DAYLIGHT SAVING

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 26 July 1928, Page 5

DAYLIGHT SAVING

THE BILL REJECTED. DEFEATED ON SECOND READING. DEBATE IN THE HOUSE. (Bv Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, July Y 5. Crowded galleries greeted Mr. I, A. Sidey when he rose ah / .30 p.m. to move the second reading of the Summer Time Bill. He said he was doing so under different conditions to those under which he had moved a similar motion for many years—that was after he had obtained his objective, his measure having had a- year’s trial. Of the operation of summer time, Mr. Sidey said he was perhaps m a, better position to judge than anyone else. He was satisfied that if summer time could not be declared a pronounced success the converse could not bo &ffii*med. Some people had made up their minds against the Bill, and nothing would convert- them, hut he recalled the opposition at one time displayed to the weekly half-holiday and the' early closing movement. These were greatly opposed, and might have created some hardship, but no one now would think of repealing them. If a hardship had been created by this Bill, continued Mr. Sidey,_ it had been mostly in the country districts. There was a little difficulty with shearers, but these difficulties were not great. The- chief difficulty was w it-h the dairy farmers. Small train adjustments in the North Island had relieved most of these cases of hardship. In the South Island no such adjustments were necessary, .and with the adoption of certain suggestions made by the Public Health Department the remaining objections would soon disAll the objection raised m New Zea- ! land had been met in Britain only to disappear with larger experience of summer time. On the other hand, many pleasant things' had been said of the measure, and these far outweighed anything to- the contrary. He believed lie' was entitled to say the production of the country had increased as a result of summer time, while the consumers of artificial light made large savings. Home-grown fruit and vegetables' had been produced more freelv, with consequent benefit to the health of the people. Many of the farmers were supporting the Bill, while others declared it made no difference to them. The opposition had been organised, but in the face of that the Auckland Farmers’ Union refused to carry a- remit against summer time, and their example had l been followed by several other similar unions. In the towns the trading organisations were largely in favour of the measure, while the workers’ unions were overwhelmingly in favour of it. The Public Service Association, the Post and Telegraph Association, the railway employees, and the Educational Institute had all nporoed of it. the- latter declaring that it was in the interests, of the health of the teachers and children. Who was better able to judge? SUNLIGHT AND HEALTH.

The British. Medical Association, said Mr. Sidey, was strongly in favour of summer time. Doctors were rapidly realising that sunlight and health were intimately associated. From sporting bodies he had been deluged with suitport. Never had the people' been Drought so much into the open air as they were last summer, thus materially aiding their health. He appealed to the farmers. to take 1 a broad view of the question. Was it not in the interests of the farmers that the health of the general community should be improved ? Would it not lessen his contribution to hospital rates ? Were the farmers not- interested when the youth of the country were pitted against the youth of other countries ? Were they uot thrilled last Sunday when the news came through that the All Blacks had been victorious against South Africa?”

The principle of summer time Avas rapidly spreading, and many countries outside Britain Avere adopting it. Last session the Bill was made operative for one year. That Avas a concession to those Avho feared dreadful things from ’t. If it was the wish of the House'to renew that scheme he would agree to it. He Avas open to make any reasonable concession, but he wanted to know where' be stood, and he asked members to- gh r e their Azotes definitely for or against the Bill OPPOSITION IN THE COUNTRY.

ivir. W. D. Lysnar said tlieie was opposition to the Bui all over toe Dominion, and that opposition was suf.ening up. He did not know anyone ..•no lormerly;opposed the Bill now supporting it, out lie did know of many cases, both inside and outside the House, where former supporters were now against it. The farmers Aveie reing driven to do extra, night Avork, and e ven” the cows were less productive.. The children had to rid© to school munching a. hunk of bread bemuse- they liad not had time to get u-eaivfast. This measure was a grave lardship to the farmers. Was the House justified in passing it? Alany aimers had gone off their farms last year because of summer time, and Here were hundreds Avaiting to see what the House was going to do about it before they walked off. (Loud dissent.) Air. Lysnar said members might object, but the position really Avas serious. He did not deny that summer time AA’as of benefit to the towns, but it Avas distinctly aggravating the position in the country districts. The Leader of the Opposition (Air. .1. E. Holland) said last year the Bill was an experiment. He always recognised it Avould suit the closely populated centres, but on the other hand people aa’lio lived a long AA r ay from their work, notably miners, would lie. at a disadvantage. Last year Air. Sidey had ’.net him in cases he had in mind, but r-his- proA’ision. had been struck out by the Legislative Council. Air. Sidey had again said lie Avas prepared to make edjustments to meet the difficulties. He therefore thought the Bill should fie read a- second time and referred to rt>' select committee, Avliich could take evidence. Then a better understanding could he arrived at regarding diffiult eases.

