PARLIAMENT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18463, 26 January 1922, Page 6

PARLIAMENT.

YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS (Abridged from Press Association Telegram.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WELLINGTON, January 25.The House mot at 2.30 p.m. SHOPS AND OFFICES BILL. The Hon. G. J. ANDERSON moved (hat ■the House disagree with the amendments made by the Legislative Council in the Shops and Offices Bill. Messrs J. S. Dickson (Parnell). T. K. Sidcy, and the mover were appointed managers to confer with the Council. The Hcusc took especial exception to the amendment which increased the hours of employees m or about hotels and restaurants from nine to 10. LEGITIMATION AMENDMENT. The Hon. W. D. STEWART moved the second reading of the Legitimation Amendment Bill, which he said extended the privi-, leges of the Act of 1903. He explained! that many cases of hardship were known to exist, and this amendment was intended to meet these cases. The Bill generally was supported by Messrs T. K. SIDEY. A. HARRIS (Wattemata), the Hon. J. A. HANAN (Invercargill), and R. M‘CALLUM (Wairau). The MINISTER promised to give consideration to the several points raised during the discussion, and the Bill was read a second time on the voices. GERALDINE COUNTY BILL. The. Geraldine County District Billl was put through the committee stages unamended, and read a third .time and passed. The House rose at 5.17. EVENING SITTING. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m. RETRENCHMENT PROPOSALS. In committee on the Public Expenditure Amendment. Bill, on clause 2, Mr 11. E. HOLLAND (Duller) moved an amendment to delete the word “all” in paragraph o, which at present roads: “All persons employed in the public service within the meaning of part II of the Public Service Classification and Superannuation Act, 1908 (whether permanently so employed ornot) ’; to delete the word “all” from paragraph J. which reads: “All employees of the Railway Department”; to delete the words any other person” and substitute the words “other persons” in paragraph K. which reads: "Any other person in receipt of remuneration from the Consolidated bund or from grants made from the Consolidated Fund to whom this Act may be applied by the Minister of Finance, not being a person exempted from the operation 'of this Act bv the next succeeding section' ; and by adding the following proviso: “Provided that this Act shall not apply so as to reduce any salary below £450 ;■ and to delete the word “ all " in paragraph I, which reads; “‘All persons employed m the education service within the meaning of Part II of ‘The Public Service Classification and Superannuation Act, 1906’ (whether permanently employed or not), Mr Holland contended that the proposed cut in wa»es would have the effect of lowering the’ standard of life among the lower paid sections of the public service as compared with 1914. , Mr MASSEY replied that two bonuses of £45 and £SO were paid the public service since 1914, and it was proposed to take away onlv half of the second bonus, so it could not,'be said that the Bill would reduce the standard of life. It was impossible to increase taxation to meet the situation, and they could not reduce taxation until they reduced expenditure. ' . , . Mr W. A. VEITCH (Wanganui) said that, the Railwaymen’s Executive had made a generous offer to accept a shilling per day less wages, but the Prime Minister refused this. Mr Veitch said that it. might produce the most serious results and involve the country in a very heavy expenditure. He understood that the raihvaymen already had been notified to , prepare for a strike M. WILFORD said that he would vote against any cut affecting salaries under £320. After that the cut should be made on a gradual scale, as was done m the matter of income tax. .. ... Mr J. M'COMBS (Lyttelton) said that while he was opposed to any cut at all, if it must be made it should be done us Mr Wilford suggested, on incomes of £450 on a gradual scale. He contended that the state of the country’s finances did not war-, rant any reduction. ... ~ T , , The Hon. C. J. PARB said that Mr Holland’s amendment would mean that out ot 51.000 peonle in the service of the State only 1440 who were receiving £460 or over would bo called upon to make any sacrifice. These received £869,000 sterling per annum, out of £9.250,000 paid to State employees, and a most ruthless cut on this amount could not save more tlvan about LLv.yw. Mr P. FRASER (Wellington Central) contended that instead of asking (he whole of tlic people to contribute to the needs ot the Government m proportion to thep- incomes the Bill proposed to penalise a section of the people in the State employ., Iho Bill proposed greater proportionate* inroads on the lower paid men than on the higher D. M’LEOD (Wairarapa) said that unless drastic reduction of expenditure were brought about the country would soon be reduced to the position .now reached in New South Whales, where thousands of men were out of work with no wages at all. VALUATION OF LAND ACT. Replying to questions, the MINISTER stated that it was impossible during the nresent session to make an amendment to the Valuation of Land Act, 1906, making alterations to the valuation rolls date back to the date when the valuation objected to was entered on the roll. MR LLOYD GEORGE. The MINISTER stated that, ,Mr Lloyd George had been invited to visit New Zealand after the Washington Conference, but it was known that this was impossible at present. VARIOUS MATTERS. The MINISTER said the Government did not, think that the Canadian sales tax could bo applied in New Zealand; that no amendment of the licensing laws was proposed to be made this session; that a reduction in telegram rates could not be made at present. , , . , Mr E. DIXON (Paten) thought that single men and women should be called upon to make a greater sacrifice than married men. After the supper adjournment discussion on Mr Holland’s amondomnt was resumed bv Messrs ATMORE (Nelson), W. J. SAVAGE (Auckland West). G. MITCHELL (Wellington South), Dr NEWMAN (Wellington East). W. E, PARRY (Auckland Cenlral), and W. A. VEITCH (Wanganui). Between 11 o'clock ai.d 0.30 a.m. the Labour members, in a scries of speeches, continued to contend that the retrenchment scheme should not apply to salaries below £450, in the course of which they were in frequent conflict with the Chairman. who had some difficulty in keeping them to the question of Mr Holland’s amendment. Mr SAVAGE was the last, to speak or. the Labour rota, and at 0.40 a.m. a division was taken on the first section of Mr Holland’s amendment, which was lost by 40 votes to 29. There then followed a series of divisions on the other portions of the amendment with practically the same result. On (he question that the Act shall not apply so as to reduce any salary below £450 the voting was;—For, 10; against, 60. Mr G. MITCHELL thei. nuyed that the Act shall not apply to salaries below £520. This was lost by 42 votes to 27. Mr P. FRASER then moved that the Act shall not apply to salaries below £250. This was lost by 37 votes to 33. The Prime Minister then moved an amendment, the effect of which is to give officers and enginemen of the 'Raahvay Department an opportunity of negotiating to accept some arrangement other than a reduction of wages. (Left sitting.)