PARLIAMENT

Manawatu Standard, Volume IV, Issue 222, 20 August 1931, Page 2

PARLIAMENT

CONDITIONS OF RAILWAYMAN. LABOUR MEMBER’S QUESTION. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Aug. 19. In the House of Representatives today, Mr D. • G. Sullivan asked the Minister of Railways, Hon. W. A. Veitch, whether there was any truth in the rumour that the Railways Board intended to reduce the hours of work of railwaymen and their wages pro rata, and if so, was that not a contradiction of the statement previously made by the Minister to the effect that the Railways Board would not have the power to deal with the wages and conditions of men. Mr Veitch said he had not time to inquire into the question and would give an answer to-morrow.

QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE. CLEARER DEFINITION DESIRED

The report of the committee of privilege concerning a letter written by Messrs Bond and Bond, Auckland, to Mr F. Lye and an advertisement published in the New Zealand Herald was considered.

Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes moved that in view of the Select Committee’s report no further action should be taken. Ho would also move, in accordance with the committee’s recommendation, that the question of more clearly defining the rules and practices relating to privilege should be referred to the Standing Orders Committee for a report. It was apparent that even members of Parliament were somewhat hazy as to what actually constituted a breach of priyilege and to the general public the position must be even more obscure. Mr R. A. Wright said he was glad the position was to be cleared. It was a little difficult for any firm to know what steps to take in endeavouring to reply to an attack made upon its activities by a member speaking in the House of Representatives. He hoped the Standing Orders Committee would bo able to arrive at some understanding which would help firms and newspapers to understand what actually constituted a breach of privilege. Mr W. E. Barnard submitted that it had been made quite clear from the evidence given before the committee that thousands of Auckland people would realise that the firm to which Mr Lye had referred was Messrs Bond and Bond. He considered Mr Lye’s criticism of the system had been somewhat intemperate and the actions of Messrs Bond and Bond in replying had also been intemperate. The whole matter was unfortunate and he thought the Prime Minister’s motion met the case very well. Mr A. Harris said he was not at all sure that criticism such as that which had been made by Mr Lye did not call for some reply. He personally would have expected some reply if he had made a similar attack. Mr Lye said he had not attacked any particular firm, or person. He had made a definite attack upon a system with which Messrs Bond and Bond had subsequently identified themselves by publishing an advertisement. That was their own responsibility. He had no other purpose in bringing the matter before the House than that of protecting the rights and privileges of members and he was quite satisfied with the expressions of regret that had bee r made.

Mr J. O’Brien suggested that Messrs Bond and Bond and the New Zealand Herald should, in addition to apologising to the House, have also apologised personally to Mr Lye. Mr D. Jones said he held that the firm attacked was quite entitled to defend itself and could issue a challenge to Mr Lye if it liked. He was of the opinion that the newspaper was justified in publishing the advertisement. The Leader of the Labour Party, Mr H. E. Holland, said he believed the newspaper should not be exempt from the criticism accorded the firm and he stressed the need for a clear definition of privilege. Mr P. Fraser said he was of the opinion that the matter had been settled satisfactorily. He considered that, once Mr Lye had drawn attention to it, it had become the affair of the House. Any member should be prepared in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred to repeat outside the House any statement he had made within it. It was possible that the one occasion in a hundred would arise when it would be perfectly unjustifiable and in the public interests for a member to get up and make a statement that could not be made outside. Mr T. TV. McDonald contended that Mr Lye had been accused by the advertisement of making statements he had never made. He hoped that the House would insist on an apology being made to Mr Lye as well as to the House.

Mr J. A. Yonng submitted that when a member made a speech on a public question he should not resent criticism from outside. After other members had spoken the Prime Minister’s motion was adopted, also the motion referring the question of the definition of privilege to the Standing Orders Committee.

