PARLIAMENT

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 289, 3 November 1934, Page 9

PARLIAMENT

THE FINANCE BILL. PROVISION FOR REBATE ON RATES. Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, Nov. 2. Amendments to the Finance Bill, No. 3, were introduced in the House of Representatives this afternoon. Rt. Hon. J. G. Coates said a new clause provided for a rebate of rates on county lands of 12£ per cent. Another clause placed education boards in the same position as the Crown as tar as rates wore concerned.

The Bill also increased the maturity period for whisky from three to five years.

Replying to a question, Mr Coates said the rebate on rates referred only to lands used for pastoral, agricultural or horticultural purposes. The amendments were agreed to and the Bill was further considered in Committee, several members contending that the Government would ultimately have to wipe off arrears as private mortgagees had done. Speaking to the amendment granting a rebate of rates, Mr M. J. Savage said the Government’s action was illogical, but lie was not going to oppose it. The Government must accept responsibility for it.

Other members criticised the amendment, stating that many persons who did not need relief would receive it. There were many persons in boroughs just as hard pressed as those in counties; yet they would receive no benefit.

Mr A. Harris suggested that the Minister should alter the amendment and make the rebate apply to all land used for agricultural, horticultural or pastoral purposes, irrespective of where the land was situated.

Mr J. A. Nash said the farmer would not secure the benefit from the Bill that was intended, but he suggested that the farmer would not get half the sum taken from the Consolidated Fund. He suggested that the rebate should be given on an income basis; that, he said, could be easily worked, as the Government had access to the figures. Progress was reported and the House rose at 6.40 till 7.30 p.m. on Monday. legislativFcouncil. COMPANIES BILL RUSHED THROUGH. The Legislative Council met at 2.30 p.m. and adjourned until 4.30, when the Companies (Special Receivership) Bill was received. On the second reading, Sir James Allen suggested that the Government should bring down legislation which would prevent the directors of trustee companies gaining control for ulterior motives. The Bill was put through all stages and passed. The Council rose at 5.5 until 10.30 a.m. on Monday. ,

THE COMPANIES LEGISLATION RECEIVERSHIP BILL PASSED.

WELLINGTON, Nov. 3. -A complaint that though the names of several New Zealand newspapers were mentioned at the investigation held in Sydney into the operations of a number of trust companies and interlocking concerns no reference had been made to them in the reports appearing in the Dominion, was made by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr AL. J. Savage, during the second reading debate on the Companies (Temporary Receivership) Bill in the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon, says the Dominion. Mr Savage said there were several political references at the inquiry in Sydney. Mr A. Harris: Polab?

Mr G. H. Sykes: Polecat. “I have heard something ‘PoJab,’ ‘Polecat’ and ‘Anchor,’ ” added Mr Savage, “but curiously enough the names of half a dozen New Zealand newspapers referred to at the inquiry were not mentioned. There were nom de plumes and innuendos to implicate the Labour Party. I will be more generous than those newspapers and not mention their names, although they would have gladly mentioned mine if they could have.” “The action of the newspapers in suppressing their own names while publishing suggestions about the Labour Party was the shadiest act of suppression in the history of New Zealand journalism,” said Mr J. A. Lee. Members had received a long diatribe, directed against some gentlemen who were directors of those newspapers. Yet while members were being fair to those gentlemen, by throwing away that diatribe, the papers were engaged in publishing an attack on the Labour Party. A statement had been made before the Royal Commission in Sydney to the effect that a certain person could influence the Auckland Star, the Waikato Times, the Whangarei Advocate, the Wanganui Chronicle, the Times and Star of Christchurch, the Challenger Advertiser and the Dairy Exporter. All those papers published the insinuations made before the Commission against the Labour Party. The Minister of Internal Affairs, Hon. J. A. Young: Were those names sent in the Press telegram from Sydney ?

Mr Lee: The names were in New Zealand all right. I saw a telegram with the nallies, but perhaps I am not at liberty to say anything about that. However, when I received a circular dealing with Mr Oliver Nicholson I threw it into the waste-paper basket, but Mr Nicholson is a director of a paper— Mr Coates: Is he a. director of a newspaper ? Mr Lee: I think he is. Mr Coates: I don’t think so.

Mr Lee: Well, I’m wrong, hut 1 am making the charge against whoever it was who brought about that suppression. The attitude of members was that the circular was not an answer t,o the charges made against Mr McArthur —it was just a personal attack on Mr Nicholson. The Minister of Finance stood up to the situation in a way that does him credit, and he did not know that these names were going to bo suppressed. I thought the Leader of the Opposition was too generous, and I thought it as well to put the names of those papers on record. Nil- A. J. Stalhvorthv asked whether the protection of the debenture-holders was to date from the passage of that Bill or from the date of the passing .of the original Act. He said that people, on the passing of the original Act, had become panickv and had hastily parted with their debentures for a fraction of their value and now they might be worth something. The Bill was put through all stages and passed. The cables received by tlie “M ana-, watu Evening Standard” were published in full.