THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 4039, 11 August 1931, Page 21

THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WELLINGTON, August 4. The House met at 2.30 p.m. RUSSIAN BUTTER. Mr A. M. Samuel (Thames) asked the Prime Minister (Mr G. W. Forbes) Whether his attention had been drawn to the cablegram stating that Russian butter Was being imported into England in boxes identical with those used for New Zealand butter, and what action he proposed to take. Mr Forbes said he had communicated With the High Commissioner asking for the full facts and comments. PRICE OF TOBACCO. Mr G. C. Black (Moteuka) referred to the increased wholesale prices of tobacco and asked whether the Prime Minister would take steps to see that the general public and the retailers were not exploited by reason of the tariff revision. Mr Forbes said the difference between the list of wholesale prices quoted and the net increase in duty was accounted for by the allowance of discounts on the increased prices. The net return to the selling companies was within a fraction of a penny of that realised prior to the increase in duty. CHRISTCHURCH TRAMWAYS. The Christchurch Tramways District Amendment Bill was reported from • the Local Bills Committee without amendment. Mr J. M'Combs (Lyttelton) said he was glad the committee had given a unanimous recommendation concerning the Bill, which provided that the powers of the Christchurch Tramways Board with respect to employees should be subject to the pro visions of the Arbitration Court Act. bringing the board into line with other tramway boards throughout the Dominion SAFER BUILDINGS. The Building Construction Bill was introduced by Governor-General’s Message and read a first time. Mr Forbes explained that the measure was designed to give effect to the recommendations of an expert committee and was intended to render buildings not so liable to earthquake damage or damage from other natural causes.

ASSISTANCE TO WINEGROWERS. Moving the second reading of the Licensing Amendment Bill, Mr H. G. R Mason (Eden) said it aimed at giving relief to the winegrowing industry. There was no reason why the wine consumed in New' Zealand should not be made here. Under the New Zealand law as it stood at present the winegrower had to grow, manufacture, and sell his own wine, allow ing co-operation with no other person The growers also were not allowed to have depots at any other than their own towns. Some alarm had been expressed that the object of the Bill was to establish wine shops in every street in the country, but such alarm was entirely unfounded. He hoped the Bill would be referred to the Industries and Commerce Committee. Mr K. S. Williams (Bay of Plenty) said that no one could but be impressed with the excellent way in which the vine yards of New Zealand were kept, and as long as we were permitted to r drink wine there was no reason why the New Zealand manufacturers should not be allowed to have greater facilities. He proposed to move an amendment when the Bill was in committee to remedy what he considered a defect in the main Act which made it unlawful to remove an hotel license more than half a mile in a borough or a mile in the country. This restriction had been fixed many years ago, and the alterations which had taken place since had rendered many hotels useless in their present situations as a result of changed road Mr J. M'Combs (Lyttelton) referred to the wine shop as an undoubted menace and expressed the opinion that if the Bill were passed there would be licensed wine shops all over the country. Mr R. A Wright (Wellington Suburbs) claimed that if the minimum amount of wine which was permitted to be sold w'ere reduced from two gallons as at present to one quart, as the Bill proposed, there would be a big increase in the trade.

Mr W. D. Lysnar (Gisborne) said there was no reason why a person should have to buy two gallons of wine when all he wanted was one bottle. He con tended that there was practically no drunkenness in France, where wine could be bought freely. Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) submitted that there was no reason why the local growers should not have an opportunity of supplying the New Zealand market in place of imported wines. Mr A. M. Samuel (Thames) said he did not think the Bill would result in more wine being sold. It merely sought to give preference to New Zealand wine as against Australian. Mr W. E. Barnard (Napier) said the House should be able to consider the question without indulging in prohibi tion or anti-prohibition views. The measure should be considered fairly on its merits.

Mr G. C. Black (Alotueka) suggested that when the Bill was in committee the definition of wine should be made to include liquor produced from apples. There was good reason for advocating the development of the cider industry in New Zealand. Mr H. Holland (Christchurch North) expressed opposition to any increased licensing facilities. Mr H. T. Armstrong (Christchurch East) said he would be favourably disposed to the Bill if it merely sought to give assistance to the -winegrowers, but it would be damaging in its effects and very far-reaching. Mr A. Hamilton (Wallace) expressed the opinion that the local industry plea could be carried too far. Mr J. A. Young (Hamilton) said there were possibilities of abuses in the establishment of wine shops, over which there was less control than over licensed hotels. The Bill was read a second time and referred to the Industries and Commerce Committee.

MEAT EXPORT CONTROL BILL. The interrupted debate on the second reading of Mr W. D. Lysnar’s Meat Export Control Amendment Bill was continued when the House resumed at 7.30 p.m., and the Reform members again spoke in opposition to the measure. After speeches by Messrs F. Waite (Clutha), A. Harris (Waitemata), and A. E. Ansell (Chalmers), Mr T. Makitanara (Southern Maori) rose and intimated his desire to move the closure. The Speaker said he was afraid that as the House, had rejected the closure motion late on Friday afternoon he could not at this stage sanction a similar motion. The debate was then resumed by Mr A. Hamilton (Wallace). A division was reached at 8.45, when Mr Hamilton’s amendment to the effect that the Bill be read a second time six months hence was rejected by 31 votes to 23. The division was as follows: — For the amendment (23). Ansell Massey, W. W. Bitchener Nash. J. A. Burnett Ransom Coates Samuel Cobbe Stallworthy de la Perrelle Sykes Forbes Waite Hamilton Ward Harris Williams Kyle Wright Linklater Young Massey, J. N. z Against the amendment (31). Atmore Al’Donaid Barnard M’Keen Black Makitanara Broadfoot Martin Chapman Munns Dickie Munro Donald Nash, W. Fletcher Ngata Healy O’Brien Holland, H. E. Parry Jordan Polson Jul] Savage Langstone Smith Lye Taverner Lysnar Wilkinson M’Combs Cheers from the lobb.v into which Mr Lysnar and prominent supporters of the Bill bad gone indicated that the amendment had suffered defeat, and the announcement of the voting was greeted with applause. The result of the division left Mr H. M. Rushworth’s amendment providing for the second reading on August 12 before the House, but Mr J. A. Nash immediately rose to move a further amendment —“ That the Bill be read a second time on October 14. ’ Mr F. Langstone (Waimarino) interjected: Why don’t you make it November 5 ? Mr Nash: I would be pleased to make it November 4 if I knew the gentleman would be about. Continuing, Mr Nash said he felt com ; pelled to move the amendment because ot the danger involved in the Bill. Further opposition to the Bill , was interrupted approximately at 10 o’clock when Mr Makaitanara again sought to submit a closure motion, but the Speaker declined to accept it. Shortly afterwards Mr W. J. Jordan (Manukau) drew atten tion to the fact that there was not a quorum present, and the bells were set ringing. The return of two or three members to the House completed the requisite number, and the debate was then continued until the rising of the House at 10.30 p.m. WELLINGTON, August 5. The House met at 2.30 p.m. REPRINT OF STATUTES. The Reprint of Statutes Bill was put through its remaining stages and passed. DEFENCE AMENDMENT BILL.

Moving the second reading of the De fence Amendment Bill, the Minister of Defence (Mr J. B. Cobbe) said it provided for drafting members of the territorial force into the reserve on attaining the age of 35 years instead of 25 as at present. It was considered that this extension of age would, by the inclusion of a number of older men, have the effect of stiffening up the various units. Provision was also made for drafting a territorial into the reserve at any time on his hav ing completed three years of efficient service although he might not have attained 35 years of age. Mr Cobbe pointed out that the territorial might require for business reasons to retire from active participation in training after he had served for a time, and the provision gave the necessary authority to enable this tc be done. The Bill also provided for an extension of the age for training in the reserve from 30 to 40 years of age. Re ferring to the Government’s defence policy generally, Mr Cobbe said it was intended to spend annual amounts of £200,000 ,»n land defence and £40,000 on aviation, and these sums would provide a force which would be creditable to the Dominion. He paid a tribute to the fine spirit displayed not only by the permanent officers, but also by the territorial officers who, by their enthusiasm, were helping to make the volunteer movement a success. The newspapers also had been most helpful, and on the whole the new system had been fairly dealt with throughout the Dominion. The number of recruits attested to July 10 was: —Mounted Rifles 367, artillery 757, engineers 149, signallers 117, infantry 1091, Army Service Corps 143, Medical Corps 127, and up _to date 50 per cent, of the number required to complete the establishment had attested. Mr F. Waite (Clutha) said the Bill was a recognition of the fact that recruits would not be forthcoming in large numbers and that it would be necessary to keep them under training for a longer period than formerly. He urged that some pretty stringent regulations should be issued to deter employers from taking advantage of the recruits by replacing them in their jobs because of their going into annual camps. It was possible that such a situation might'arise. Mr W. E Barnard (Napier) expressed the opinion that young recruits should be encouraged and should not be de terred from service by the precedence being given to older men. He agreed that there should be statutory provision to ensure that volunteers’ jobs were kept open while thev were in camp. Mr H. W. McDonald (Wairarapa) said he welcomed the proposal to raise the age because older men would be a great help to the young recruits.

Mr 11. S. S. Kyle said he thought an effort should be made to encourage young men in the country districts to join up with the mounteds, although he admitted it would be difficult to secure the necessary number of mounts. The Bill was read a second time. NATIONAL PROVIDENT FUND.

Moving the second reading of the National Provident Fund Amendment Bill the Minister in charge of the National Provident Fund Department (Mr J. B. Donald) explained its provisions on the lines of his previous statement. He said the Bill would place contributors to the fund on the same basis as civil servants, this provision having been made necessary as the result of the salary cuts. There was also provision that claims for incapacity and maternity benefit had to be made within 12 months. Mr A. Hamilton (Wallace) said he considered the scheme could be extended materially to the benefit of a large number of people. Mr Al. J. Savage (Auckland West) said he would like an assurance that contributors would be left in the same position as formerly. Mr Donald: That is so. The local authority had to decide whether contributors should continue at a higher rate or not. The Bill was read a second time. BANK OF NEW ZEALAND BILL. Mr F. Langstone (Waimarino), moving the second reading of the Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill, said it aimed at conferring on the directors of the bank appointed by the Government the same powers as those enjoyed by the directors representing the shareholders. It also provided that directors appointed by the Government should not be connected with other banking, commercial, insurance, or other financial concerns. The Prime Minister (Mr G. W Forbes) said it would be difficult to obtain men with the necessary qualifications for appointment who were not connected with institutions of the kind to which Mr Langstone had referred. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment of the House at 5.30 p.m. The whole of the evening session was occupied by the debate on the Budget (a full report of which appears elsewnere), and the House rose at 9.45 p.m.