PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11770, 27 September 1901, Page 6

PARLIAMENT.

[BY TELEGRAM!.PKES9 ASSOCIATION.] LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Thursday. Thk Council met at half-past two p.m. SECOND READINGS. The Charitable Gifts Bill and the Trustee ' Amendment Bill were read a second time. FINAL STAGES. The Exportation of Arms Bill and the Promissory Oaths Bill passed their final stages without amendment. The Council rose at fifteen minutes past three p.m. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Thursday. The House met at half-past two p.m. DESIGNATION OF NEW ZEALAND. Mr. Napier gave notice to ask the Government if they will introduce legislation this session to provide that New Zealand be designated a state instead of a colony. BEGINNING OF THE END. The Acting-Speaker, in reply to a point raised by Mr. Seddon, said that as the session was approaching within measurable distance of completion, he would give facilities for passing Bills through all their stages at one sitting. This would only apply to Bills which were reported from committee. HANSARD VACANCY. In reply to Mr, Pirani, the Acting-Speaker said it had been decided not to make a permanent appointment this session to the Hansard staff, in the place of Mr. Crow. A temporary appointment had. however, been made for"the remainder of the session SERGEANT-AT-ARMS. The Acting-Speaker also stated that several applications had been made for the vacant position of Sergeant-at-Arms. but no recommendation as to an appointment had vet been made by him. Mr. Seddon said a recommendation had been made by Sir G. M. O'Rorke. but, as a number of applications had come in which Sir G. M. O'Roi'Ke had not had an opportunity of considering, the matter had not vet been dealt with. CANTERBURY COLLEGE EMPOWERING BILL. The Canterbury College Empowering Act, 1900. Amendment Bill (Mr. G. W. Russell), was introduced and read a first time. THE ROYAL VISIT. A Bill " To make prevision for the reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by His Excellency the Governor in connection with the Royal visit to New Zealand" was brought down by Governor's message. Mr. Seddon said he desired to explain the position. Exception had been taken, he believed, to an item for the Governor's expenses appearing on the Estimates, but the course the Government had taken in placing the sum on the Estimates was strictly in accordance* with the law. However, to remove any wrong impression on the point, be desired to explain that the money had been expended by His Excellency on behalf of the colony. The Imperial Government had inquired whether the colony of New Zealand would entertain the Royal party, and the reply was that the colony would do so. His Excellency had simply done the entertaining on behalf of the colony by arrangement between the colony and the Mother Country. He did not think it proper that the King's representative should be brought on to the floor of the House and made the subject of debate, and to prevent - what might have been an acrimonious discussion on tins item of the Estimates the Government had adopted the course of bringing down the Bill. He also pointed out that later on the Governor would have to approve of the Appropriation Bill, and if the item appeared on the Estimates he would be approving of a Bill in which he was interested. Mr. Atkinson : He would have to reserve the Appropriation Bill. Mr. Seddon said nothing of the kind. The Royal instructions were clear on the "point. He went on to say that he wished it clearly understood that the Governor, at the request of Ministers, had taken the position of host for the colony for the time being. This i new Bill would, of course, be reserved for the 1 Royal assent,' and the item on the Estimates would be struck out. Mr. Pirani said the Royal instructions to the Governor were perfectly clear. The Governor could not assent to any Bill which contained a grant to himself. The Premier knew that, and fearing that the Appropriation Act would be hung up he made the grant to the Governor a separate Bill, to be reserved for the Royal assent. Had the Premier read the Royal instructions a little more carefully he would have found that in. cases of urgency His Excellency could have signed the Appropriation Bill, reserving the part which referred to himself for the 'Roval assent. Mr. fTornsby protested against paying any grant to the Governor, on the ground that Parliament was assured that the salary would cover everything. The Governor had not only acted" as host, but interfered in every way, especially in Wellington, and created a feelintr 'hat had not been created by any former Governor. Sir Joseph Ward thought it was a pity that such expressions had fallen from members of the House. The Governor had acted as host on behalf of the colony, and had conducted the entertainment of their Royal Highnesses in New Zealand as Lord Hopetor.n had done in Australia. The sum was merelv a refund of moneys expended by His Excellency on behalf of the colony. Mr. G. W. Russell said a principle was at stake. A gentleman holding a very high, but irresponsible position, had been permitted to expend a very large sum of money without authority, but if the £2250 was a repayment of money disbursed by His Exj cellency in entertaining their Royal Highnesses in the way of food, etc., he would I have no objection to it. Mr. Seddon interjected that, that was precisely what the money was for. Mr. Fisher said if the Premier had notbeen taken by surprise why had he changed the whole position of the vote ? It was clear that, the £2250 proposed to be granted to the Governor was a gratuity within the meaning of the Royal instructions. Having already provided last session for the expenses of the visit of the Duke of York, it was unfair to ask Parliament to pay money twice over. Sir J. Ward : That is not so. My. Fisher went on to contend that this grant was unfair and unwarrantable, and in the light of the Royal instructions invalid and illegal. Mr. Napier regretted that this discussion had arisen, and paid a tribute to Lord Ranfurly for the way in which he had carried out his duties as host during the Royal visit. Mr. A. L. Fraser considered it was not very creditable to the House that this discussion had taken place. This being a reimbursement and not a donation, he could not think that the Bill was required. In reply to Mr. Fisher, he argued that the increase of salary voted to the Governor last session was intended to apply to all Go. vernors, and bad not been voted simply in anticipation of the Royal visit. Mr. Wiiford supported the courne taker by the Premier. Mr. Atkinson contended that this pay ment name within the prohibition of tht 1 Royal instructions. , j Mr. Seddon. in replying, said the Solici i tor-General had advised him that this pro J posed reimbursement of £2250 was not i ! grant within the meaning of the Royal in ' i strnetions. In face of this legal advice, am ■ ! against his own convictions, he had brough • ! down a Bill with the view of avoiding an} • ' acrimonious discussion on the Estimates ' , which might have detracted from the credi I the colony had gained from its entertain > ; ! ment of the Royal visitors. He could tel • ' the House that outside of this payment tin ! ; Roval visit had entailed very heavy expens . i upon His Excellency. As far as the cos - ! to the colonv of the visit was concerned, h believed £70,000 would cover everything ■. Pin could sav this now that all the account ■f were in. He was satisfied the Bill wouh - pass practically unanimously, and the colon; o would cheerfully pay up. J' The Bill was then read a. first time on th II voices. - At a-quarter to five p.m. the House wen d into Committee of Supply for the furthe d I consideration of the Estimates. e ! The vote for miscellaneous services of th s I Colonial Secretary's Department, £181,39? c* i was further discussed. The items of ex d ' penses connected with the Royal visit wer d j first, considered. d On the motion of Sir J. Ward the item « " Grant to the Governor in reimbwsemen

