HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 545, 15 July 1882, Page 9

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

> : i t MONDAY, JULY 10. j i The Speaker took the chair at 7.30 p.m. ■, J !<:■ ' PETITIONS. Petitions were presented by Messrs Whitaker j , Dargaville, Levestam, Shrimski, George, Tole, J. Green, and the Hon. W i Rolleston. NOTIOEB OF MOTIONS AND QUESTIONS. A number of-notices of motions and ques T tions were given. Among them was one by the « Hon H A. Atkinson, who said he Would move next’ day “That during the remainder Of the session Government business should take pre- • cedence on Wednesdays. ; ihi ; til (*EPOBT.c ,; ‘ vi. - • Mr LEVIN' brought up the report of the . Standing Orders Committee on a Bill to S, authorise the closing of certain cemeteries. . y The Bill was referred back to the Standing Orders Committee. , : ; ~ * • odi I'li PAPERS. • ; A number of papers were laid on the table . by the Hon. T. Dick. ' 1 ■ ' ! NATIONAL INSURANCE*. The Hon. H. A. ATKINSON moved, “That, in the opinion of this House, -provision should be made against sickness and pauperism by compulsory national ■ insurance to secure the following benefits • (1) Sick pay for every single person, male and - female, between the ages of eighteen and sixtyfive years, of not less than 15s per week during • sickness ; (2) Sick pay for every married man

' of not less than 22s 6d per week, and tor every married woman 7« 6d per week during sickness ; (3) A superannuation allowance of 10s per weak for every person 1 , male or female, from sixty-five years of age to death ; (4) An allowance of IBs per week for every widow ' with one child, increasing according to scale with the size of the family to 30s per week, until the children are fifteen years of age.” He said he felt this the most important of any resolution be had had the honor of submitting to the House. ■ The benefits to the country would ■ be so far-reaching, (and the consequences of keeping on as we were going at present so disastrous, that he felt his responsibility to be very great. He would put himself right with the l House at once when he said he did not claim any originality in the matter.- The idea ; belonged to ‘--thief Hev. • Mr Blakley of Hampshire, England, but he claimed the credit of proclaiming the scheme to the House and . the colony. The scheme ' he proposed however, was not exactly Mr Blakley 7 s, . for it had been altered to meet !! the requirements of ■ the colony. That gentleman • proposed that no man who was able to earn a living should be able to draw from the fund, but he (the Coloinial Treasurer) proposed that everyone should pay to the fund, and that everyone should have a right to draw from it. It was, therefore, necessary that the sum to be paid by each individual'Here should be larger than that prd- ‘ posed l at 'Home. People l who had studied the problem of pauperism had felt sorrow and anxiety, l for'the question how poverty Was" to ' b* l prevented 1 was a -'nioßt difficult one to answer. 1 As the aggregate of wealth' increased, so did the unevenhess of its distribution, and the line waiijbeing drawn sharper and sharper betweenthe enormously rich and the wretchedly poor. Some thinkers set the difficulty down to over population, others to the monopoly-cif land, others te the‘merchants, middlemen, or distributers,' who made a great deal at the expense. of. the’ producer. It seemed to, be true ' that timinfliiences which brought about the ' state of things he had were gradually spreading themselves over this colony, until it was necessary to devise some means for checking the evil which was . coining upon us. He believed the English poor law was enacted with the kept of intentipns, but he ventured to say that ho piece of legislation passed by the Imperial Parliament had ever done such tremendous wrong to the country. We had to consider how we could > provide against. destitution without demoralising the people. Private thrift must be acknowledged to be useless in the matter, and he thought before he sat down he would be able to prove that the only remedy was insurance, which must be compulsory ana aational. The real cause of poveity he held to be inability to work, lowness of wages, and inability fee- obtain work through an influx of laborers. Some of these causes we were not likely to have in this colony for some time, but others we had amongst us already, and we must make provision to meet them, or their effect would become intensified. What were we doing now as a country to prevent pauperism ? Why, absolutely nothing. We had hospitals, charitable aid, and benevolent institutions, but • these did not touch the root of the evil. The only good work was being done by the Friendly Societies, to which we were deeply indebted for what they had done. They however, could not deal with national poverty. They only took what were called “ good lives ” —persons whp had passed, a medical examination—and when a man .became bad on the books ” by ceasing to pay, he ceased to be a member. These societies did _ not provide for women, and few of them provided for orphanage or old age. It must be remembered that, ; with every effort these societies had made, they had only succeeded in getting within their pale some 20,000 male adults, so that what they had done did not really touch the question he was now bringing before the House. The persons who were. likely to become national paupers had no connection with these societies. As a matter of fact, we were making no provision against pauperism as a nation, and we must acknowledge that no private provision would do. There must be a _ compulsory system. It must he evident to everyone that no national scheme pf a voluntary kind would do. Most persons were agreed that a poor law was out of the question, and that private philanthropy would not meet the question, and he contended that those who went so far must admit that a strong case had been made out for the necessity of some action in the matter. He would now come to the practicability of the scheme. It might be said that the minimum he had fixed was too high, and if that could he proved he would not have any great objection to alter it. He might say that he had fixed the amount by careful inquiry as to the lowest amount on which benevolent societies had found it possible to maintain families and individuals. The amounts it was proposed to give were stated in the resolution he had moved, and, in addition to this, (itj (was proposed Ithat orphans

