PARLIAMENT

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 269, 12 October 1929, Page 4

PARLIAMENT

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. MARRIAGE AMENDMENT BILL PASSED. Ter Press Association. WELLINGTON, Oct. 11. The Legislative Council met at 2.30 o’clock to-day. The Land Laws. Amendment Bill was read a second time pro. forma and referred to the lands committee. In speaking on the third reading of the Marriage Amendment Bill,, perinitting marriage with a deceased wife’s niece or a deceased husband’s nephew, Sir Francis Bell entered a protest, as it would create illegitimates in other parts of the Empire. He contended that there should he uniformity in the marriage laws throughout ’ the Empire. This was supported by Hon. T. S. Weston. Hon. J. Barr contested the argument; declaring that New Zealand was a separate entity and that we should not wait till Great Britain took action to rectify a wrong in law. Hon. W. Earnshaw moved that the bill be read a third time three months hence, but this was lost by 22 votes to 13. . The bill was passed without amendment. , • . In speaking on the second reading of the Education Amendment Bill, introduced by Hon. G..M. Thomson,' with the object of initiating a system of religious instruction in public schools, Hon. L. M. Isitt submitted that it was the duty of the State to see that the whole development of the child was catered for in the schools. .Ir moral and ethical teaching should be given and he was not satisfied that this was being done. He accepted/the bill on the principle that half a loaf was better than no bread, but insisted that, if it proved unsuccessful, parents should have the right to express their further opinion concerning it at a fixed date. At this stage the debate was adjourned and the Council rose at 4.10 o’clock until Wednesday. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. CIVIL SERVANTS’ SALARIES. When the House of Representatives resumed in Committee of Supply at 2.30 o’clock. Hon. T. M. Wilford stated that he had in the interval discussed the morning’s proceedings with the Prime Minister, who had requested him to inform the House that he intended, as soon as possible after hw return, to make a full and complete statement in regard to civil servants affected by the salary “cut ” An opportunity to discuss it would be given all members. ' . . ... Mr J. A. Nash said that in view‘of the Prime Minister’s message, the House should be satisfied. Mr H. E. Holland agreed. He considered that he -would be meeting the wishes of the House if he asked leave to withdraw .his amendment (hear hears). The amendment was that the Post Office vote be reduced by £2 as a recommendation to the Government that the salaries of the employees in the Post and Telegraph Department should be restored to tne 1922 standard. Mr A. M. Samuel criticised Mr Holland’s attitude and referred to the amendment as “blank ammunition. It was pointed out by Mr P. Fraser that there was nothing to be gained by proceeding with tne amendment. The House would shortly be a big, to resume the discussion of the subject with the advantage of knowing what was the Government’s policy in the Mr J. McCombs stated that the members of the Reform Party, ever since 1922, had consistently voted to resist the 'efforts of the Labour Party to prevent the “cute” applying to lower paid officers. , , ~ , Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates stated that the “cuts” had been essential and had been accepted by the civil servants themselves. The Arbitration Court had to face the position. . Mr McCombs: You forced it to. Mr Coates submitted that it was not reasonable to talk of forcing the Arbitration Court. _ ■ . , Mr McCombs described the legislation of 1922 as the most confiscatory that Parliament had <sver been called upon to consider. The money which was taken from civil servants had been given to the wealthy pastoralists of'the Dominion by way of a reduction in taxation. „ . , , , Mr J. T. Hogan stated that he had spoken in favour of the restoration of the “cut,’.’ but on the Minister’s statement he had thought there was no need to go further with the amendment. He considered that the House should allow it to be withdrawn m view of the Prime. Minister s message. ... Mr H. S. Kyle did not agree with this view, whereupon Mr Holland said that he had sought, to withdraw the amendment to meet the request of the Prime Minister. It was the only decent thing to do. After the statement of the Government’s policy had been submitted, if it Were not satisfactory the amendment could be moved again. Mr Coates said that his party was agreeable to meet tire wi6nes of the Prime Minister and the amendment was withdrawn. ■ . . ... Hon T. M. Wilford intimated that, when ’the Post Office account and Prisons and Pensions Department estimates had been passed, the House would adjourn. In reply to questions from various members, Hon. J. B. Donald stated that the Rluff-Hobart-Melbourne mad service would not be a charge .against the Post Office account altogether. It might carry- portion of the subsidy, but not the whole of it. ... The vote was then passed and the estimates for the Prisons (£92,867) and Pensions Departments (£165,360) went through without discussion. The House rose at 4.44 p.m. till 7.30 p.m. on Monday.