DEBATE ON ESTIMATES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20678, 25 September 1930, Page 13

DEBATE ON ESTIMATES.

ENGINES FOR RAILWAYS.

THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM. " t LABOUR AMENDMENT DEFEATED. [by telegraph.—press association.] WELLINGTON. Wednesday. Consideration of the vote of £6,378,003 for the Working Railways Account was resumed by the House of Representatives this afternoon in Committee of Supply. Replying to questions raised by members, the Minister, Hon. W. A. Veitch, said that Garratt engines were still in the experimental stage. A great deal of money had been expended on them and he would not like to take the responsibility, of scrapping them, as earnest endeavour was being made to make them successful. With regard to Diesel engines, the officer who had be-m sent abroad had reported that they, too, were in the experimental stage and it would not be advisable at present to expend a great deal of money on them. This advice had been accepted. The reason for the curtailment of Sunday services had been the heavy losses. An attempt to meet the situation by increasing the fares had only resulted in making matters worse. Mr. H. G. R. Mason (Labour —Auckland Suburbs) expressed the opinion that it would have been a more likely means of effecting an improvement to have experimented with reduced fares. This would surely have been more likely to result in successful competition with suburban bus routes. The Estimate was passed. " Paramount Problem of the Day." Consideration of the vote of £56,871for the Labour Department was resumed. An amendment moved by Mr. H. E. Holland, Leader of the Labour Party, when the Estimate was previously under consideration, calling for a reduction of the vote by £lO as a protest against the Estimate being submitted to the House before the report of the department was presented, was defeated on the voices. Mr. A. M. Samuel (Reform —Thames) asked the Government to make an immediate effort to grapple more effectively with the unemployment problem. Mr. D. G. Sullivan (Labour —Avon) urged that the Government should treat unemployment as the paramount problem of the day. It should give the special unemployment committee every opportunity to present its recommendations to the House without delay and it should lose no time in bringing those recommendations into operation. The Minister of Labour, Hon, S. G. Smith, replying to Mr. Samuel, said that the Labour Department was only the recording office for the unemployed. It could not create work for men. With reference to the point raised by Mr. Sullivan, he said, the matter of the Special Unemployment Committee's interim report was one for the Leader of the House. Mr. M. J. Savage (Labour —Auckland West) moved that the sum be reduced by £5 as an indication that definite proposals for the employment of all those willing to work should be brought before the House before Parliament rose. He could see nothing in the amendment that could not be supported by members. Unemployment demanded the most earnest attention from everyone, and he was prepared to do anything except admit that*tho position was hopeless. Not a Matter lor Department.

Mr. Smith said the solution of the unemployment problem was not a matter for the Labour Department. There was no justification for the amendment before the House. He mentioned that in his own district, New Plymouth, all the public bodies were co-operating to deal with the problem, and the result was that there were only 41 men out of work. As an indication of the earnestness with which the Government was tackling the problem, he said that over 4000 men had been placed on the road works on September 20. Labour Members: How many were put off? The Minister said that 100 4 men left of their own accord last week to go on relief work? Mr. W. D. Lysnar (Independent Reform—Gisborne) said he could not congratulate the Labour Party on the amendment. The unemployment problem should be faced in a different spirit. Mr. Savage pointed out the amendment was not intended as an attack on the Government. It simply sought an expression of opinion from the House. Defeat of the Amendment. Mr. Savage's amendment was rejected by 37 votes to 27, and the vote was passed. The voting was as follows:

For the Amendment—27. Ansell McKeen Armstrong Martin Barnard v Mason Carr Munro Chapman Nash, W.Fletcher O'Brien Fraser Parry Hall Samuel Holland, H.E. Savage Howard Semple Jordan . Sullivan Kyle Waite Langstone Wright McLombs

Against—37. Atmore McDougall Broad foot Macpherson Burnett Makitanara Clinkard. Munns Cobbe Murdoch De la Perrelle Nash, J. A^ Donald Ngata Endean Poison Field Hansom Hamilton Rushworth Harris Smith Hawke Stalhvorthy Healy Stewart Hogan Taverner Holland, H. Ypitch Linklater Wilkinson Lye Williams Lysnar Young McDonald

When the estimate of £279,400 for the Department of Internal Affairs was under consideration the Minister, Hon. P. A. de la Perrelle, replying to Mr. Fraser, said the regulations dealing with the censorship of picture posters would bo gazetted next week. (Left sitting).