LEGISLATORS' PAY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19170, 9 November 1925, Page 11

LEGISLATORS' PAY.

CONTROVERSY IN SYDNEY

NEW SOUTH WALES INCREASE.

THE REPLY TO MR. M. J. SAVAGE

[from our own correspondent.] SYDNEY. Oct. 30. When the Deputy-Leader of the New Zealand Labour Party, Mr. M. J. Savage, cabled to Mr. J. T, Lang, Premier of New South t Wales, for information concerning the recent increase in the salaries of the State Parliament members, he probably littl guessed that ho would start as neat a political controversy as one could desire. Last Tuesday morning a section of the Sydney press published a cable message from New Zealand giving the gist of Mr. Lang's reply to the effect that tho increase had received the approval of ah parties. The Legislative Assembly met that morning and, of course, Mr, Lang was questioned as to the correctness of the cabled statement. The increase, it may bo stated, has been frankly labelled a "grab" by press and public. Thus it was like dragging a skeleton from the family cupboard when Mr. Lang replied to his questioners that he understood some Nationalists had voted against the increase, but that none of them had refused to accept the increase. This was said with a sardonic smile, and there were cheers from the xvlinisterial benches when Mr. Lang added that Mr. Lysaght, a Labour member, was the only member who had refused to accept the increase. Tho report of these proceedings in Wednesday's papers was accompanied by a copy of a cablegram sent by Mr. T. R. Bavin, Leader of the Opposition, to Mr. Savage, refuting Mr. Lang's assertion and adding that the bill was carried against the Opposition on a division. Then on Wednesday Mr. Lang had to admit that Mr. Bavin had also refused to accept the increase. Unseemly Proceedings. Rowdy scenes occurred when Mr. Lang reiterated his statement that the increase in salaries had been approved by all parties. All sorts of allegations flew about, with denials in their wake, making the proceedings, as one paper suggested, as unseemly as the "grab" itself. The Premier alleged that Nationalist members had approached tho AttorneyGeneral and himself to introduce a bill increasing salaries, and several, ho averred, asked during the debate for him to move the closure so that they would not have to express their views. Then Mr. Davidson, the Government whip, alleged that the; Opposition whip. Mr. Lee, approached him and said that if Mr. Davidson would prepare a "round robin," members of the Opposition would sign it. This Mr. Lee hotly denied, saying that Mr. Davidson had handed him a petition to sign, which, on being pasted up on the wall of the party's room, was torn down within a few hours. In the midst of the recriminations there are facts that stand out and which will be remembered by electors at the next time of asking, One is that no mandate was give'i any party or any candidate to move for an increase of salary, and no mention of an increase was made in preelection speeches. Another is that although the Labour Party, as the Government, moved for the" increase, the Opposition was not as sincere in its opposition to this bill as it has been on other subjects. Excuse for Acceptance. More than one member of the Nationalist and Country Parties excused their acceptance of the increase by saying that if Mr. Blank thought he was entitled to the increased salary, they wei'e not going to admit their inferiority as legislators by returning the increase to the Treasury. Certainly there was a widespread feeling among all parties that as the day sittings of the Assembly interfered with business and professions, increased remuneration was not inappropriate. As a matter of fact, the public believes that the on.y sincere opponents of the "grab" were the two who refused to accept the increase, Messrs. Bavin and Lysaght. The latter's action has been particularly straightforward. At one stage his opposition almost created a crisis in the Labour caucus, yet be never wavered in his determination and crossed the floor of the House to vote with the hated Opposition on the measure. New South Wales believes that, with the exception of these two members, all the members of the Assembly can be branded with the same brush. It was not a matter so much of party support and approval, but of the individual.