without father or mother should receive 103 per week up to three years of age,, during which time they would require attention. It was proposed that every man and woman should pay L4117s Id, either between the ages of sixteen and twenty-three, or eighteen and twentythree. This would provide the siok pay up to sixty-five, and an annuity of IQs per week from that age till death. That, however, made no provision for orphans, and that had to met by further payments of L 5 per year by every man and woman. It might be asked whether young fmen and women in this colony could make this payment. Considering the rate of wages paid he had no hesitation in stating that the amount could easily be paid by those who were to be asked to contribute it. Supposing they could not pay it, what then ? Was no to be told that in a country like this young men and women between the ages of 18 and 23 could not pay a miserable pittance of L 8 a year for five years ? If they could not pay it was a disgrace to the country, and the sooner we were brought face to face with the fact the better. He would impress upon hon. members that if any provision were made it must be made while men and women were young, There was a class of young men and women who lived at home and did nothing, and he might say that this was a class with which he had not much sympathy. If their fathers could not pay for them, it was high time that they were raised to a sense of their responsibility. He would propose that every male up to the age of 23 should make. provision, for sick pay up to the age of 65. The payments would not exceed £8 per year,, and would be spread over five years., From this he would exempt all members of Friendly Societies up to the amount to which they were entitled to beneGt. He did hot propose to touch women of the present population, or to deal with men who were over 50. With regard to persons over 65, he did not propose te take any steps at all. With regard to immigrants, of course all those who were under 23 would come under the scale, while those over that age would be asked to come under the sick benefit. He would not propose in any case to give surrender value for the moneys paid in. The total cost to provide for sickness, old age, annuity, and orphanage would be £64 per head. If we were to determine to set aside the money we received fioih the rents of Crown lands, we could ’ then make provision for the necessitous widows of the present population until the scheme was in full operation. This would cost L 30,000. The remainder of the land fund would endow every child born to the amount of L 5, and this sum invested at compound interest would provide the orphanage insurance, leaving the child to provide only for the sick pay and annuity. This was not a part of his soheme, but he threw it out as a suggestion. It was admitted by everyone that the rent of the Crown lands belonged to the people of New Zealand. All, therefore, we had to consider was the best use to which it could be applied, and he asked hon. members if it could be devoted to a better purpose than that, which he had suggested. There was nothing revolutionary in all this; it was simply a different method of distributing the land fund. If this course was adopted the whole population would be brought under the scheme. Assuming that the necessary provision could be made, they bad to consider the machinery by which they could secure premiums. ' There was no doubt it would be necessary to divide the colony into districts co-ter-minous with the local bodies, which would be charged with the duty of registration within their limits. There was no difficulty in the way of this registration in countries where there was compulsory military service, and ‘ there would be no trouble here in finding out when persons became of a taxable age. Employers would have to be made responsible for the payment of the amounts, and would have authority to pay them into the Savings Banks. T,o some hon. members this might look very formidable, buthe did not think there was much trouble involved when we came to look at the experience of other countries. We were not without experience in our own country, and he ventured to say th’at any obstacles raised on this score would soon disappear. There would, no doubt, be some difficulty With regard to the investment of the funds, and this vvould have to be attended to by a Board appointed for the purpose, the Crown determining the securities in which, investments should be made. He was convinced that in years to como they would obtain interest at nearer 6 per cent, than 5, and as all the tables had been drawn up on a ' 4 per cent, basis it would be seen that a considerable margin was left. If there was a Erofit it would be for the House to determine ow it would be dealt with. He would propose that the sick should be looked after by an officer of the local bodies (who would, of course, be paid out of the funds), and it would also be necessary to have district visitors, as the Friendly Societies did, and to take due precautions against malingering. It would also be necessary to have travelling inspectors. His proposal might be deemed impracticable, but he called upon those hon. members who believed it to be so to cime forward with some scheme which was workable. It might seem that he was proposing to create a large department. (Hear, hear.) Well, if any hon. member could get rid of poverty in a more simple way, let him do so. He knew of no cheaper way of meeting the problem of pauEerism than that contained in the proposal he ad submitted to the House. He would impress on hon. members that there could be no forfeiture, and that those who had once paid could never get out of benefit as was the case with Friendly Societies. It might be said that he proposed to go outside the functions of Government in this matter. (Hear, hear.) Well, let the hon. members who thought so tell him what the proper functions of Government were. In this country, the Government had done many things which fifty years ago the greatest radical would have considered beyond the functions of Government. Nothing could be undertaken now-a-days without combination, and if they could promote the well-being of the people and strike a fatal blow at pauperism, by all means let them do all in their power. Some held that the scheme was an interference with the liberty of the subject, but we had to' keep the poor and needy now, and he only asked that the fund should be contributed by those who would use it. Another important objection that had been raised was, that the scheme would compete with and ruin the Friendly Societies. He did not admit that, but, suppose it really were the case, all the Friendly Societies were competing one with another at the present time. But would not the 20,000 men wl o belonged to them be glad of any sacrifice if all the rest of their fellow colonists could he brought within the pale ? It was not.true, how, ever, that they were wanted to sacrifice themselves at all, for there was no doubt in his mind that if his proposal was carried out these societies would be enormously strengthened It was invariably the first saving that was the most difficult, and when a spirit of thrift had been introduced into the nation he. would not be surprised to see the Friendly Societies num» ber 100,000 instead of 20,000. The Government proposal, it must be remembered, only provided for bare necessities. The State would have to provide >for lunatics

