THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 4074, 12 April 1932, Page 24

THE WEEK IN PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

WELLINGTON, April 5. The work of the General Assembly was resumed to-day after the Easter recess. The Legislative Council met at 2.30 p.m. SUPERANNUATION FUNDS.

Replying to Sir James Allen, who asked a question as to the work of the committee set up to consider the superannuation funds, the Minister of Education (Mr R. Masters) said that the matters which were referred to the committee dealt principally with the adjustment of anomalies existing between the various funds. A review of the representations which were made showed that the adjustment referred to would involve additional expenditure, a course which could not be favourably consideied at the present time. These matters, however, were really only subordinate to the question of the financial stability of the funds, a matter which had caused grave concern to the Government. The National Expenditure Commission had made certain investigations into the position and it was hoped that the commission would be able to advise the Government as to a fair and equitable method of enabling the funds to attain a degree of financial solvency. The adjustment of anomalies and the improvement of the financial position of the funds were so interwoven with the general finances of the country that it was proposed to defer action pending consideration by the Government of the report of the National Expenditure Commission. ARBITRATION BILL.

Moving the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill the Leader of the Council (Sir James Parr) said he did not propose to send the Bill to a select committee. The provisions of the Bill had been exhaustively discussed both inside and outside Parliament and all that could be said had been said both on the part of the employers and the employees. The amendment was a drastic one. The note stressed by the Bill was one of conciliation and goodwill. Conciliation councils in the past had been regarded more as channels to the court, and he was afraid that every effort had not been made to settle disputes in the councils. The Government proposed to make an important concession to women workers, for whom a minimum wage would be secured. Women would have the right to approach the court and ask that the minimum wage should be fixed. This concession would apply solely to wages and not to hours and general conditions. Sir James agreed that there was room for disagreement over the provisions of the Bill, but there was no doubt that the Act was proving a drag on industry and was delaying the general recovery. The Act was hindering the employment of thousands of men. It was significant that no other country but Australia had followed New Zealand’s example, and the workers in England and America had always opposed compulsory arbitration. Mr M. Fagan moved an amendment that the Bill should be read a second time that day six months’ hence. He believed the Bill was unnecessary, dangerous, and unfair. He was not opposing the Bill as a trades’ unionist but as a citizen concerned for the welfare of the country. The co-operation of all classes was needed at the present time, and they could not afford to risk industrial disturbances. A strike under the present conditions would be a greater menace than the 1913 upheaval. They 7 were making strike the workers’ only weapon against reductions in wages. He did not see how the abolition of the compulsory clause of the Act would assist the farmer. He had yet to meet a farmer who had been driven off his land as a result of the operation of the Act. He did not believe the Bill would result in one additional man being given employment. Mr C. J. Carrington seconded the amendment, and the debate was adjourned. The Council rose at 4.45 p.m.

WELLINGTON, April 0.

The Council met at 2.30 p.m. RAGWORT IN NORTH AUCKLAND.

Mr C. J. Carrington moved a motion urging the Government to take steps to destroy ragwort in the North Auckland peninsula, but after Sir James Parr had given an assurance that the Department of Agriculture had the matter in hand the motion was withdrawn. ARBITRATION BILL. Resuming the debate on the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill Mr J. G. Garland referred to the measure as the most important they had had to consider for the last 20 years. An honest endeavour had been made by the Government to bring employer and employee together in a spirit of goodwill. He denied that there had been industrial peace in New Zealand as the result of the Act.

Mr D. Buddo said that in spite of the efforts of Parliament to provide better conditions for the working class it had not been possible to prevent disputes, but he believed the Bill provided a way out of that difficulty. The strength of public opinion was a sufficient safeguard against injustices. He did not think the Act would be detrimental to the interests of the workers.

