PARLIAMENT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20499, 29 August 1928, Page 8

PARLIAMENT.

YESTERDAY’S PROCEEDINGS.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

(Per United Press Association.)

WELLINGTON, August 28 The House met at 2.30 p.m. HOSPITAL LEVIES.

Replying to Mr T. M. Wilford (Hutt) the Minister of Health (Mr J. A. Young) said that the introduction of legislation this session dealing with the incidence of levies made by hospital hoards on local authorities was not contemplated. The expenditure, on hospitals was primarily in the hands of the hospital boards. The expenditure had increased in recent years for various reasons, but boards had to make levies on 'the local authorities. At present the hospital boards were elected by precisely the same electors who voted for local bodies. It seemed to him that the work of collecting the levies could best be done by the local bodies who had the necessary machinery for the work. If local bodies did not like that work the obvious reply seemed to him to be that hospital boards should be made rating authorities. The Minister said that that seemed to him to be undesirable.because they would multiply the methods of levying on the rates. If there was any complaint about' levies the people who were responsible for local representation were to blame because they elected the hospital representatives. He had asked f. r a conference between the municipal and country authorities on the question, and had stated that when they agreed on a- basis for the levies he would be pleased to consider fresh legislation. THE LICENSING BILL.

Replying to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E. Holland) the Prime Minister (Mr J. G. Coates) said the Licensing Bill would probably be introduced next week, and if Parliament passed it there would be ample time to have all the necessary ballot papers printed. INDUSTRIAL CONFERENCE.

The Prime Minister laid on the table the report of the recent National Industrial Conference, after which it Was agreed that the discussion should be taken on Thursday next.

PRISONS DEPARTMENT,

The Minister of Justice (Mr F. J. Rolleston) laid on the table the annual report of the Prisons Department, discussion on which occupied the whole of the afternoon. The speakers generally eulogised the improvement which had taken place in the system of prison reform during recent years. The Minister, in reply, said that the main purpose of the prisons was reformation, but they could not be administered without a certain amount of discipline and authority. He paid a tribute to the prison officers and to the voluntary workers who have laboured for the benefit of the prisoners. THE PROBATION DEPARTMENT.

The Minister also laid on the table the report of the Probation Department.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. K. Holland) drew attention to the report on the operation of the probation system in Victoria where, he said, out of prisoners released on probation only seven had been returned to gaol, ami !m asked if the Minister could give similar information as to the operation of the system in New Zealand. He thought more prisoners might be released on probation. The Minister, in reply, said the question of probation was entirely for the magistrates. The number of ‘releases in Now Zealand had not been quite so great as quoted by the Leader of the Opposition, but the position was quite satisfactory. During the past five years 957 prisoners hare been released, of which only 120, or 12.5 per cent, had been returned to prison.

PRISONS BOARD. The report of the Prisons Board was laid on the table without discussion. EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.

The report of the Education Department was laid on the table by the Minister (Mr R. A. Wright), and was being discussed by Mr R. M'Keen (Wellington South) when the House adjourned at 5.30 p.m.

EVENING SESSION,

PUBLIC WORKS ACT

When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. the Public Works Act Amendment Bill was in', reduced by Govcrnor-GeneraTs Message. In reply to the Leader of the Opposbf-in (Mr H. E. - Holland) the Minister of Public Works (Mr K. S. Williams) explained that it was intended to introduce a Consolidation of Public Works Act Bill before the end of the session, and these were some of the amendments they desired to get into the consolidation. They referred principally to the dedication of lands and streets, etc. The Bill was read a first time. POST AND TELEGRAPH BILL.

Mr K. S. Williams moved the second reading of the Post and Telegraph Bill. He explained that the Bill was purely a consolidating measure, and contained no new matter whatever.

Mr M. J. Savage (Auckland West) said he was glad there was no new matter in the Bill, but he supposed there was enough in the old Bill to keep them going for a considerable time. He then entered upon a criticism of Section S2 authorising the Minister to pay interest to depositors in the Post Office Savings Bank. He argued that the Post Office Savings Bank was not being sed to the best advantage. By refusing to receive deposits of amounts over £I2OOO they had driven that money into the coffers of the private competing batiks, whereas it might have been used ' y the State Advances Office to lend to settlers. The policy of the Government had driven away from the public funds money which could have been had at 31 per cent. Then when the Government wanted to borrow it had to pay 5i per cent, and there were millions, of money in that category. The Government had taken authority to stop investments leaving the Post Office Savings Bank by paying higher rates of interest, but instead of using the power the Hcuse had given it it had done the reverse, and had refused to pay any interest on large amounts. Mr J. A. Lee (Auckland East) said the Minister had not answered the question repeatedly put to him: “Why did the Minister take power to attract deposits to the Post Office Savings Bank if he did not intend to use it?" He had driven away good money from the Post Office, and to make gcod the deficiency had purchased Treasury Bills overseas. The Opposition did not complain at the Minister taking power to attract deposits, but it complained because he did not use the power. From this onward it would be a question whether they could accept the Minister's statement of intention.