and imbeciles, but criminals he would compel to pay their full share. There were no doubt classes in the community who would find it difficult to pay the premiums ; but in his opinion those who could not do so must be employed at most unprofitable labor. He thought he had not touched on all the points that were necessary in order to enable him to place the proposals before hon. members .with tolerable clearness. Some members received them witn indifference, while others appeared to regard them as Utopian; but he contended that nothing had been proposed which the . House could not give full effect to. The question was one of vast importance, and now was the time to deal with it, while we were rich and in a position to put the people of the colony in a right groove. (Applause.) Mr SUTTON seconded the motion. Mr MONTGOMERY said it was impossible for anyone to have listened to the hon. the Colonial Treasurer without being convinced of his earnestness of purpose.. In fact he had given such attention to this important matter that he deserved the thanks of the House and the country. (Hear, hear,) He was familiar with Mr Blakley’s scheme, but he had various objections to it, and to the proposals that had been placed before them by the hon. the Colonial Treasurer'. In the first place he thought there were-many young people between the ages of 18 and 23 who were supporting one of their parents, and who would find it impossible or at any rate very difficult to pay L 8 a year. Then again he did not think that sufficient attention had been given to the. difficulty of collection, while it would be almost impossible to prevent malingering. The Friendly Societies found this difficult enough, and he at^ as sure the work could not be done by the State. He regarded the proposal really as one to levy a poll tax on a certain class of the community who could ill afford to pay it, in order to relieve the holders of property from their burthens. Sir GEO. GREY said they had been asked to deliver their opinions on a .most important question, namely, the abolition or poverty j and it would be admitted that the subject was one which deserved their utmost attention. The Colonial Treasurer had given them a plan, but he had not given them the groundwork on which it was based. The scheme was admittedly meant for Great Britain; but there was no analogy between the condition of the people of Great Britain and of this colony, and he thought the proposal was likely to do a great injustice to a number of young people here. The people were paying for themselves now, and the scheme was simply designed to shift the burthen from property. He regarded the speech of the Hon. Colonial Treasurer as a most dreary one —in fact, he had never spent a. more dreary hour and a half in his life than m listening to it. (Laughter.) There was one bright spot in it, however, and that was when the hon. gentleman referred to the land fund a*, the property of the people. The land fund, if it had been let alone, would have been sufficient to pay for everything. Poverty was. threatening the country on account of the legislation of those who were interested in great estates, and that was why we should have to deal with the problem of poverty in the future. Would it be too much to say that these large landholders should bear a large part of the burthen, by the imposition of a land tax ? He thought the effect of the measure would be to destroy the independence of the people of this country, and to break up all the societies which had been formed by men who had banded together for the purpose of protecting themselves from poverty. The whole tendency of the plan was to strike at the independence of the people, to destroy the respect of the child for the parent, to aim a blow at Christianity itself, and to make every individual part of a great communistic body. In many cases young people would not be able to pay the sum demanded, and their parents, if they had to pay it for them, would be kept in a state of poverty. The Hon. the Colonial Treasurer had spoken of the benefit of a first saving, but this law would absolutely prevent saving, for the word saving could not be applied to money that was extorted from a young man or woman by taxation. There would be just as much seeking for relief if the Bill were passed as at the present time, for those who drew the allowance mentioned would seek to augment it by every means in their power. The plan would have the effect of sapping all the finer elements of our nature. If civilisation meant combination, it did not mean the combination of a whole State on communistic principles of this kind, but such a combination as was already going on in our midst. The plan was merely part of a scheme to sweep all the money in the colony into the coffers of the Government—a scheme which there had been many attempts to carry out. Let them look at what had already been don# in respect of the Public Tiust Office and the Government Insurance Office. With all these great bodies in existence, fancy the enormous power' that would be exercised at elections and at other times. We were already threatened with a great many evils in this respect, but he regarded this last as the most pernicious of all. Justice to the people of New Zealand required that steps should be taken in a totally different direction to that proposed. So far as he was concerned, he would do his. utmost to oppose the carrying of the resolution, and he was sure the Colonial Treasurer was quite well aware that it would not be carried. The Government, however, had no right to bring the resolution forward unless they meant to taka the sense of Parliament, and he hoped hon. members would insist upon it going to a vote. It seemed to him that some agreement had been made to let the Government down easily, but he would do his utmost to prevent it being carried out. At 10.30 the Speaker left the chair for half an hour. On resuming,

