MR G. LAURENSON

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8481, 16 July 1913, Page 8

MR G. LAURENSON

“SAME OLD CONSERVATIVES.” Mr G. Laureuson (Lyttelton) said that he had been fourteen years in Parliament, but he had never Known a more vigorous debate on the Address-in-Reply. He had listened with interest to the speech just delivered by the Prime He differed from Mr Massey politically, but personally he had the highest for him. He could not help thinking, however, that that night. Mr Massey was on weak ground. He was not the Massey of old, backed up by his able lieutenant, the member for Bruce, at-

tacking the Government of the day with a vigour that was good to hear. Mr Laurenson said'it would be far better for the party opposite if they could support a Ministry which could stick to the guns it cocked two or three years ago. There was the Old Ago Pensions Act, which the Government had religiously opposed. Now they wanted to reduce the age for women to sixty years. But a leopard could not change its spots, nor the Ethiopian his hide, said Mr Laurenson. The Government were still the same Conservative party they were years ago. A GREAT BLUNDER. Se pointed out that they were importing at .a salary of £3OOO (the Chief Justice only got £2000) a man to take charge of the railways, who was used to a system which was run Jor _ the purpose of making money, arid giving him control of a service, the main feature of which was assisting in the settlement of the land. He criticised the Minister of Finance in his recent loan raising, and said that evidently they had come to the time when money was cheap it was floated for a short time and when dear for a long period. Amidst Opposition hear, hears, ha characterised tlm loan, floating as a great blunder which in time to come the country would have to suffer for. REJECTS IN THE COUNCIL. Nothing they had heard more from the Government when in Opposition was a denunciation of the appointment of rejects to the Legislative Council. A Government member: What about Mr Duncan? Mr Laurenson said ho had nothing to say against the four rejects of the five members recently appointed to the Legislative Council* hut what ho did object to was the party who had so criticised the previous Government doing the same thing they had so denounced. WHAT HAVE THEY DONE? Mr Laurenson said that when the Minister of Customs was speaking he had asked, “What has the Liberal party done?” In reply he would like to state that it had done everything for New Zealand. Act after Act, measure after measure, had been passed by the Liberal party for twenty-one years, attaining at making life more endurable aud to equalise the conditions of life. He could go on for an hour giving measures the Liberal party had brought into operation, many of which had been subsequently adopted by other countries. He objected to the Minister of Customs making a statement like this in his flippant style. WHY NOT ALL OP THEM?

Ha did not -want to refer a great deal to the Public Service Commissioners, but lie would like to ask the Minister of Justice, if the Public Service was to get such advantages from the measure, why were the police, defence and railway services not included in it? It was said that it was to relieve the Minister, but ho asked what Ministers were there for. He did not agree in placing the service in the hands ol the irresponsible trio. “A PERSONAL FRIEND.” Referring to the appointment of Mr Royd Garlick, he asked what the pre- , sent Minister of Defence when in Opposition would have said if they had, appointed a personal friend like that at a salary of i-600 a year, Hon. James Allen: Do you say we appointed our personal friends? Mr Laurensou: Yes. Hon. James Alloa: All right; you bring proof of it. Mr Wilford: Why docs he get it? Mr Laurenson: The Minister of Defence will tell you that. What would he have said if we had done a thing like that? Mr Wilford; He would have smacked his lips. (Laughter.) Mr Laurenson said that the present party in power had asked the people just to put them in power and then they would find things in the pigeonholes. What had they found? he asked. Opposition members: Nothing. In Opposition the Government had said, “ Give up a period of office, and we will show you clean finance.” They got into office by innuendo. What did they find now? The expenditure had gone up a quarter of a million. 'He was not opposed to the increase, but he did object to these statements being made in the backblccks schoolrooms. “Everything they condemned out of power,” he said, “ they are practising in office.” TEE TRAVELLING HABIT. Then they had denounced the travelling habit of Ministers. But what had they done? Nearly every day of tubrecess they would read that the only Minister in Wellington was the Hon. H. D. Bell; that the Minister of Customs was in Auckland adding to the gaiety of the nation; that the Minister of Railways was visiting friends near Gisborne, having a very happytime ; and so on. He did not condemn the travelling. He believed that Ministers should go into every hole and corner of the country to find out its

needs, but consistency was wanted to some degree. Mr Laurenson concluded by criticising, the barrenness of the Governor’s Speech, He said that there were questions of 1 labour, capital, and social conditions 1 which must be dealt with for the sake of the welfare of the country. Yet there was no mention of these things in the Speech. In the last year of the Ward Administration, the then Gov-' eminent had advanced to workers, local bodies, and settlers a total of £3,600,000. The Massey Government had advanced £l,37o,ooo—about onethird. Not only that, but money was going up in price every day. Ho had had a letter from a Southern working man who had been told that if lie wanted to renew, his mortgage he would have to pay 8 per cent. The Government was responsible for these high rates. M r Laurenson said he had tried, during his speech to show where the Government had failed with its promises!, and having done that, ho thought ho had done enough with that barren Governor’s Speech.