WORKERS’ COMPENSATION.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 10 August 1928, Page 5

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION.

LABOUR AAIENDAIENT BILL

SOME OF THE PROPOSALS

(By T^legrar-b—Press Associati-'-n.) WELLINGTON, Aug. 8. Air. E. J. Howard moved in the House of Representatives to-day the Workers’ Compensation Amendment Bill. He said the Bill contained three main principles, but even so it did not contaiu( all that the Labour Party desired. He had dodged the “appropriation” difficulty -by specially exempting the Crown from the operation of the Bill. The first principle of the Bill was that a worker meeting with an accident- should receive full images and medical attendance from the day on which the accident occurs. At present he received only, 6G -per cent, of his wages. The second principle was that in case of total or partial disablement all workers should be treated alike, regardless of their occupation. He claimed that the present-day interpretation of what one judge called a “pernicious system” was not what the framer o: the original Act intended. He quoted tlie -Samoa Act, drawn by the same authority, but in which “common employment” was deliberately left out. So greatly did he dislike the judee-made law called “common emoio - meat.” that if he was given preferen.e of any of the three principles in Vs Bill he would unhesitatingly say strife out “common -employment” from the present law© The Hon. A. D. AlcLeod said that no one would object to the sentiments expressed by ’Alt. Howard on the subjc t of his Bill any more than they would object to increasing pensions, hut- in all such matters the responsibility rested with the Government. At present the AJinister of Labour was absent from the Dominion, but while abroad he was making inquiries into the subject, and this fact had prevented the Government from coming to a decision on the points raised, but the Government had not by any means overlooked them. They must- remember that New Zealand was in industrial competition with other parts of the world, because the fact had an important bearing on the question. The Goveminent would not object to the Bill beino- read a second time if it was referred to the Labour Bills Committee. The Bill was read a second time and referred to the Labour Bills Committee.