Mr C. J. Carrington said that although amendments to the Act were necessary the present amendments were too drastic. The council had a duty to perform, not only to the workers but to the people as a whole. He was prepared to admit that the majority of the employers were generous, but the trouble was that the ungenerous employer played the tune and the others had to follow. He held that membership of unions should be completely voluntary. The Bill should

be amended in the following directions:—(l) The suspension of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act for 12 months or longer if neces sary; (2) provision for a minimum or basic wage; (3) enlargement of the scope of the industrial Disputes’ Investigation Act, 1913, to embrace all disputes that could not be settled by conferences between the employers and the employees. In committee he would move that the amendments should become inoperative on March 31, 1933. The debate was adjourned and the Council rose at 4.45 p.m. WELLINGTON, April 7. The Council met at 2.30 p.m. BIRTHDAY GREETINGS. The Leader of the Council (Sir James Parr) congratulated Sir E. Mitchelson’ and Sir Francis Bell on the attainment of their eighty-seventh and eighty-first birthday respectively. ARBITRATION BILL. Resuming the debate on the second reading of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill, Sir Thomas Sidey confessed that he did not feel much enthusiasm for the measure. He believed that compensation cases should be removed from the Arbitration Court and that a ' second court should be established. Compensation cases should be handed over to the Supreme Court judges. The present was not the time to introduce experimental legislation. The Bill should be referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. Mr R. M'Callum said the Bil] was demanded by the abnormal times through which they were passing. Mr T. H. MTntyre said the Government did not sense the feeling which existed in the country against the measure. There was a growing feeling that the country was passing class legislation. Members of Cabinet were out of touch with the people The present Bil] went too far altogether. The Minister of Education (Mr R. Masters) said the Government was not in the least concerned about its popularity, but was only concerned about placing the country on a sound basis. The Government found no pleasure in cutting wages and effecting economies, but it was compelled to do so in view of general conditions. The sacrifice was being spread to the fullest extent. Certain members did not appear to realise the necessity for such legislation as was being introduced. They did not realise that the costs of production must be reduced. What was needed in New Zealand was greater confidence in industry. Industries to-day were suffering from harassing conditions, and until these were removed there would be no confidence. He did not believe there was any need for another court, and was hopeful that under the present Bill it would be possible to arrive at agreements.

Continuing the debate at the evening session. Mr J. B. Gow said that the Act had been too rigid. The Government at the general election had made no secret of its intentions to amend the Act, which has done a tremendous lot of harm and had ranged the employers and the employees into two sections. What was wanted to-day was a spirit of unity. Mr G. Witty said the Bill was a step in the right direction and would prove of inestimable value to the farming community.

The debate was adjourned and the Council rose at 9 p.m.

WELLINGTON, April 8 The Council met at 10.30 a.m. ARBITRATION BILL.

An amendment moved by 7 Mr Mark Fagan that the Arbitration Amendment Bill be read a second time six months hence was defeated by 30 votes to 3. Those who supported Mr Fagan were Sir Thomas Sidey and Mr W. H. MTntyre. Sir James Parr (Leader of the Council). replying to the second reading debate, said the debate had worthily upheld the traditions of the Chamber, and hqd been on a very high level. Speakers one and all had admitted that industry was suffering from irksome conditions, which the state of the Dominion could not allow to continue any longer. The sooner awards were revised the better for everybody. The Bill was an honest and earnest attempt to face the position without further delay. The financial position demanded that man and master should get together to reduce costs all round. Sir James Parr contended that there were ample safeguards in the existing legislation against nine-tenths of the mischief popularly called “ sweating.” He agreed to refer the Bill to the Statutes Revision Committee, with the stipulation that there should be no delay or evidence taken, and that the committee report back that afternoon.

On resuming at 4.30 p.m., the Statutes Revision Committee reported the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Amendment Bill with amendments.

