FORCING THE POSITION

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17100, 5 November 1929, Page 7

FORCING THE POSITION

LABOR AND SALARY CUTS NO CONFIDENCE MOTION PARTY VIEWS DEFINED. (Parliamentary Reporter.) ■ WELLINGTON, this day. , The first notice of motion given when the House of Representatives met yesterday was that relating to public Servants’ salaries by Mr. H. E. Holjknd, leader of the Labor Party, whiqP the acting-Leadcr of the House, thp Hon. G. W. Forbes, announced would be accepted as a motion of no-conikteuce in the Government. He wished "it to be taken immediately, as the Government did not wish to have a- question of that sort hanging over. /

Tiie lit. Hon. J. G. Goates, Leader of Opposition, demurred to this suggestion, pointing out that the question involved was complicated, and' the motion might well be allowed to come forward in the ordinary way. However, he took no strong exception, and Mr. Holland was able to proceed with his speech. PAST RECORDS QUOTED

In moving the motion, he quoted copiously from records k to show how often present nieigbers of the Government and their supporters voted against the operation of the Public Expenditure Adjustment .Act, or the lower salaries, contending ."that every vote in that way constituted a promise to the public servants /f ever those members got into power' they would secure redress. These divisions gave promise that if either Lajjhr or United got into power the position created in 1922 by Reform be remedied. He moved: “That this House regrets the failure of the present Government to make provision for improving the salaries of public servants, file great majority of whom have suffered considerable hardship owing to the unjust levy that was made on them in 1922, when the Public Expenditure Adjustment Act was passed, and this House recommends to the Government that an overhaul of salary schedules be commenced forthwith ; that immediate provision be made this year for a 5 per cent, increase in the maxima of schedule scales up to £295, and also inclusive of stationary wages of railway servants and others: that a minimum adult wage be established, and all schedule scales be dealt with during the next financial year, with the ‘ object of providing an adequate living standard for all servants cf the State; further, the House recommends that to provide the necessary additional revenue a supertax be levied on all incomes of £IOOO and over.” ■*»

THE GOVERNMENT’S ATTITUDE.

Mr. Forbes, acting-Leader of the Government, in announcing his acceptance of the motion as one of no-confidence, dealt immediately with the reminders which the mover had given of his own attitude towards the salary cuts on lower levels.

“He quoted my own speech,” remarked Mr. Forbes, “and I have not departed one jot from it. I-said at that time that talcing tiie statement of the Prime Minister, we were entering on a prosperous time. I assumed from that that the Government would have sufficient finance to deal with the claim. That is the attitude I have taken -up; that when it is at all possible to give these increases, that they should be i given." , Mr. Forbes then reminded the House of the financial difficulties the Government was now endeavoring to overcome, due to the deficit it . had inherited, the abnormal expenditure caused ;by the earthquake, and the phenomenal outlay to relieve unemployment. He "was informed by the Treasury that to pay a 5 per cent, increase up to £295 per annum would mean an additional expenditure of £346,823, which did not include temporary employees. It mights really mean £500,000. Mr. H. G.. Dickie, Patea: Put on some more primage duty. Mr. Forbes; That is not the motion. I think the mover has been following some of the arguments used in the land tax debate, where a suggestion was made that any additional revenue required should come from a super-tax on incomes. 3lr. A. M. Samuel: Did you arrange it between you? . PRIME MINISTER’S ATTITUDE. Continuing, Mr. Forbes stated that he had discussed; the’ question with the Prime Minister, who had told him that if he could possibly have met the position he would have been pleased to do so, but one of the most important things was to keep finance on a sound basis, otherwise . every class in the community, including public servants, would be prejudiced.. * “The Prime Minister has authorised, me to say that if the returns prove to bo more than the estimates, and he is able to show a surplus at the end of the financial year, he will be ready to go into the question and try and meet, in some way, if not in full, the ■ requests of officers of the Public 'Service and the lower-paid men who. are the concern, not only of the Government, hut of practically every member of the House,” continued Mr. Forbes. "If anything can be done to meet their position lie will be only too willing to do it, and he will he agreeable that any increase that could be made should date from April 1. That is going as far as the Minister of Finance thinks it opportune to go.” This statement, added Mr. Forbes, showed that the Government was not going back on what it had said in previous years, that it was prepared to assist the Public Service, but when it was faced with financial stringency, as sensible men they had recognised that the interests of the country as a whole must be put before the interests of a section. The claim should not be forced at the present juncture. OPPOSITION LEADER PUZZLED Mr. Coates confessed himself puzzled over the motion. His first information came from United quarters, and ho thought to himself, “is this an attempt of the Labor Party, with the connivance of the Government, to try to give 4he Labor Party, an opportunity to put itself on side with the Civil Service?” Then lie was more than evef puzzled when the acting-Leader of* the Government did not take the motion in tho ordinary course. Why tho haste? It was a cunninglyi devised motion which justified the Labor Party, and it had Lacked on a tag which made it impossible for the United Party to acquiesce. “I am only using my imagination,’’ he .added. Mr. P. Fraser: Hear, hear. Working overtinie. (Laughter.) Mr. Coates went on to say that there had been a solid combination of Labor and United right through, but now, in tho dying hours of tho session, here was this motion with thorns in it which allowed the United Party .to say it could not be accepted. Mr. E. J. Howard: Give us your amendment.

