FAMILY ALLOWANCES

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 12 September 1935, Page 7

FAMILY ALLOWANCES

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS PROBLEM OF WIFE DESERTION GOVERNMENT’S DIFFICULTIES. (By Telegraph-Press Association,) WELLINGTON, Sept. 11. Aloving for leave to introduce the Family Allowances Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, Mr W. E. Barnard i(Lab., Najpier) said the question of family allowances was one that affected an increasingly large number of the poorest of the people. According to official figures in 1928 the number of allowances in force was 3000. In 1930 the number had risen to 3868 and in 1932 to 7332, and it was in that year that the basis of income upon which family allowance was paid was reduced from £4 to £3 os, but that caused no diminution iu the number of applications, and for the year ending March 31 last, the total number of applications stood at 12,321. Four thousand children were affected. It was high time, he thought, that the existing provision, which dated back to 1926, was overhauled and improved. The object of the Bill was to enable a mother rather than a father to apply for a pension. Under the law as it stood at present the only, person who could make application was the father. In a number of eases unfortunate women had been deserted by their husbands and left often in an extremely difficult position. He hoped the Government would itself do something in the matter. The Bill was supported by several members, who said there were a mini • bet of cases where women with children had been deserted by their husbands and were unable to secure assistance because they could not find their husbands to sign applications, or where the husband refused to sign an application, perhaps through spite or some quarrel. LOCATING DEFAULTERS. The Rev. Clyde Carr (Lab., Timaru) and Mr A. S. Richards (Lab., Roskill) referred to the fact that when the Minister of Finance was Leader of the Opposition, he urged amendments to the Act, yet when he became a member of the Cabinet he took no steps on the lines he had llreviously urged. Mr Carr allegdd that the police did not always do all they might do in locating defaulting husbands. The Hon. J. G. Cobbe said it was entirely contrary to fact to say that the police did not use every possible endeavour to ascertain the whereabouts of defaulting husbands. The police did their duty very carefully in eases of that; kind. During the past two years the number of cases where family allowances were paid increased by 2000. the cost being just more-than £30,000. The total amount paid for the year on account •of family allowances was £152,818. It could not be said that family allowances were not receiving the attention of the Government. There were cases where husbands avoided their responsibility, .but it was not fair that the State should be called upon to bear what was the husband’s responsibility. He had discussed the matter with the commissioner of pensions and there were difficulties of which the members of the House were not aware. The Government was doing everything it reasonably could regarding family allowances. The Bill was read a first time. The Invalid Pensions Bill (Mr J. O’Brien) was also read a first time after the mover had replied to the debate which took place on Friday morning. OTHER. MEASURES. Other Bills introduced and read a first time were the % Rabbit Nuisance Amendment Bill (Sir Alfred Ransom), the Mental Defectives Amendment Bill (Sir Alexander Young), the Masseurs’ Registration Amendment Bill (Sir Alexander Young), the Urban Farm Land Rating Amendment Bill (Sir Alexander Young) and the Rent Restriction Bill (the Hon. Adam Hamilton). The Law Practitioners’ Amendment Bill (tlie Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) was introduced and read a second time pro forma and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. The Commercial Trusts Amendment Bill (Mr Forbes) was also introduced and read a second time pro forma and referred to the Industries and Commerce Committee. Mr Barnard asked the Minister of Employment if he had seen a notice issued to relief workers asking if they were prepared to accept fulltime work in the country, probably necessitating their absence from tlieir homes, and what would be the position of men who replied in the negative. The Hon. S. G. Smith in reply said the question was asked in older to ascertain what men would be available in the event of public works, which would probably be in the country, being arranged. Under the circumstances the board was not called on to make a decision regarding the second part of the question. The Shipping and Seamen Act Amendment Bill and the Regulation oi Whaling Bill were introduced and read a first time. The Hauraki Plains County Eastern Water Supply Empowering Bill was read a first time. The Judicature Act Amendment Bill was introduced, read a second time pro forma and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee.