ADDRESS-IN-REPLY

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLV, Issue 188, 14 July 1925, Page 11

ADDRESS-IN-REPLY

MR J. A. NASH’S SPEECH. SALARIES OF HEADMASTERS. One of the speakers in the Address-in-Reply debate in the House of Representatives last week was the member for Palmerston who, after congratulating Mr Coates on his appointment as Prime Minister, briefly dealt with the Government’s land policy and the settlement of soldiers on the land.

Continuing, Mr Nash referred to the salaries of school teachers, stating that he did not think that the headmasters, particularly of the State schools, were receiving the consideration to which they were entitled. I have had the privilege for some years past, continued the speaker, of meeting the Headmasters’ Association of the town and district that I represent, and I have found that their efforts have been directed towards helping those who were entering the profession—that is, the junior teachers—and particularly the country teachers. They have never laid before mo any claim on behalf of themselves. But they feel to-day that the time has arrived when they, also, should receive consideration. The position of a headmaster of grade VI. and grade VII. schools has received very scant consideration during the past few years. For the younger members of the profession the salaries have gone up by 105 per cent., as compared with 26 per cent, for the headmasters. The maximum salary in this country for a headmaster is £585. In New South Wales it reaches £661; in Victoria £650; in Burnham £670: and In Canada £735. Surely the teachers in this country are just as well entitled to such payments, and just as competent as teachers in any of the other Dominions. I think there snould be a set standard of salaries as far as the head teachers are concerned, and I want to commend this to the Minister of Education, because I know that he has always “played fair” with the teachers.

Sir Jas. Parr; They have had substantial increases.

Mr Nash: They have not had increases in the same proportion as the junior members of the profession. I do not ; think the Minister can say that they have. They are not lodging a big complaint. I think the teachers have been very moderate indeed. But what I commend to the Minister is this: that consideration should be given to the headmaster who has the control of, wo will say, 1000 scholars, as compared with the one who has only 500. That is the point—there is no distinction made. With all that responsibility lie receives the same salary as the man with the smaller school. Mr Masters: Where are there headmasters with 1000 scholars ? Mr Nash: Wo have one in Palmerston North with nearly 1000. If we take the minimum salary in grade 7, the amount is. £525. Take the head of a high school; the'sums arc £SOO, £B6O and £9OO Then the first assistant of a high school receives £530. These are our minimum salaries, and could be very well increased. The head teacher of a technical school receives from £650 up to £850; the first assistant of a technical school, £535. whilst in Toronto, Canada, it is £546. I hope that the Minister will give consideration to the members of the teaching profession, be : cause there is no question about it that they are entitled to it. There is another matter that I want to refer to —the removal expenses of teachers. Here is one case, and it is rather an interesting one, too. The teacher was in a grade 5 school and ho was receiving £390 with a house allowance of £6O, with grade increments of £6O. He was removed to another town to a grade 6 school, after which he was again removed to a grade 7 school. The salary he receives is £430, plus £6O house allowance, with increments of £SO, making £540 in all. Now I want to impress upon the Minister this fact, that all these changes took place within two years. Sir Jas. Parr: He applied for removal. Mr Nash: Yes, certainly. If the teacher had qualifications and it was found necessary by the department that he should be removed to a bigger and a better school, then it was being done in the interests of education. Sir Jas. Parr: The department did it. Mr Nash: I want to say that the teacher’s increase by way of increment was only £3O within two years, yet it cost this teacher £IOO for removal expenses. That is the whole point. I think that some consideration should bo given to teachers in that respect. There are any number of institutions in New Zealand — : tnke the Railway Department—in which there are allowances made if a man is removed from one place to another. DAIRY CONTROL BOARD. After referring to the housing shortage, and the anxiety of people as to what was to he done in the matter of providing money for building homes, incidentally paying a tribute to the State Advances Department, Mr Nash said that, he was very anxious to hear this session from the Minister of Agriculture whether he was going to allow absolute control to he put into execution by the Dairy Control Board.

Hon. Mr Nosworthv: You can bear from bin) now—it is a question for tbc board entirely. Mr N'asb: The Minister says it is a question for the board, sir, but ho has sufficient grip over that kioard to tell them whether they are to have absolute control or not on the farmers of this country, fanners, as a rule, are rather slow in taking anything up, and when this proposal for a board of control came along they thought it would be a good thing, but many of the men who supported it at the beginning are now absolutely opposed to it. Why should factories which have been carrying on their business for the past thirty years, having made a success of it and worked out their own destines, both in the foreign and Home markets, and are to-day enjoying most excellent arrangements, bo compelled to have a hoard of farmers to take over their affairs? They don’t want it; they want to be able to control their own business themselves. The present system ;of election is- most unsatisfactory. To-day we had a deputation to both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Agriculture, and I do want to stress on the Minister the fact that wo want the single ward representation. The ward system is being advocated by factories all over New Zealand, and the sooner the Minister understands that position and knows that it is the desire and the earnest wish of the farmers of this country that it should be introduced, the bettter will it be for all concerned. Mr Masters: He promised that.

Mr Nash : I believe the Minister is going to do it, but he has a lot of work fo do and we have to keep him up to the scratch. LOCAL BODIES LOANS. The speaker urged that the present was an excellent opportunity for the new Minister of Finance to do something to help local bodies to raise money to carry on their works. Unfortunately, lie said, at the present time they are paying a rate of 6 per cent., and money is not obtainable at less than that. Something will have to be done to help them, otherwise it means that (he roads right throughout the country will have to go back I am not, of course, referring to the main highways, but speaking of roads in general. There is one department that could give a lend in this direction, and that is the Public Trust Office. If you go to the Public Trustee to-day he demands 6 per cent, for his money, and if he does that it is only natural that other institutions will do the same thing. HOW PARTIES DIFFER. Denying a Labour statement that he had said Mr Coates had been given a free hand by members of his party, Mr Nnsh said he agreed with the alleged utterance all the same. We have had a happy knack in the Reform Party of having a leader that we can trust, and we are always prepared to leave matters in his hands, added the

Speaker. Reform is a united party. Can that be said of ~the Labour Party. We do not tie the hands of our leader in the manner that they tie the hands of the leader of the Labour Party, who has to do what the annual conference tells liim. He is not allowed a free hand to do anything even so far as this House is concerned; everything has to be discussed and arranged and decided upon by the party u* a whole. As to their land policy, during the Franklin election they called it the “tischokl” policy and surely now they have had a clear indication that the farmers of the country do not want in. Someone here has described it as the “loosehold.’ Mr Holland: That happened to be a land agent. Mr Nash: It is better to be a land agent than to be a man who does nothing but. depend upon bis salary in this House far better. I am a land agent, and I am happy to be ao employed trying to do a little better for myself when not engaged in Parliamentary duties. We arc very anxious to know what the leader has to say about the land policy. It is a great policy—it was manufactured by a watchmaker in my own town, during his spare hours, and the only thing they have added to it since is “usehold.” I was reading a speech delivered by a gentleman tonly two days ago, in which lie said he had seen posted up in one of the big cities of New Zealand » sort: of proclamation. I want to refer to this because our Labour friends used to tell us to call them Bolsheviks. But now they arc playing a softer game, and are putting on the soft pedal. But this is what was posted iip in one of the big cities of New Zealand: “Don’t scab, on the unemployed, go slow —-.slpwer work more jobs, fewer unemployed, less competition, higher wages; don’t be a ‘scab’; be a man and join the 1.W.W.” And when a discussion took place the other day in- the House on the question of the handling of coal the Labour members were most indignant that reference was made to it. Yet this is the sort of thing we find exhibited in one of our big cities. THE FUSION ISSUE. They have made reference, too, about the Reform and Liberal Parties joining up. I desire to say that so far as the negotiations between the two parties arc concerned they have been absolutely honest. Whether anything conics of them or not, each side has played square with one • another. Bui, so far as the Labour Party itself is concerned, I believe it is the last thing they want to see happen. They know only to o well that, the joining up of the two parties in the House means the testing of the position of the extreme Labour Party during the coming election. They know only too well that many of them were elected on the minority vote. I fun not suggesting there arc not other minority members here —there are plenty —but we know that if we can get a true test of the extreme Labour Party during the coming election, there will be a few vacant seats in the next Parliament so far as that party is concerned. QUEER PAMPHLETS. All sorts of pamphets are issued by the Labour Party. Here is one .of them: “My dear fellow-workers” (they have dropped the ‘comrades’, it is too common these days) “I have one ambition; I want to see 60,000 dairy farmers, who with thenworkers and their families, produce £60,000,000 of exports, freed from financia worries that, blight their lives; it should not he financial slavery; a hc.ii.~c to sleep in, and the everlasting grind of com spanking. This is a legacy of Reform, and tne only remedy is for the working farmers to join the Labour Party. Yours in the fight.” , ' .. The speaker criticised the contents ot this document, saying the farmers were not so easily taken down, and then quoted anothei which set forth that the “workers represented 80 per cent 6f the population, and Labour’s fight was to protect them from profiteers, etc.” Pointing out that all the workers of the country were not in the hands of the Labour Party, the speaker said there were many with jao confidence in that party at all. We are all workers, every one of us. It is not a case of 80 per cent of the population of the country being workers, but 100 per cent. GOVERNMENT’S RECORD. Replying to Labour charges that the Government had done nothing. Mr Nash mentioned the housing policy which had been a good thing for the country. Ihen, in regard to education, the expenditure had i ncrea-.cd from £1,50,000 in 1914 to £3,500,000. In regard to . the pension scheme, as far as the returned soldiers were concerned, they had, he supposed, the best pension scheme in the world. I o the question of child welfare every attention had been given, and the system controlled by the Plimket Society had been a great success. Let the members of the Labour Party look at the improvement which had taken place in regard to the t conditions of the men sent t’o prison. Their wives were receiving (he wages which were credited to these men while they were put away for a short space of time. The advances to a settler had been increased to £3500 while assistance had been giver, to farmers enable them to purchase stock. The Government had also introduced a system under which dairy and farm inspectors were sent to make periodical visits to farms and to advise farmers as to new methods which could be profitably introduced in connection with farm production. In addition there wore the grants for roads and bridges in all electorates and an export subsidy had been given on fruit. There had also been a reduction of taxation as promised by the late Prime Minister. Above all, the Reform Government had upheld law and order, added the speaker, who made passing reference to the Lyons ease and urged the deportation of all undesirables. As for some people said Mr Nash in conclusion, if this country is not good enough for them to live here and behave themselves as citizens should —if it _ becomes necessary for them to preach sedition and adopt Bolshevik tactics —the sooner we deport them from our shores the better. We have a country that we should be proud of. We should uphold its integrity and protect its citizens.