The Leader of the Council (Sir James Parr) explained that the amendments made were in the direction of making the language of the Bill clearer, and he expressed appreciation of the work performed by the committee. The Council rose at 4.45 p.m. until Tuesday. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WELLNGTON, April 5. The House met at 2.30 p.m. SALARY AND WAGE REDUCTIONS. Numerous additional largely-signed petitions were presented praying that there be no further reductions in wages and salaries. E x C HAN GE p QOL>

Mr W. J. Polson (Stratford) asked whether, in view of the fact that he had informed that three leading counsel in New Zealand had declared that the Order-in-Council establishing the exchange pool was illegal and ultra vires,, would the Government withdraw it; and, further, would the Government give permission for a Supreme Court decision to be made to test the matter and so enable primary producers to obtain their rights. The Prime Minister (Mr G. W. Forbes) replied that the question involved some investigation, and he promised to go into it.

UNEMPLOYMENT BILL The second reading of the Unemployment Amendment Bill was moved by the Minister in Charge of Unemployment (Mr J. G. Coates). [A full report of the discussion appears under a separate heading.] The House adjourned at' 11.30 p.m. WELLINGTON, April 6. The House met at 2.30 p.m. MAUI POMARE’S ITINERARY. Mr A. S. Richards (Roskill) asked whether, in view of the importance of fostering trade within and without New Zealand, the Government would take steps to include Auckland in the itinerary of the steamer Maui Pomare. The Prime Minister (Mr G. W. Forbes) said the decision to cut out both Auckland and Dunedin from the itinerary had been made as a result of recommendations by the parliamentary committee of 1929 which had fully, inquired into the service. It was'considered that the alteration was in the best interests of the service. Trade with Samoa would still be continued by the Union Steam Ship Company’s vessels, which ran regularly from Auckland, and by the Maui Pomare from Wellington. Trade with Niue would be continued by the only sea connection with that island (namely the Maui Pomare) via Wellington, and through freights from Auckland had been arranged.

SALE OF LIQUOR AT BELLAMYS. The Speaker announced the result of the poll taken of members of the General Assembly under the Legislature Act to determine whether liquor should be sold within the precincts of Parliament Buildings for the remainder of the present Parliament. The voting had been as follows:—Legislative Council—Ayes, 22; Noes, 9. House of Representatives— Ayes, G 3, noes 12. Authority had therefore been given for the sale of liquor until the next parliament had taken a poll on the subject.

WELLINGTON, April 7 The House met at 2.30 p.m. SUBTERRANEAN WATER.

Mr C. H. Clinkard (Rotorua) asked whether attention had been drawn to the report that a Mr Thompson, a water diviner, had claimed to have located a large body of subterranean water at right angles to the Waikato River and passing under or near the Arapuni power station. The Minister of Public Works (Mr J. G. Coates) replied that the matter had been fully investigated. The ground in question had previously been explored by bore holes, some to great depths, even below the sea level, and by tunnels and with the services of other water diviners. The Government considered that all necessary steps had been taken and there was no cause for alarm. The engineer-in-chief of the Public Works Department had reported that he had gone over the ground with Mr Thompson. Almost all the demonstrations made by Mr Thompson had been either directly over or in close proximity to the drives and pipes carrying the water. CONFERENCE WITH CITY EDITORS. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) asked whether a conference had been held between the Government and the editors of the Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin newspapers, ami whether the conference had been addressed by Messrs Forbes. Stewart, and Coates; also whether the editors had been informed regarding the financial proposals, which had not yet been placed before Parliament, with' a view to obtaining the support of the press, and whether there was any connection between this conference and the leakage of information concerning which Mr Forbes had complained. Mr Forbes said he had received notice of the question just prior to entering the House, and he suggested it should be put on the order paper. FINANCIAL STATEMENT. In the House of Representatives this evening the Minister of Finance (Mr W. D. Stewart) presented his Financial Statement. _ The Minister was accorded a very attentive hearing and interruptions were practically absent. There was, however, a chorus of derision from the Labour benches when reference was made to the extension of the life of Parliament. When the Minister had concluded the Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E. Holland) asked, “ Is this as full a statement as was supplied to the conference of editors? ” Mr Stewart: It is a great deal fuller than any indication given by me to anyone else. Nobody has seen this statement prior to its presentation to the House. A Labour member: How has so much appeared in the papers? Mr Stewart: A lot of guesswork goes on. WELLINGTON, April 8. The House met at 2.30 p.m. TRANSPORT TO RELIEF WORK. Mr F. Jones (Dunedin South) asked Mr Coates if he would instruct the various unemployment committees to pay the cost of transport of unemployed workers on relief jobs. The Minister said that the local authorities deriving direct benefit on the jobs were being asked to bear this cost. UNEMPLOYED SEAMEN. Mr P. Fraser (Wellington Central) asked whether it could be arranged that seamen who were likely to be called upon to fill positions would be allowed to take relief work in or near the cities so that when the time came to line, up on the wharf their opportunity should not be lost.