Colonel TRIMBLE regarded the question before the House as a most important one, and one deserving the attention of every member of the House. The hon. member who . had precaded him had introduced a lot of irrelevant matter, to which he did not intend to refer. With regard to the question as to whether the people could afford to pay the sums proposed, he was of opinion that the hon. the Colonial Treasurer had expected too much. If the contributions and benefits had been both lowered, he thought the object would have been more easily attained. The Colonial Treasurer had allowed too much in the description of relief, which would tell most heavily on his fund. In dealing with the present generation—with those who were over 23 years of. age—the hon. gentleman was simply encumbering his.scheme, and he strongly advised him to reconsider the matter. With regard to the investment of the funds, he thought it weuld be wiser to invest the whole of them in the colonial debt while we had one. He thought they ought to congratulate themselves on the handsome way in which the hon. member for Akaroa had addressed himself to the question, for he evidently had a desire to get at the truth. (Hear, hear.) Many of the difficulties raised by the hon. member, however, were mere matters of detail or machinery, and could easily be got over. Every man taking a youth into his employment could ascertain in an instant the position in which he stood with regard to his insurance money. No doubt the prospect of the creation of a great central establishment was an objection to the scheme ; but it must be

remembered that every individual in the country would be interested in the scheme, and that, in his opinion, would be a sufficient check on undue centralisation. He believed that the plan was one which would induce thrift, and which would go largely to reduce absolute poverty. They were told that the scheme would lighten the burthen on property, but he could not see how this enforced insurance would prevent Parliament levying any tax it liked on property. (Hear, hear.) It was no more a poll tax than the contributions levied by any Friendly Society. At the present time the honest man was compelled to look after himself, his own children, and his neighbor’s, too, but under the scheme proposed the dishonest man would be compelled to look after himself. The opposition to it would not come from the honest man. The self-reliance of the people was not touched in the slightest degree. They were simply compelled .to. pay a small sum when they could afford it, in order to secure a certain benefit in after life. Mr MOSS was of opinion that there were large numbers of persons between the ages of 16 and 23 who were living on 12s 6d a week, who really were not able to pay. L 6 or L 8 a year. It appeared to him that in this sense the soheme was most oppressive, and that they were heavily taxir g a class they had no right to tax. What would be the result if the wealthy classes were taxed in the same manner in proportion to their income ? He looked upon the measure as so absolutely wrong in principle that do what they would they could not make it workable. Mr HURSTHOUSE was of opinion that the proposals of the Hon. the Colonial Treasurer would meet with the approval of the country, and that most of the objections that had been raised to it would vanish into thin air. It was our duty in New Zealand to prevent the growth o.f a state of society that existed in older countries. He did not agree with the argument that, the Eroposal would interfere with the Friendly ocieties, for it was designed to reach those whom the Friendly Societies could not reach. There had been great talk of probable imposition, but he did not think there would be anything of that kind if every member of the State was a sharer in the fund. It seemed to him that if the. scheme became law it would not destroy the independence of the people, but would nave an exactly contrary effect. Why should a man lose his self-respect by participating in the benefits of a scheme he had contributed to in his youth? He thought it was quite within the ability of any young person earning wages to pay three shillings per week. There were hundreds of ways in which the wages-earning classes showed their extravagance, and he was satisfied that they could afford to lay aside as much money as was proposed by the Colonial Treasurer. It was nonsense to say that we would not have a poor rate, for there were individuals in every community who became a burthen .on their fellows. He would hail with great satisfaction the day when such a scheme as that proposed waa put into force, though perhaps it was too large for our present requirements. Mr HUTCHISON regarded the proposal as the most revolutionary one that had ever been submitted to any aesembly. He did not think it could be carried out without an interference with social life that would be absolutely intolerable. Mr WESTON proposed the adjournment of the debate. The Hon. H. A. ATKINSON said he was desirous that the proposals should be fully discussed,