of expenses incurred by him in connection with the Royal visit, £2250," was struck out. Mr. Pirani asked for an explanation of the item, grant to Mr. Rhodes, Mayor of Christchinch, in reimbursement of expenses incurred by him, £257." Mr. Seddon said this was in payment of liabilities (tradesmen accounts, etc.), incurred by Mr. A. E. G. Rhodes on behalf of the Government, in connection with the stay of the Royal party at Mr. Rhodes' residence at Christchurch. The accounts were made out in Mr. Rhodes' name, and this was the only way the Government could wet them passed and reimburse Mr. Rhodes for an expenditure lie had incurred on behalf of the colony. Mr. Rhodes had been very careful and businesslike and lie (Mr. Seddon) commended to the House what he had done. Considerable discussion ensued, which was interrupted by the half-past five adjournment. , , The House resumed at half-past seven p.m. The items of expenditure connected with the Roval visit were further discussed. _ Eventually the item regarding Mr. Rhodes expenses was passed without:, alteration. Mr Massey moved to omit the item " grant to Ministers and their secretaries in reimbursement of expenses incurred by them, including £150 for ordinary travelling allowance, £350." The motion was lost by 36 to 19. The item, " Reviews and massing of troops and cadets at various centres, with freights, passages, and incidental expenses connected therewith. £20,000," was next considered Mr. Pirani condemned the bungling that had occurred in connection with the transport of troops at the,"time of the Royal visit, and complained that some of the volunteers had not yet been paid the allowance promised them. Mr. Tanner spoke strongly in condemnation of the administration 61 the Defence Department, saying it was the worst-man-aged and most scandalously-extravagant Department in the colony. The British War Office was a fool to it. Mr. Seddon said as to the payment of the men. he had only to-day received the vouchers for Otago, which should have been in weeks ago. If his officers did not sharpen up in these matters he would have to look for a fresh lot. The men should not have been kept out of their money so long. As to the Christehurch review, general satisfaction had been expressed at its management, and as to the Newtown camp affair, it was sub judioe, as the evidence of the Committee of Inquiry had been forwarded tc the officers concerned, and they had been asked to report on it. He considered, however, that Newtown Park should never have been selected as the site for the camp. The caterer for the camp had not yet been paid. Mr. Willis thought it was extremely unjust to attempt to put all the blame for the Newtown Park muddle on the shoulders of the officer in charge of the camp. LieutenantColonel Sommervilie. He believed, when the proper time name, that officer would be able to completely vindicate himself. The heads of the Defence Department should bear the blame.

