N.S. WALES POLITICS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18545, 4 May 1922, Page 7

N.S. WALES POLITICS

MEMBERS’ SALARIES DEBATE. GOVERNMENT COMPROMISE. A STONEWALL DEVELOPED. Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright SYDNEY, May 3. In the Assembly, the debate on the 'Members’ Salaries Bill was lively, and a decision was not reached until the Government further compromised by deleting the clause which provided that payment should cease on the dissolution or expiration of Parliament. This assured memfull pay during an'election and the retention of their railway passes. An acrimonious debate over the reduction of Ministers’ salaries followed. Sir George Fuller stated that the Government proposed to cut £SOOO off the salaries in one lump, and to divide the salaries of 12 Ministers among 13. He appealed to the House not a spirit of revenge against Ministers." Various amendments were moved, and a stonewall developed. The patience, of the Government became exhausted, and at 8 o’clock in the morning a motion on its behalf for the -adjournment of the debate till the afternoon was passed. The Assembly, by 43 votes to 35, rejected a clause in the Salaries Bill making provision for a Solicitor-general. The voted with Labour in the majority. The Government did not regard defeat as vital. The clause reducing members’ salaries to £6OO per annum was carried by 43 4 vbtes to 33.; Labour, voted with the minority. The House sat all night discussing amendments to reduce Ministers’ salaries. ‘ SORDID SQUABBLES. SARCASTIC PRESS COMMENT. - SYDNEY, May 3. (Received May 3, at 7.30 p.m.) - In, the Assembly there was a heated battle over the Ministers’ Salaries Reduc-tion-Bill, which ended in .the Government accepting an amendment by Mr Brayner. Leader of the Progressive Party, fixing the total amount allotted as Ministers’ salaries at £IB,OOO, instead of the £20,000 proposed by the Government. The amendment was carried on the voices. Meantime Mr M'Girr’s amendment to make the allotment £16,000 had been defeated. The Treasurer announced an allotment as follows: Premier, £2OOO. Attorney-general, £I6OO. Vice-president of the Executive Council, £9OO. . ' Nine Ministers, £ISOO each. • With frequent applications of the gag,* against which strong protests were entered, the Bill was taken, through its remaining stages and sent to the Council. The prfP ceediifgs throughout were of’ a very acrimonious character. The sordid squabbles in Parliament and the temporising by the Government over the reductions have caused a painful phblic feeling arid much sarcastic press / and nrivate remark. The Labour Party. directly opposed the reductions, but the majority of- the other mem* bers were pledged to 1 them. It is evident, however, that very few regarded them in a kindly spirit and -were determined to make the beet possible terms. The pleas of poor members dependent' on their salaries and. even of poor members’ wive? were strongly urged. • The- Government found itself in a tight place between the recalcitrants of its own party and the Progressive section, which was determined on obtaining its pound of flesh for Any support given, and was compelled to surrender on several points to avert a possible, defeat. The Ministers’ fight over their salaries proved the hottest part of the battle. Besides placing them in‘anything but a favourable light, it disclosed that a strong cave existed and that they had a very tricky House to handle. On the whole, the cave scored in the first encounter. r GROWN LANDS. THE GOVERNMENT’S POLICY. , SYDNEY, May 3. {Received Mav 3, at 10.30 p.m.) The Minister o{ Works announced that the new Government 'ntends to revert to the sale of Crown lands by auction.