Mr SHEEHAN would oppose the adjournment, unless he had an assurance that the matter would be brought up at an early date. The Hon. H. A. ATKINSON said he was quite prepared to go on with the debate, and to hear what the hon. member for the Thames had to say, Mr SHEEHAN said he would favor the House with a speech, and would also move au amendment to the motion before them. He thought the question had been put before them in a most crude, and unsatisfactory manner. He had heard this colony called the Britain of the South, but, if such a proposal as that before them were carried, it would become the Alsatia of the South, for as soon as the conditions of the National Insurance scheme became known the improvident of all countries would flock here. What the Hon. the Colonial Treasurer proposed was nothing more nor less than a poor rate. (Hear, hear.) It was said that the payments asked for could easily be made by the wages-earning class, but he contradicted that statement, and asserted that the amount demanded from girls between 18 and 23 years of age was large enough to serve for a dowry. He moved as an amendment that the words “ proposal is not satisfactory” be inserted after the word “ House” on the motion before them. Mr TURNBULL admired the conduct of the Colonial Treasurer in bringing forward the proposal, for in doing so he had no doubt offended many of those with whom he had previously been iir close alliance. He had not, however, told them the cause of poverty in this country. There was poverty here because the land was locked up and the people excluded from it, while those who held large tracts of •ountry were relieved of what should be their fair share of taxation. The. present proposal was simply one to further relieve the holders of property, and throw an additional burthen on the people. , , . Captain HARRIS moved the adjournment of the debate. The motion was carried on the voices. Mr MONTGOMERY asked whether the debate could be resumed next day. The Hon. Major ATKINSON said it was proposed to bring down the Public Works Statement next day. . Mr MACANDiiEW hoped the intentions of the Government in that respect would not be interfered with. , , , , , Mr SEDDON moved that the debate be adjourned for a week. The Hon. H. A. ATKINSON could not consent to the hon. member for Kumara arranging the Government business. He was sincere in bringing down the proposals, and had been treated in a handsome way by the leader of the Opposition, but he regretted that they had been seized upon for party purposes instead of being discussed on their merits. Mr SHEEHAN said the Hon. the Colonial Treasurer wante ito make the matter a want-of-confidence motion, but he would not allow him to do so. If he wanted such a motion he would probably get it in due time. Mr BARRON did not think the Hon. the Colonial Treasurer had met the Opposition in a handsome way by expressing a desire to treat the question before them as a no-confidence motion. He for one would not do so. Mr MONTGOMERY said he. had understood that the question was simply to be debated, and he spoke for the great bulk of the Opposition when he said that they would not regard it as a question of confidence or want of confidence He hoped the debate would be adjourned for a fortnight. , j Mr FISH said the hon. member who had last spoken had, no doubt, spoken on behaL of the party with which he was thoroughly identified. He (Mr Fish) had the misfortune with others to belong to no party. He thoughtit far more desirable to have the Public Works Statement next night than a further discussion of this question, |

The Hon. W. ROLLESTON thought it would be a pity to keep the debate up any longer, as no good object could be gained.. Sir GEORGE GREY said he had no intention of using any discourtesy to the Government. He did not like to hear the hon. member for Akaroa allude to “the party,” for several members’ characters might be affected, and he rose to protect his own. (Laughter). Mr MONTGOMERY said he had never alluded to the hon. member for Auckland East as belonging to his party. (Laughter.) Mr MOSS said there was one party he hoped to see arise out of the present confusion, and that was the Great Provincial party. (Laughter.) Mr MACANDREW hoped the amendment would be withdrawn, and the Government left to arrange their own business.. After some further discussion, the debate was adjourned until next sitting. At 1.35 the House rose.