Mr. Holland knew there was opposition to the Bill in the country, hut he had not many opinions one way or the •other sent to him. He would vote for the Bill in the hope that it would fro to a committee, hut he also thought it ■hould not he enacted for more than a vear, and before it became' law it should 1m? referred- directly to- the people. If it went to a committee the government -should give an undertakor at the House Avon Id ha ve ■& ftiri.her onuortunity of considering it. Mr. .A. Harris said he was always in 'a-voii- 1 ' of the Bill, and after a year’s trial he was fortified in his supportXone o f the fears raised hy the measure had been realised-. It was of the

greatest benefit to the towns, and. the objections which came from the couptry hftd fallen to the ground. OTHER MEMBERS’ OPINIONS. Mr. A. M. Samuel said summer time iiad not been a success, and even. Mr. Sidey did not- display that enthusiasm for it he had done m previous years, i'he measure had had a_ year’s trial and it had been found guilty, and would Ire sentenced that night. Women were the greatest sufferers, and if a vote of the people were taken as had been suggsted not .10 per .cent of the women of the Dominion would vote for it. Personally, he would vote against it first, last and on every occasion. .Mr. J. R. Hamilton, as a farmers’ representative, opposed the Bill, and Sir John Luke supported the Bill from the city- point of view. He appealed to the country people to give the measure a further trial in the interests of the health of the community as a whole. In Britain it had been introduced as a Avar measure, but it had lieen found so beneficial that the people had made it permanent. Mr. R. McKeen also supported the Bill for practically similar reasons. Mr. W. J. Girling opposed the Bill because 75 per cent of the votes cast in his district on the subject, had been against summer time. The dairy people found it a great hardship. Mr. H. S. S. Kyle said, ■fc’h.a.-fc from the point of view of the primary producers and of the married man. he must oppose the Bill. Mr. E. P. Lee (Oamaru) said Mr. Sidev had offered to consider any reasonable amendment-, but the opponents of the Bill Avould have no ; it Avas all or nothing. They Avere not prepared to give anyone any measure of summer time. He suggested that a; Royal Commission should inquire into the AA’orking of the measure after the Bill had had another trial. Mr. W. S. Glenn said that Mr. Lee’s suggestion of a- compromise was the first- signal of distress, for never had the suggestion of a compromise come "rom him Avhen he was on the winning side. Mr. F. Waite said that when lie put the disadvantages of the dairy farmers against- the advantages of the snortsmen be must vote against the Bill, although he had previously voted for.ifc. Mr. Lee Martin said that after girt ing due consideration to the arguments of all sides, particularly of the underground miners, to whom 60 minutes’ extra- daylight Avas worth a great deal, fie had decided he must A-ote against the Bill. Mr. H. G. Dickie (Patea) said that as the majority of the fanners in his district were opposed to the Bill he would vote against it. Air. C. E. Bellringer (Taranaki) thought the objections to the Bill had, been greatly exaggerated, and that fieing so be would vote for the Bill. Air. D. Jones (Ellesmere) suggested that the Bill should be killed. . That would free the country from- its efceets, and then the towns could voTuntarilv adopt summer time if they desired it. Air. Horn believed that-if a vote of the people Avere taken there would be aver the whole Dominion a large ma•oritv in favour of summer time. Air. T. Forsvth supported the. Bill ->n th© ground that* it was beneficial to the city point of view. He annealed to the health of the school children. Air. Sidey, replying after midnight, -aid he was ready to make any reasonable compromise. A committee,, to ’•■ear evidence would not be of much -nine in Wellington, but would arrive d a true estimate if it toured the •wintry. THE DIVISION LIST. The motion for the second reading .vent to a division at 12.20 a.m., when ib was defeated by 33 A-otes to 28. The division A\-as: — For the Bill (28). —Armstrong, Rarbrani, Bellringer, Buddo, J. S. Dickson, Forsyth, Fraser, Harris, H. Holland, H. E. Holland, Howard, E. P. Lee, Luke, AlcCoinbs, AlcKeen, H. G. R. Mason, J. Alason, Nash, Parry, F. J. Rolleston, Savage, Seddon, Sidey, Smith, Sullivan, Veiteh, AVright, Young. Against the Bill (33). —Bell, Burnett. Campbell, Coates, Dickie, J. McC. Dickson, Eliott, Field, Girling, Gleen. A. Hamilton. J. R. Hamilton, Hawken, Hockly, Hunter, D. Jones, W. Jones. Kyle, Linklater, Lysnar, McLeod. AlacAlillan, Alartin, Ransom, Reid, Rhodes J. C. Rolleston, Samuel, Sykes, Urn, Waite, Walter, Williams. The pairs Avere: — For the Bill. —SteAvarfc, Wilford, Tanley, Horn, Ngata.

Against the Bill.—McLenna.il, Hudson. Forlies, Bitchener, Pomare. ;