PARLIAMENT.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 10603, 4 November 1910, Page 1

PARLIAMENT.

(Peb Piiess Association.) Wellington, November 2. HI)USE OF REPRESENTATIVES —National Annuities.— ;

In moving tlie second reading of the. ideational. Provident Fund,Bill, Sir Jo--sepia Ward said the -provisions of the Bill would in several years' time call rror an expendituie of £50,000 yearly loi national annuities and assistance to lauthois. Lnc public service superan'liuu/iioir lund nad worked satisfactorily on tne wnole, ancl the national j -provident fund was established ;on 9, similar basis ror those not in the public: service. ' It, oi course,' would . not be open to people m receipt of moderate incomes, but would only 'apply to those'- having, incomes of £2OO. a: year and less. Contributions to the fund would- be payable weekly, and could, be paid at any post, office. Pensions woulcl be provided for those joining the fund, payable at the age ot ,60, varying in amount from 10s to 40s weekly, ac--1 hording to the rate of payment. The i Bill would ameliorate the lot of widows 1 and 1 orjilians and have the effect of | hastening marriages, which were often postponed for prudential reasons. By I paying Is 3d a week a man who subI sequentiy marries and has four children secures for himself a pension of 10s a week at 60 for the rest of his life, an allowance of 30s a week during incapacity, and the payment of £6 011 the, birth ot each child. -At death his widow and. children receive an allowance of £1 17s 6d a week while the ! latter are under the age of fourteen. : I "Mr Massoy said he heartily supported the Bill, the principle of which he thoroughly approved. He had advocated 111 the past that a superannuation fund should be provided for the ordinary citizen. as well as. the civil servant. He did not commit himself to approval of every detail of the Bill, nor as to its financial soundness. He regretted that the Bill had not been introduced earlier, and referred to the Public Accounts Committee, who could have taken the evidence of actuaries as to its financial and political soundness. The House would have to consider the Bill . under difficulties; considering the fact that members were i working at high pressure. He had doubts as to whether the Bill would in- [ tertere with the work of friendly socie T | ties. He was quite certain _ that the money expended on a national provident fund would be recouped to the State m the saving effected as the result of people being encouraged to provide for themselves, and not becoming a burden on the country. The Bill would tend to the welfare and, happiness of those who took advantage of its provisions. . Messrs Jennings, Taylor, Thomson, Poland, and Allen supported the Bill. : Mr Allen, while 111 favor of the Bill, considered it had many imperfections, the c'lief of which was the limitation of its provisions to those having £2OO a year. This recant that a man earning £2OO a year tfas debarred from the fundj while the man earning £2OO might go on increasing his income after loinmg the fund. This anomaly .could be removed bv making the fund gene? ral 111 its application. He would not advocate a compulsory scheme at the present time, but it might be advisable for tlio Dominion to adopt this in tutnro.

The debate was continued by Messrs M'Laren,. Luke, and Stallworthy.: Sir Joseph Ward, in reply, said the greatest, credit was due to the late Sir H. Atkinson and Mr Seddon for their work in connection with old-age pensions. Referring-to. Mr Allen's remark that the funds should be made general, he said that under the Bill any member of a family over 16 could join the'fund. It practically meant that it was general in its - application. If the £2OO limit were', removed it would mean a larger outlay than the country could afford, and would "be ; detrimental to' those whom the Bill intended to benefit. LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.; ' Wellington, November, •3. The Council met at 2.30. —Commercial Trusts.— The Attorney-General moved the second reading of the Commercial Trusts Bill, passed by the House. : Mr Rigg, who thought the Bill more effective than it appeared at first sight, said the proper way -to deal with a trust was to outlaw it, and take away all the protection . from its contracts and property: -Mr Jones considered the Bill very frastic, and it. would fall with undue harshness on what was called the flour combine, .which carried on its work in the interests of others besides millers. It had given flour to the people at bedrock price, and at the same time paid fair wages to its employees. sli- Anstey thought the Bill lwould apply' effectively to some combines, but could not cover all it ought to achieve. He regretted the shipping combines badynot been dealt with. •Mr M'Gowan,.welcomed the Bill-as a | much-needed measure. • Pho_debate was adjourned. The Council rose.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. / Tlie House met at 2.30. —A Petition. — The Railway Committee reported oil the petition of the Engine Drivers!,: Firemen and Cleaners' Society .for official recognition by the Government, to the effect that the evidence: went to show that the A:S.R.S. has well represented the interests of railway men, but' the Committee considered; that there was evidence that the breach between the two societies could not bo ; . healed. The Committee therefore recommende'd the petition to tlie Government's consideration.' • Mr:Wright moved, as an amendment, that the report be referred back to the Committee for reconsideiation. It was desirable,-he said, that the railway employees should be united in one organs isation. - Sir Joseph Ward said it would Joe ad--visable to refer the matter back rto the Qomimttee a \iew to ;seeing "whether it v. as possible for the two bodies to come to an agieemens with a - view to working in unity. < - On the suggestion of'Mr Fisher, it "was" agieed to-add to .the amendment -that -the Committee-should report withpiiifrsevcn days."' Kl'hc amendment was earned. ,