) held that the Government was not adopt ing an honorable course in using th*» services of men who disregarded pledges. The Government was using the fruits of dishonor. He held that the of the Public Trustee as to the apponntment of his successor during his illness were dis regarded, showing interference with the Public Service by the Government No cases of aggregation had beer* dealt with. If the valuation on the secret valuation list was known he thought that would be found that large estates were evading the giduated tax. Concluding Mr. Forbes urged that | the time had arrived when the large land holders must move up to make room for closer settlement. This rould only be done by. the application of a graduated tax.

MEMBER FOR WANGANUI.

Mr. W. A. Vieitch .(Wanganui) disagreed with the statement in the Gover nor's Speech that , labour conditions were satisfactory for the prudent work ers. The prosperity was amongst land owners and not amongst the mass es. The SReech contained ho propos a whatever for the benefit of workers. Continuing Mr. Veitch said that there was dim hope of a proposal to deal with the cost of living.j It was a pity that no indications or .the Government, intention was given. A combination of Liberal and Labour was hinted at, but was not such a combination justified to ensure the return of a Government which would make constitution of a labour party possible; He was favourable to such a. combination, but he had not turned his coat. It was his duty to assist a combina^ tion which would bring about good Government. The debate was adjourned on the motion of Mr. J. A. Young (Waikato) and the House rose at 11.55.