Mr. Symes defended Colonel Sommervilie, and pointed out that his repeated suggestions to the officer in command of the district had been ignored. Sir J. G. Ward said while the cost of the Royal Commissioners and their expenses was £467, the Chief Commissioner, Mr. Holmes, received £100 a month for three months and a-half.

Mr. G. J. Smith considered that the Christchurch review reflected great credit on the Defence Minister. Some exception had been-taken to the cost of it, but surely if the thing was worth doing at all it. was worth doing well. From what he had seen in connection with the review he thought the House ought to congratulate itself that the cost was not £40,000.

Mr. Pirani moved to reduce the item by £5, as indicating the disapproval of the House at the arrangements made by the Government and their officers in connection with the review and massing of troops and the non-payment of the troops. Sir J. G. Ward hoped members would discuss defence matters in their proper place, namely, when the Defence Department estimates came on.

Mr. Collins said the Christehurch review itself was well worth the expenditure. Mr. Wiiford contended that the evidence taken by the Newtown Park Inquiry Committee showed that if Colonel Sommerville's suggestions had been acted on by the Defence Department the whole trouble would have been avoided.

Mr. Pimm's motion was negatived by 38 to 18, and the item was passed unaltered. On the item, " Miscellaneous entertainments, including Commissioners' salaries and expenses, also expenses of invited guests from Australia and press representatives, £12.15")," Mi*. Collins moved a reduction of £1000. He held that the expenditure on Commissioners' salaries was a wicked extravagance. Sir J. G. Ward gave, details of the vote, which included railway fares and freights to the demonstration at Rotorua, £3700 ; steamer fares and freights, £584 : food, camp, attendance, etc., £2571 ; medals for school children, £1157 ; Parliamentary reception, including lunches and dinners, £1848 ; kinematographs, £400 ; presentations to the Duke and Duchess, £686 ; cost of souvenir cards, £1050. The motion for reduction was negatived on the voices.

The remaining items of the vote of £50,000, m connection with the Royal visit, passed without amendment. Till-; FEDERATION COMMISSION.

On the item. "Expenses of Royal Commission on federation, £3800," Mr. Thos. Mackenzie moved a reduction of £5 as an expression of the opinion of the House as to the inadequacy of the representation of small farmers on that Commission. Mr. Fisher said the Premier had previously given a clear indication that he was opposed to federation, and the expenditure on the Commission was deliberately useless. Mir. Massey declared that the Commissioners had 'been appointed because they were opened to federation. Mr. Pirani said it was one of the most useless wastes of public money the Government had been guilty of. Mr. Seddon promised that another opportunity would lie afforded the House of discussing the federation question. He defended the personnel of the Commission, and said whatever might happen in the future New Zealand at the present time was not ripe to seriously consider the change in our constitution, which would be iuvolved by joining the federation. He considered the amount expended on the Commission was money well spent. Mr. T. Mackenzie's motion was negatived by 34 to 17. At twenty minutes to two a.m. a motion by Mr. Graham to report progress was lost by 29 to 20, and the House was left sitting at two a.m.