The Minister of Finance (Mr W. Downic Stewart) said the point raised bv Mr Savage and Mr Lee had been raised so often and answered just as often, that he could not help thinking (hev were speaking with their tongues in their cheeks. If they had watched the course of events they would have >cen what was happening. In May. 1927. the private banks raised the rates of interest on deposits, but the Government did not legislate till October. By lUat t'tne large "ninis of money, which -he Opposition said was driven out. had

already gem® out, and legislation was brought in to stop that sort of thing happening again. He had been charged with not raising the rate of interest to depositors to attract deposits, but how could he raise interest n £50,000,000 just because £2,000,000 bad gone out. That would not have been a business proposition at all. The case might have been different if £20,000,000 had gone out of the Post Office Savings Bank, but for a mere drop in the bucket the rates of interest could not be increased to all departments borrowing from the Post Office. To say that the Government drove money out of the Post Office Savings Bank when that money had already gone out was so absurd that he could not understand why the Opposition persisted in it. The Government had not used its power to pay increased interest because there was no need to do so. He would have done so if large sums had continued to leave the Post Office. The money was not now leaving because small depositors were not influenced by the bank rate of interest, and matters were again normal. It was absurd to say that the banks were dictating the financial policy of the country. The Government had taken the only possible course, which was a perfectly business-like course. Mr G. W. Forbes (Hurunuj) said he thought the whole difficulty with regard to the sudden withdrawals of large deposits might have been got over if it had been stipulated that certain notice must be given before withdrawals could be made. With such a safeguard as that Ik? could not see any objection to the Post Office Savings Bank taking large sums on deposit. The Leader of the Opposition said that the Minister had clouded the issue considerably. It was well known that private banks were attacking the manner in which the Post Office Savings Bank was conducting its business, and on that the Minister had made a statement that interest would not be paid on the larger deposits. It was then that the heavy withdrawals took place, because there was no certainty what exactly the Government was going to do. That was as clear as day, and that was the true explanation of what took place. The Acting Postmaster-general (Mr K. S. Williams), in reply, said the Minister of Finance bad covered most of the ground. There had been criticism on the score of toll charges for telephone calls, but the New Zealand rates compared favourably with other countries. Every effort was made to keep the charges down in order to help the country people. The Bill was read a second time. STATUS OF ALIENS.

The Minister of Justice (Mr F. J. Kolloston) moved the second reading of the British Nationality and Status _of Aliens (in New Zealand) Bill, which originated in the Legislative Council. He said all the Bills introduced throughout the British Commonwealth of Nations were on similar- lines, and the Bills were designed to secure uniformity throughout the Empire in the matter of the naturalisation of aliens. In 1923 New Zealand had not gone so far as other portions of the Empire, and had not accepted the principle of Empire citizenship. That was, r, person Who was a British citizen in one part of the Empire was a citizen in all parts of the Empire. On the contrary, we had adopted local cit izenship, which was good only so far as New Zealand was concerned. New Zealand was the only country in the British Commonwealth of Nations standing out of the generally accepted standard of naturalisation, and this had created anomolies. It was now proposed to adopt part II of the British Act, and so adopt the British standard of naturalisation which was rather higher than our present standard. The reason New Zealand had not done this before was one of caution, but five years of the working of the Act had shown that this polio;,' was not now necessary, and with certain safeguards which it was proposed to impose he thought wo could fall into line with other parts of the Empire. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) said that so far as the Bill sought to unify and simplify the system of naturalisation, unless we were prepared to take np the attitude that we would ignore the recommendations of the imperial couferenoes and legislate, only for ourselves, there could be no particular objection to the present Bill. He, however, re-' gretted that the Government had taken the opportunity to do justice to British women who had married aliens, and tnereby lost their British nationality. He had never heard a single argument that would hold water why this should not be done. Mr E. P. Lee (Oamaru) said that the cardinal principle of the Bill was uniformity in the system of naturalisation. This was a change of front on cur part, but be denied that we bad been invited by the Imperial Conference to make this change of front. On the other hand, Great Britain had looked sym pathetically on the position taken up in 1923 that we had the right to naturalise whom we pleased. He did not agree that wo should accept the standards of naturalisation adopted in Canada or South Africa, and we should not admit into New Zealand people who might obtain admission into other countries of the Empire, and that was what the Bill proposed that we should do, for the very feeble reasons that we were asked to give up the rights we now possessed. The Leader of the Opposition safd that all that was wrong with the Bill was that it came five years too late. It represented what the Labour Party was advocating in 1923. He congratulated the Government on having changed its view.

Mr H. Atmore (Nelson) and Mr H. M. Campbell (Hawke’s Bay) regretted the introduction of the Bill.

The Minister, in reply, said that New Zealand’s position was not weakened by the Bill because we still had the power to restrict the introduction of undesirables under the Immigration Restriction Bill.

The second reading of the Bill was challenged, but on the division was carried by .18 votes to 15. The House rose at 1.52 a.m.