HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume II, Issue 131, 16 July 1881, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Tuesday, July 12. local self-government.

Major Atkinson (having moved tbre second reading of the Crown and Native • Lands Bating Bill) said he wished to state the views of the Government on the whole question of local self-government, which he believed was agitating the minds of members a great deal more than it was the minds of the country. He did not intend to press the second reading of the Bill that night. The first difficulty in the question was that no two members seemed agreed as to what local government was. Thus Sir George Grey wanted the reestablishment of Provincialism, not local - government, while Mr. Wood's desire was for the establishment of sovereign States with a federal government, and Mr. Ormond wanted, not local government, but something between local government and general government ; Mr. Murray wanted; something else. None of them touched the real question of local government. If members wanted something else, they should say what it was, and call it by. its proper name, not miscall it local government. The Government held that the country had got local government already. If people were consulted, the Counties and . Boad Boards would remain the local government of the country. , What", the country desired was the simplification 'of what it already possessed, its extension in certain directions, and sufficient funds 'to work with. Of all administrative provincial Acts, only twenty were now administered from Wellington, and of these thirteen must, under any circumstances, be so administered, as being, of. general application. Of the other seven, four might with advantage be dealt with > locally. These were animals protection, licensing, cemeteries, and .auctioneers. The others were land, neglected children, and bankruptcy. The remaining Acts were either administered locally or jointly, and must necessarily be so. Instead of centralising, Government had decentralised, and were decentralising administration as far as possible. They had given local bodies many powers formerly centralised in provinces. The first question was — Were all these bodies necessary, and could they not be amalgamated, and made more efficient? He thought very little good could be done by abolishing any of the existing bodies. There was great difficulty in getting competent men to administer affairs.' It was therefore better to get men interested in special subjects who were willing to give up their time to deal with those subjects only. This was the case with Eiver Boards, Harbor Boards, and Education Boards. There was no leisure class here able to give up time to large bodies dealing with all these subjects. As to Waste Land Boards he had no great love for them, and Government had it in contemplation to abolish them,' and to consult County Councils on all questions affecting land within the counties. As to County Councils and Eoad Boards, no two persons seemed to agree as to what should be done. In some places the county did the work, in some the Boad Boards, but in no case had they been asked to join two counties. If. the ratepayers wished union of this kind they would effect it. One point on which all these bodies were agreed was a desire to get more money. There was still a feeling abroad that money could be obtained in some other way than out of the pockets of the ratepayers. They must recognise the fact that there was no other way- of getting money than out 6f. v their'OWn pockets. This was the view on which the Government scheme of local finance was founded. It was founded not on partnership or land fund, but on the principle that all obtained' from the land should be expended on the .land.- He held that the scheme would supply all the wants of the local bodies. Government held that every facility should be given for Counties amalgamating, and for merging Road Boards. They proposed to take power to delegate to Councils all power of administration under local or general Acts which could, be delegated safely ; also to give power to Counties to levy the rates for Boad Boards, and, where the Boad Boards desired it, to spend the money for them on definite works. It was proposed also to give County Councils the power now exercised by Government as to Boad Board boundaries, and until the Property Tax valuation roll was available, to allow the existing" valuations to be used with annual amendments. Then as to Boad Boards, Government proposed to introduce an Act to simplify the Boad Board machinery, especially in regard to elections for which the Local Elections Act was too cumbersome ; this would' be a permissive Act.

power for merging would also be given to Boards. No portion of Connties should be outside of Road Boards. Asiar as possible, Road Districts should be electoral districts of the County. As to Hospitals and Charitable Aid Boards, be considered them absolutely' necessary, and that the districts must necessarily be large, in order to provide suitable buildings and medical aid. Unless they were to have a law administered by officials, they would require these boards to consist of people doing the work for love and administering local contributions. He believed these proposals wonld meet all legitimate demands for local self-govern-ment.

HUBSDAY,

In the House last night, a motion for panting compensation to P. Farrella, as immigration agent, was rejected on the voices.

LICENSING BILL.

The Honsd then went into committee on the Licensing Bill. Clause 106.— A proposal to limit a £50 fee to boroughs with over 1000 inhabitants was negatived by 85 to 21. A proposal to reduce the fee to £30 was also negatived, as also one to make it not exceeding £25 outside of boroughs. A proEosal to make this fee £20 was rejected y 87 to 18. Mr. Beeves then moved that the chairman leave the chair, as they might as well kill the Bill at that stage as waste any more time over it.

Messrs. Weston, Wallis, and Levastam, expressed an opinion that the sooner the Bill was thrown out the better.

Messrs. Lundon and Speight defended the Bill.

. Mr. Beeves said the universal opinion was that the Bill now was a lot of confounded rot.

At 12.30 Mr. Andrews moved that they report progress, as evidently the committee was not disposed to do any business. Several members opposed this. Mr. Beeves said he had an amendment to propose on one clause which would take till six in the morning. The Hon. Mr. Hall said, after such a threat, he hoped progress would not be reported. He was prepared to sit till six to teach Mr. Beeves a lesson.

Sir W. Fox said that, after the scandalous and disgraceful scenes of the last two sights, he hoped members would support his motion, when it next came on, to abolish Bellamy's. Dr. Wallis protested against such insinuations. Nothing scandalous or disgraceful had taken place, and members were all perfectly "able to judge calmly and fairly of what they were doing. Mr. "Weston protested in strong terms against Sir W. Fox's language. Although a young member, he would not submit to suoh imputations on his character.

Mr. Pyke and others also objected to such insinuations.

Mr. Beeves said Sir W. Fox himself was the most intemperate man in the House, and always spoiled his cause by the use of intemperate language. Sir W. Fox ought to be thoroughly ashamed of himself for creating the only scandal which had occurred; and the Premier should also apologise for having lost his temper.

A motion to report progress was lost by 83 to 18.

Mr. Sheehan then said Sir W. Fox had insulted the Chairman by saying scandalous scenes had taken place. Not a single member had been called to order, and therefore the accusation, if true, meant that the Chairman was neglecting bis duty. After some farther discussion, the proposal to increase the Club licenses from £20 to £80 was rejected by 43 to 38. The bottle license, A'4o, was re-inserted by 41 to 7.

Mr. Olliver moved an increase in the wine license from £1 to £10. After discussion, the proposal was lost by 28 to 20. J

Progress was reported, and the House rose at 2 o'clock.