Mr. Coates ignored the invitation, and proceeded to show that the cuts were absolutely justified when Parliament agreed to impose them. He realised that there was a ease for the lower paid men, but be thought the cost would he more than £346,000. The country had arrived at a. point when it must consider tlm question of Public Service

salaries, and whether it could stand the overhead cost.. If tie had the six months’ financial returns he could quickly see whether his suggestions could be carried out. “SHOT IN THE DARK” Mr. Forbes,: It would be a shot in the dark. Mr. Coates went on to characterise tiie motion as being devised in criticism of the Reform Rarty, and as he saw it, in collusion between Labor and United.

Members : No, no. All'. Coates: Well, 1 am mighty suspicious, but if I am wrong 1 will withdraw my imputations. 1 thought it over carefully, and thought. I could see a nigger in the woodpile. Mr. Fraser: Apologies to the nigger. (Laughter.) . Mr. Coates again deplored ttie absence of the six-monthly financial returns. He demanded fuller information from the Government regarding Die financial resources, and the cost of carrying out the proposals, and suggested that £lO a year extra might be paid to officers on j&295 and under.

The Government could not find the money to restore the cuts, said tl(e Minister of Education, the Hon. H. Atmore, who followed Mr. Coates. However, the House had to be given an assurance by ilia acting-Lcadcr of the House that tiie Government would review the position at the end of the financial year, and it. might then be in a- position to make an adjustment. That adjustment might be retrospective, if finances permitted. No one could go beyond that statement, said Mr. Atmore, and it should appeal to every reasonable person in the country. The estimated cost of the increase sought by the Labor Party was £346,895. A NNUAL INCREASES

it had to be remembered, said Mr. Atmore, that £250,000 had been granted in annual increases in civil servants’ salaries this year, and of that amount officers in receipt of salaries of £295 and Jess had been paid £185,791. The Hon. T. M. Willord: That is in annual increases?

Mr. Atmore: Yes, so that we see something bad been done. There is plenty of reason For caution at the present time.

Although caution and sympathy might not appeal to the man who was up against it, it was impossible for the 'treasury to pay out what it had not got, lie continued. ’ The Labor Party said.it would be necessary to put a stiff income tax on all in receipt of £IOOO and more, which showed that the Labor Party realised that the necessary money was not available.

Mr. Fraser interjected that the amendment simply suggested a supertax. There was nothing about a “stiff” income tax in the amendment.

Mr. Atmore said it had been estimated that to give a £lO increase all round to officers on £295 and under would cost the country another £192,000 per annum. He contended that any dispassionate critic would say that the Government’s attitude was correct, because no party, on the present national income, could carry out what was proposed. Mr. M, J. Savage contended that, to give effect to the motion before the House it would not cost one-fourth oi £500,000. One bright speck in the Minister’s remarks had been the statement that he had been authorised by the ’Prime Minister to say that, if theie were a surplus, the position would be reviewed. Mr. Savage said be thought the only possible inference was that, if there was a surplus, the public servants’ salaries would be increased, and lie took it that the Government would begin with those whose salaries were most unsatisfactory to-day. Mr. YV. 1). Lysnar said he regarded the resolution as a party move and as political propaganda, so that the Labor Party might coquette with the civil ■ servants and win their favor. Mr. Parry: You have always said that.

Mr. Lysnar: Then it must be true. It is not an opportune time to do what is asked. , .

Mr. Lysnar added ,that ho was m favor of reclassification. It would, however, be a physical impossibility to restore the “cuts” i.n individual cases, because, in a majority of instances, reclassification had been effected since the “cuts,” and had restored nearly all that was lost. / Mr. J, McCombs criticised the actingLeader of the House for treating the motion as one of no-confidence. He considered that was a matter on which the Government should have been prepared to accept the judgment of the House. The Minister’s attitude had inflicted an injustice on the rank and file of the Hinted Party, many of whom during the election campaign laid been loud in their protestations concerning the treatment of the public servants. Mr. C. H. Chapman suggested that the .Government should reconsider the position, lie maintained that tiie improvements suggested in Mr. Holland’s resolution could be effected at a cost not exceeding £IOO,OOO, and he con tended that there would lie ample in the super taxation of incomes exceeding £IOOO to provide this amount. , Mr. D. G. Sullivan said that he considered the public servants bad an uri answerable case. He urged the actmgLeader of the House to reconsider his attitude towards the motion. He felt sure the majority of the electors would be in favor of the position of public servants being improved at such a small ’cost and he. did not think Mr. Forbes was justified in creating a crisis by treat ing the motion as one of no-confidence. Ho was satisfied the finances of the country were easily sufficient to meet the comparatively small cost involved. He did not think the terms of the motion would meet, the ease of the civic servants fully, but they would indicate that Parliament recognised tiie justice of their claims. PARTY NOT CONSULTED. Mr. H. T. Armstrong said that it was quibbling for the Government to say that it. lmd not the money to grant the increases sought. He suggested that a decision had been reached by Cabinet and that the rank and tile of the members of the United Party bad not been consulted as to the claims of the civil servants. The Rev. C. Carr said the motion did not go as fur as lie would have liked, but ‘ he was glad it. contained at least some improvement. Mr. O. F. Macmillan said that he was prepared to support tiie motion with

certain reservations. ' He took strong exception to the words therein stating “a majority of whom have suffered com siderable hardship, owing to the unjust levy that was made on them in 1922.” He considered the financial position at the present time would permit the increases sought without the imposition of additional taxation. He objected to the recommendation contained in the motion calling for the imposition of a super-tax cm incomes. Mr. J. A.' Nash said that lie had always made a reservation when advocating the restoration of the “cuts" that he would support no motion moved by the leader of the Labor Party. One reason was that if Mr. Holland were successful it would mean that he would he called upon to form a Government. Another reason was that the motion called for a super-tax on incomes. Mr. G. It. Sykes said that he was in favor of the Labor Party’s representations in relation to civil servants, but a liy in the ointment existed in the proposal to increase taxation on incomes. Mr. J. A. Young, after reviewing the position, moved the following amendment : "That the House recommends the Government to expedite the statutory reclassification of salaries of employees of the State in the several departments as each such reclassification is ! due, and further recommends that the Government make specific inquiry into the cjuestion-of the minimum adult wages paid to its employees, with a view to placing low-paid wage-earners on a fair and equitable basis and restore as far as is practicable the rate loss made by those receiving a salary not exceeding £295 per annum.” Mr. Forbes stated that the Government was prepared to expedite reclassification. It had previously announced its intention to do so. Mr. Coates asked whether the Government had tried to work out a scheme whereby those who had reached the “banked up” classes and were deserving of promotion could be granted an increase in salary. Mr. A. Harris said that he would vote against Mr. Holland’s motion because it was purely and simply a party move. PLEDGE NOT REDEEMED. Mr. Samuel said the Government’s statement that £250,000 had been added to the salaries of public servants could not be taken as a redemption of the pledge. It simply represented the national increase in salaries that would have had to have been paid whatever Government had' been in office. Mr. Lysnar said that he was in favor of reclassification of the i salaries schedules. The motion, as originally phrased, was then put and defeated by 49 rotes to 20. The division list was as follows: Ayes (20) : Armstrong, Barnard, Carr, Chapman, Fraser,- H. E. Holland, Howard, Jordan, McCombs, McKeen, Martin, Mason, Munro, O’Brien, Parry, Savage, Samuel. Semple, Sullivan, Wright. Noes (49): .Ansell, Atmore, Bitchener, Black, Bodkin, Broadfoot, Clinkard, Coates, Cobbe, den la Perrelle, Dickie, Field, Fletcher, Forbes, Hall, Hamilton, Harris, Healy, Hogan, 11. Holland, Jenkins, Jones, Linklater, Lye, Lysnar, McDonald, McDougall, Macmillan, Macpherson, Makitanara, Massey, Munns, Murdoch, Nash, Ngata, Ransom, Rushworth, Smith, Stallworthy, Stewart, Sykes, Taverner, Veitch, Waite, Willard, Wilkinson, Williams, Young.

Mr. Holland said it did not seem to matter what happneed to the amendment, for it was a wholly meaningless and vague representation that the Government could easily accept without altering the public servants’ position one jot. Mr. • Forbes said that everything asked in the amendment consisted of actions the Government had intended to take. It did not m any way affect the position of the Government, and he had no hesitation in accepting it. The amendment was carried on the voices; ;