PARLIAMENT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 10514, 23 July 1910, Page 2

PARLIAMENT.

(Per Pbess Association.) LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. Wellington, July 22. The Council met at 2.30, and immediately adjourned until 11 p.m. for an Imprest Supply Bill. The Council met at 12.45 and passed the Imprest Supply Bill. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.' The House met at 2.30. —Technical Education. — On _a motion of Mr Fowlds to lay the report of the Teachers' Conference on the tables— Mr Taylor (Christchurch) raised tlie question of technical education, with special reference to Christchurch Technical School. He complained of the inadequacy of technical education generally, and hoped the Minister would give effect to the recommendation of the conference as to the necessity for increased expenditure on technical education. He protested against the Department making the cost of technical education a burden on the local body and not a charge on the State. Mr Thomson (Wallace) contended that the State 'should not be asked to bear the cost of tuition in such subjects as shorthand and typewriting. ' Mr Luke fully endorsed the remarks of. Mr Taylor. Some time ago the Minister of Education announced that sooner or later the cost of technical education would have to be borne by the local authorities.

Mr Fowlds denied having made any such statement at any time. Mr Fowlds said the most arrant humbug had been talked on the question. Whenever a board asked for funds for new buildings had the Minister no right to say the Government had gone far enough? Primary education was after all more important to the community than technical education. The claim put forward by Christchurch was extravagant. The whole system of making grants was rotten to the core. A large expenditure was now being made without proper control and this should receive the attention of the House. The motion was carried. . —Public Debt Sinking Funds. — '■• A. Bill providing for sinking funds for the extinction of the public debt was introduced by Governor's Message and read a first time. —The Gaming Act.— r The debate on Sir Joseph Ward's motion that in the opinion of the House provision should be made for a reduction of the annual number of days of racing, and also of the totnlisator permits issued throughout the Dominion by one-half was resumed.

Sir Joseph Ward suggested that the words "by one-half" be deleted so as to give the House an opportunity of recording its opinion on the matter without settling details. He hoped Mr Davey would withdraw his motion to substitute one-sixth for one-half so far as the totalisator permits were concerned. Mr Herries suggested that those conversant with . sporting matters be consulted with a view of arriving at a modus vivendi as to the reduction of race meetings. Sir Joseph Ward said he was prepared to consider the question of referring the Bill to a committee. All he wanted now was for the House to affirm the necessity for a reduction. Mr Davey withdrew his amendment, and the motion was carried on the voices.

—Retrenchment.— An Imprest Supply Bill was introduced by Governor's Message, and on the motion that the House go into committee— Mr Herdman moved as an amendment that inasmuch as the Premier's statement in 1909 that he could reduce the departmental expenditure by £250,000 a year without reducing efficiency was an unequivocal admission of extravagant administration, this House is of opinion -that the Civil Service be controlled by a Public Service Board. Sir Herdman, speaking in support of his amendment, said the House had no satisfactory information regarding the

Premier's declaration of policy in connection with the Civil Service, nor in regard to servants who had been re-

tired as a result of the retrenchment scheme. He asked for details as to the servants dispensed with, the salaries they were in receipt of, and if any principle was followed in carrying out the retrenchment scheme. He criticised Mr Dinnie's appointment on the Native Land Board, for which his training and experience had not fitted him. The only conclusion that could be arrived at as a result of the Pre-

mier's declaration was that a quarter of a million had been wasted on departmental expenses. Had there been

a board in existence the necessity for' the retrenchment scheme would never have existed. The board would also rid the country of the detestable system of public -patronage obtaining at I present. Mr Poland adduced Australian opinion as adverse to public service boards in the Commonwealth. Mr Malcolm supported the amendment. The House resumed at 7.30. Mr Malcolm resumed the debate on Mr Herdman's amendment, and asked that full publicity be given in regard to the retrenchment scheme. Sir Joseph Ward said the last speaker had applied to two Ministers to engage men and reinstate others who had been discharged. This highsouled economist (Mr Malcolm) had also inserted an advertisement in a paper in his electorate asking his constituents to place before him their public works requirements. How could the Government be expected to economise when members made so many exorbitant demands on the public purse. Mr Herdman's speech was calculated to make people believe the country was going to the dogs. He taxed Mr Herdman with deliberate misrepresentation in regard to the expenditure figures, which had been quoted with the object of proving extravagance, but no notice had been taken of the increased revenue during the period of 1906 to 1909 mentioned by Mr Herdman. Dealing with the retrenchment scheme, Sir Joseph Ward said the reductions effected were £300,000 a year. The Government could not retrench more than they had done, yet the Opposition clamored for further retrenchment, and at the same time for the establishment of a Public Service Board composed of highly salaried men. .

Mr Massey, referring to the Premier's criticism of Mr Malcolm's demands for votes, said he hoped the day would come' when it would be unnecessary to mention road or bridge in Parliament, the time of which should be devoted solely to legislative work. He heartily supported Mr Herdman's

proposal to set up a Public Service Board. If ever a commission was necessary one was required "to investigate the Civil Service. Mr Dinnie's appointment -would never have been made if a Public Service Board had been in existence. Very serious offences had been committed in the Land and Income Tax Department recently, all of which went to show the necessity for a reform in the public service. Parliament was entitled to a great deal more information in connection with the cases mentioned. Mr Laurenson said it was a cruel proposal that civil servants who had been retired should have their names published, so that they be handicapped in the struggle for life. The amendment was rejected by, 33 to 23, and the Bill passed. . On the third of the Bill a discussion arose on the national endowments, in which, Mr Massey, Sir Joseph Ward, Messrs Witty, Wilford, Taylor (Thames), and Buchanan took part, the Leader the Opposition contending that the settlors on the 'national endowments should be given the right of the freehold. ' Sir Joseph Ward said the GTovernment had no intention of conceding this. Mr Massey said the settlers should be informed of the tenure on which the lands were granted. Mr Buddo said it was absurd to suggest that, the endowments should T e sold and the money invested in suburban lands. Mr T. Mackenzie cited instances of lands that had been brought into productive uses, and some endowment lands had proved to be very productive j indeed. I Sir Joseph Ward complained of the | time spent in discussing the Supply

Bill, which had been useless. Nine hours had been occupied on this occasion. He went on to attack Mr Herdman's amendment, taking exception to the language in which it was couched, and.defending the, Government's action in reducing expenditure during the time of the depression. Regarding the national endowments, he could not understand how it was possible to find suburban lands to return a revenue equal to that derived from the endowment lands. The country would be wise to hold on to the national'endowments, which were now producing £63,800 a year. If half this was invested at 4 per cent., in 75 years it would amount to 13 millions. This would be a good thing to do: Touching Mr Dinnie's appointment, the Premier said many similar appointments had been adversely criticised, and had turned out all right. The third reading was carried. The House adjourned at 12.40 a.m.'