Mr Coates said it was hoped that the shipping companies and the Seamen’s Union would make an arrangement which would meet the position. The House adjourned at 2.45 p.m. till the ringing of the bells. Mr Forbes stated that it was intended to introduce the Finance Bill on resuming.

AFTERNOON SESSION NATIONAL EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENT BILL. The National Expenditure Adjustment Bill was introduced by Governor-General's Message when the House resumed at 5.20 p.m. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr H. E. Holland) said it was apparent from its long title that the Bill was the most dangerous and reactionary piece of legislation that had ever been placed before Parliament since New Zealand had had representative government. The Labour Party would offer the strongest resistance to the measure that the forms of the House would permit. It desired in the meantime to study the provisions of the measure. The Bill seemed to contain proposals of which the details had been given to newspaper editors before they were placed before the House. He desired to comment on the action of the Press Association and the newspapers which, he alleged, had suppressed the tact that there had been a conference ever since it had been mentioned in the House.

Mr Forbes said there had been a meeting between editors and members of the Government. It was not uncommon for a Government to discuss matters with editors of newspapers. There had been no attempt to come to an arrangement with the editors, who would no doubt have resented any attempt to interfere with the conduct of their newspapers. Mr Forbes said he desired to pay a tribute to the untiring work of the Minister of Finance (Mr W. D. Stewart), who during the last month had been carrying on discussions with various organisations in regard to the most far-reaching legislation that had ever been placed before the country. The discussion of the aspects of the legislation was simply one of the phases of its preparation. No one had been placed in a better position than the members of the House in regard to the actual contents of the Bill. The Prime Minister expressed the opinion that a study of the Bill would reveal that evenhanded justice was being done to everybody. lie felt confident that members of the Opposition would realise that the measure was designed to meet the present emergency conditions, and would give it a large degree of support. Mr J. M'Combs (Lyttelton) said the measure seemed to be one of general repudiation. It would only deepen the depression. The Government seemed able to think only in terms of depression. Mr W. E. Parry (Auckland Central) said the Bil] would reveal the utter incompetence of the present Government to deal with the situation. The Govern ment was destroying trade and industry. It was ruining tie sources from which it could derive revenue. The reduction c.f pensions would be a cruel step in an endeavour to balance the Budget. I'he proposal to increase the life of Parliament was to be condemned. He asked whether the Government was going to cal] a halt or whether it would wait far the people to rise up in thousands and demand the resignation of the Government. Mr Coates said it would seem from the remarks of Mr M'Combs and Mr Parry that they were not yet cognisant of the very grave and serious crisis through which the country was passing. The only thing that would see the country through was a determination to meet obligations.- “If we attempt to avoid facing our task, then we are gone as a nation.” Mr Coates declared. He sail that the proposals in the Bill covered a three years’ plan under which the Government was setting out to restore the country’s equilibrium. Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch South) asked whether any ponspiracy had been entered into with the banking institutions in regard to the Government’s policy. Mr R. Semple (Wellington East) declared that tlie Government was bankrupt in statesmanship. The Governor-General’s Message was adopted by 43 votes to 25. and the Bil] was read a first time by 43 votes to 24.

The-House rose at 6.20 p.m. till 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday.