PARLIAMENT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18899, 27 June 1923, Page 8

PARLIAMENT.

YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS (Abridged from Press Association Telegram.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. WELLINGTON, Juno 26. The House met at 2.30 p.rn. ADDRESS-IN-REPLY DEBATE. The debate on the Address-in-Reply was resumed by Mr POTTER, who declared that the Opposition members had offered no constructive suggestions during the course of their criticism of the Government, and they never would.. They claimed that the Government policy was based on the old Liberal policy. Supposing it was, why were the Liberals not prepared to come over and help to administer it? There was only one thing preventing a union of the Liberal and the Rolorm Parties, and that was Cabinet appointments. The personal ambitions of a few Liberals were the real obstacle to a fusion. lie favoured the Prime Minister going to the Imperial Conference with his hands untied, free to offer to the Motherland a full and generous subsidy towards the British Navy —a- thing we had never paid. He also favoured as a moans of the defence of the Pacific the establishment of a naval base at Singapore. On the subject of hanking, he declared against a State bank, but favoured more generous treatment of clients by the existing ban its. The speaker proceeded to discuss the sectarian issue.

Mr HORN disagreed with the suggestions made by the seconder of the address to the effect that a tax should be put on petrol. A tyre tax was the fairest of all the imposts so far suggested in connection with the finance necessary to form roads. All motorists desiring good highways were prepared to pay it. So far as the Imperial Conference was concerned no one cn the Liberal side suggested that the Prime Minister should not go. There was nothing to prevent Mr Massey from going if they could come to terms about the matter, and there should bo no great difficulty about that. The amendment by the Leader of the Opposition referred to important legislation which the Liberals deemed necessary. Mr MASSEY: Let us get to (he legislation. Mr WILFOR.D : What about electoral reform. Mr MASSEY: There will be no electoral reform this session.

Continuing Mr HORN proceeded to deal W'ith the alleged flour trust, which, ho declared, was operating in the South Island, and which supplied just what flour it pleased. As things stood at present all the bakers wore suffering, and the Minister of Agriculture should lake some steps to deal with the matter. At present the producers wore not getting a square deal, and that was why they wore losing faith in the Reform Party. Mr GIRLING gave general support to the policy of the Government, which met the public requirements, white its administration. was efficient and sympathetic. There was, therefore, no reason w r hy the Government should be displaced from the Treasury Benches to make room for another parly which was going to be Liberal or Labour—no one knew' which. The Hon. Mr BUDDO said there was much distress in the country, and it was little comfort to the people to bo told by the Government that it intended doing something. There seemed to be too much disposition on the part of the Government to consult the friends of the party before ; t did anything, and the consequence was that the evil had often passed before it was met. In the good old days of the Liberal administration things were done quickly, and people who needed Government assistance got benefit from it. If taxation was to bo revised it must be done justly, and the individual interests of every section of the community must be taken into consideration. If that wore done relief must bo given to some businesses, while others dould bo fairly asked to pay more.

Mr BUDDO deprecated further large expenditure on public works, especially on railway extensions, asking that the railway authorities should employ motor lorries as feeders to the railways rather than build new lines.

Mr FORBES said he thought it would bo regrettable if the Prime Minister did not attend the Imperial Conference. At the same time there was a general feeling that tho business of the country should be done first. Tho programme laid down by the Leader of the Opposition was not excessive, and could be done if Parliament addressed itself to work. They wanted to know v/hat was the Prime Minister's attitude towards it. Tho fact was that wo had the weakest Government on the benches that the country had ever had—so weak that it could not possibly puss a programme of strong legislation. The Government was depending on throe men who did not belong to its party. Under these circumstances could it bring down licensing legislation that was not acceptable to tho member for Christchurch North? The thing was impossible, and so it would be right through, and tho country would suffer in all directions from the fact that the Government could not take up any strong line of action. He complimented Mr Bollard on being raised to Cabinet rank, but quoted from a Reform journal to show that the Government was not strengthened by his inclusion. He deprecated tho action of Mr Massey in taking part in the Oamaru election us ho did. He degraded his high office by doing as he did, and his tactics must be condemned by every decent man. He had no right to receive deputations there, make promises, and grant concessions for the pc impose of influencing the electors. That was Tammanyism in its worst form. He condemned the granting of a high school at Morrinsville during the Tauranga. election, after it had been refused. Tho Minister of Education might, as a lawyer, wriggle out of the difficulty in which he found himself, hut ho was setting up a political standard which was peouliarily bis own, but which would not bo endorsed by the general public. The speaker also condemned the political use made by the Reform Party of tho Legislative Council, and regretted the tendency of the Prime Minister to go cold on agricultural banks because the chairman of tho Bank of New Zealand was opposed to them. He paid ?. tribute to the impartial spirit of the Minister of Public Works, but complained that when tho Liberals gave a Minister any credit it was immediately turned and used for party purposes. Land aggregation was going on, and the Government had not once intervened to check it.

By way of personal explanation the Hon. Mr PARR said that at no time had a high school at Morrinsville been refused. Mr MASSEY, by way of personal explanation, denied that he received any deputation in Oamaru on matters affecting- the electorate, nor did ho make any concessions for the purpose of influencing the electors.

Mr Glenn spoke briefly, dealing mainly with local questions. He hoped the Prime Minister would go to the Imperial Conference and that ho wo-uld go with the goodwill of Parliament. When in London Mr Massey might look into the question why the dominions were cut out of the navy and array -meat contracts. Mr Wilford then rose, and said he desired to make the position of his party clear in view of the various amendments which were before the House. The Liberal-Labour Party hod drawn up and moved a carefullyconsidered amendment to the Address-in-Kepiy, which amendment included the necessity for electoral reform. Since thilt was moved an amendment to the Liberal amendment had been moved by Mr Sullivan providing for proportional representation and for the abolition of the Legislative Council. This attack on the Liberal-Labour amendment would bo resisted and opposed because the Liberal-Labour Party believed that its amendment gave every chance of bringing about electoral reform. As to the attitude of the Reform Party in regard to the amendment moved by the Labour tarty to alter the Liberal-Labour amendment, that party no doubt would take its own action. Whether the Reformers would follow the member for Avon and the Labour Party or whether they would follow the Liberals the division list would show. It was sufficient for him to say that they would defend their amendment from the attack made upon it by the Labour Party.

Mr Holland contended that the Labour Party’s amendment was a motion of noconlidonco in the Government, and that the Liberal Party could not make anything else of it.

Mr Vcitcli argued that Labour’s amendment was an attack an the Liberal Party and not on the Government. A division was then taken on Mr Sullivan’s amendment, adding to Mr Wilford’s amendment the following words; “Providing for proportional representation and tho abolition of tho Legislative Council.” This was defeated by 58 votes to 18, only the Labour Party and Mr Poland voting for it. Mr M'Combs then moved the adjournment of the debate, and the House rose at &.uu