BUDGET DEBATE. ENCOURAGEMENT OF THRIFT. The Budget debate was resumed by Mr T. D. Burnett, who said the State, with the best of intentions, was making a big mistake in postponing the payment of interest and rates as the system was striking a blow at the business morality of the community. There should, instead, be a readjustment of rents and interest on the basis of the reduced prices for primary produce. If that were done there would he a reduction of from 33 to 50 per cent, in rentals and the money would not be so hopelessly lost as it was under the system of postponements. The State would, as the outcome of the depression, have to insist on compulsory thrift so that reserves could be built up. Mr E. J. Howard said the Labour Party had been accused of keeping the Government in office' for eighteen months. He pointed out that the Labour Party had supported the Government until it had departed from the policy on which it had been elected. NAVAL DEFENCE. Mr Wilkinson inquired what was the reason for the increase of £25,000 in the naval defence vote. He said one ship should be sufficient for the Dominion. Two- ships would not be able to put up a fight by themselves. He criticised the continuation of work on the South Island Main Trank railway, suggesting that it would bo one of the biggest disasters this country had ever taken on. He attacked the retention of the wheat duties on the ground that they had the effect of keeping up he price of bread. Mr Wilkinson said he believed the country desired a fusion of parties for the purpose of facing the national difficulties. Mr Jones, when speaking at Eltham, had expressed the opinion that there would be no United Party after the next election and it seemed that that was the mainspring of the Reform Party’s reason for re- 1 peatedly rejecting the overtures. The Reform Party in its folly evidently believed that it would have a majority after the next election. Hon. J. G. Cobbe said there had

been a considerable question about the advisability of utilising the reserves. He contended that the purpose of building up reserves was to enable any concern to meet an emergency and in his opinion the present was an occasion when the Government was justified in drawing upon its reserves. Replying to Mr Wilkinson’s criticism of the cruisers in the New Zealand squadron, the Minister said the vessels were the correct type for the South Pacific and one had only to look at the map to see the necessity for having these two vessels to patrol the waters. Referring to the wheat duties, he said that while he did not support high duties he recognised that some duty was necessary, otherwise thousands of glowers in the South Island would go out of business. Mr Cobbe denied that Sir Otto Niemeyer had come to New Zealand as a dictator, but had come to tender advice for which he had been asked. WAR DEBTS PROBLEM.

Mr A. M. Samuel said he thought the present was the most serious crisis New Zealand had ever known—not only New Zealand, but the whole world. It liad been predicted that if wo continued along the present lines there would be an inevitable breakdown of civilisation, but he did not think the European countrios would allow this to take place. The way out of the crisis could be found by tho cancellation of the war debts and he thought civilisation would be forced to meet and find some satisfactory basis of agreement. It was also necessary to stabilise the currency'. Ho considered each country would have to face its problems along the lines of national unity, and for that reason he thought a concrete invitation should be sent to all parties so that the best brains could bo brought to bear on all the problems enabling the country to speak with one voice.

Tho debate was interrupted by the rising of tho House at 10.30.

FEWER MEMBERS. SUPPORT FOR PROPOSAL. WELLINGTON, Aug. 19. Agreement with Mr K. S. Williams that the number of members of Parliament should be reduced, was expressed by the Minister of Defence, Hon. J. G. Cobbe. Mr Cobbe said a start should be made in cutting down the number fo city members, who, as was well known, constituted a large proportion of the House. Mr W. E. Parry: And mostly Labour members, too. Mr Cobbe said that after all the country' members represented those who produced and the city members those who spent. The question of honoraria had to be considered and possibly tho reduction of those of city members and an increase for country representatives. It took practically the whole of the first year’s honorarium of a country member to pay for his election. A Voice: And the. city members, too.

Mr Cobbe said lie had heard of one city member whose election had cost him 6s Bd, although he had borrowed 5s of this. One city member had told him he could stand on his door-step and see the whole of his electorate, but it took the speaker days to get round his own district.

TRADING COUPONS. CASH SYSTEM FAVOURED. WELLINGTON, Aug. 19. Support for tho Trading Coupons Bill in a form to prohibit all gifts except cash is contained in a series of Auckland petitions presented to the House by Auckland members of Parliament. In the aggregate the petitions contain the names of 109 individual traders and firms, of whom 13 are wholesale concerns. The petitioners state that from their wide experience of merchandising they regard the Trading Coupons Bill redrafted in such manner as to prohibit gifts of any kind (other than cash) in addition to the main article purchased, as wise and beneficial legislation, and believe it to be in the best interests of the community as a whole. They urge that the Bill be submitted to the House in this form.