N.Z. PARLIAMENT.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume II, Issue 172, 5 July 1912, Page 5

N.Z. PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Wellington. July 4. Mr. Paul, resuming the Address-in-Reply debate, characterised the speech as remarkable for its length and its omissions of many big questions. In thee rcpects it wa eaiiy a record. The only explanation was that the party in power was anxious to frame a policy for the moment. He criticised the administration of the Labour laws, and declared that the Arbitration Court was one of the most beneficent institutions we had. He advocated a bare majority in regard to the liquor question. He also advocated proportional representation.

Mr. Anstey commended th? suggestion in the Speech to make a retiring allowance to legislators. He approved of the setting up of the "Education and Cost of Living Commissions, but criticised the order of reference of the latter. In regard to defence it appeared that we were aiming rather to establish a military autocracy than to be given efficient training. Rings and monopolies were at the bottom of the Labour unrest. The Council adjourned till 8 p.m. The Council passed the Address-in-'Reply and adjourned till Wednesday next. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

BREACH OF PRIVILEGE

When the Speaker announced the continuation or the debate on the Address-in-Reply, Mr. McCallum rose and said he desired to move that a breach of privilege had been committed. He had received a letter which had been forwarded to a member of the House. He moved, “That in the opinion of the House the publication of a letter of 25th March from William Sinclair to William Car is a breach of privilege of the House, inasmuch as it contained a libel on a member of the House.”

Mr. Massey asked if the letter had been published. If not it was not a breach of privilege. The Speaker said there had been sufficient publication for a breach of privilege. Mr. Hanan said the member for Wairau had been said to have been guilty of corruption. The dignity of Parliament should be upheld, he said, at any cost.

Mr. McCallum said he was not going to treat the matter from a party standpoint. He would say that no member of the House was responsible for the letter, nor was the member who gave him the letter a member of the Opposition. The Speaker asked for a seconder of Mr. McCallum’s motion. Mr. Massey rose and seconded the motion. He admitted that a breach of privilege had been committed. The matter should be referred to the Privileges Committee. This was done.

[The letter which constituted the breach of privilege was from Mr. W. Sinclair, of Blenheim, to Mr. William Carr, and traversed the judgment of the election court, alleging that the pctitiomrs were clearly entitled to succeed in the Wairau election ease. Perjury was alleged by the writer of the letter against Messrs. Hrehaid McCallum, Ajchibald, George Sydney Kerr (secretary of the No-license League), Edward Sterne Parker. Willmm Henrv Macey. Frank Morr.son and E. H. Best. The writer suggests that a petition be presented to Parliament signed by the petitioners, attaching to the petition a copy of the notes of evidence, on the grounds that the petitioners have had to pay costs, which they would not bat e had to pay if the judgment had been in accordance with the ey idenee. The petition ,thc writer says, could embody a prayer that p.iiliamtnl would be pleaded to refer the decision of the matter to the Privy Council]. NO-( OX IT DUNCE DEBATE. Mr. J. C. Thompson continued the debate on the Address-in Reply. He dealt exhmisiiy ely with the land question, holding that the present party in power had accomplish! d great things in the settlement of the land and had a'-.o lira rd in the direction of putting down the aggregation of Linds. The Houtc then adjourned till 7.30 p.m. Mr. Brndncy continued the debate. He repudiated any suggestion that he had made deprecatory reference to the humanitarian legislation of this country. He did not object at all to the i.ld age pension scheme, but he did object to the system by which it was administered.

Mr. Veitch said he was pleased with the Governor’s Speech in some Tespect-K ; on the. other hand, he was disappointed with several other matters contained therein. He averred that he was not allied to either the Government or the Opposition party. He had his own reasons for voting for the party at present in power. Dealing with financial matters, he referred to the Bank of New Zealand. No institut’on should reap 15 per cent on its capital. The bank should be taken over by the State and controlled by it. He criticised the suggestion in the Speech to construct light lines of railways, advocating the wide gauge and by tunnels, which would carry the increasing traffic for years to ceme. He also referred to the labour unrest in the country. The solution of the matters, he vontemhd, lay in the settlement of the land question. Mr. Atmore said be conceded every virtue to Mr. Massey in private life, but did not consider hint competent to held the pc>sitiou of leader of the (lovernment. Humanitarian proposals could not be expected from the party which represented the* interests m' the men who owned £l3,S()(i.o('o worth of land in j|rtates of -25.000 ten's, and upwards. Tfie Opposition party was now nt high tide. but there would be an ebb. and the ebb was coming. Mr. Pavne continued the- debate. He had. he said, drafted :> sc r : es of bills to remedv the present labc-iir Iltiri’M. II is ideas might be right. th»v mioht be wrong-. But when Im

had concluded his programme it would be seen that he was on the right side of the fence. The House rose on the motion?of Mr. Glover at 11.15. '