OTTAWA DELEGATION

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17957, 8 December 1932, Page 7

OTTAWA DELEGATION

ADDITIONAL EXPENSES LABOR INSINUATIONS (Parliamentary Reporter.) 'WELLINGTON, this day. A further amount of £f.lO which appears .in the supplementary estimates to cover additional expenses of the New Zealand delegation to the Imperial Conference at Ottawa gave rise to a discussion in the House of .Representatives last night, and comments from the Labor benches brought a sharp rebuke from the Minister of Public Works. Mr. J. A. Lee (Labor, Grey Lynn) asked whether the member for Wnirau, Mr. E. F. Healy, had participated in the additional expenses in view of the back-door lobbying he was supposed to have done. The lit. Hon. J. G. Coates said that Mr. Healy had not done ahy back-dohr lobbying. He had offered his services free, and had never asked for payment at any time. The inquiry by Mr. Leo was utterly mi,justifiable. Mr. K. J. Howard (Labor, Christchurch S.) asked why the Ottawa expenses had not been presented in one bill. For years he had complained about the unsatisfactory way in which public accounts had been presented. It was almost, impossible to find out the 'expenses incurred by Ministers. Ho was not questioning the amount of expenses, as New Zealand was not over-generous in the matter of expenses, but he did complain about the manner in which the accounts wore kept. Mr. C. Carr (Labor, Timaru) said that the previous vote for the Ottawa delegation had been £3750, and lie asked .whether the additional amount was to be the final payment. He had noticed from newspaper reports that night clubs across the river had been popular with delegates, but he knew that was not true.

Mr. Coates said the additional amount was to cover the general expenses of the delegation. It had to be remembered, that when the main estimates were prepared, the delegation had not returned, and an additional amount had been required to meet the expenses which had been incurred. Naturally, receipts and vouchers had been shown for the amount involved. The remark made by Mr. Carr was beneath contempt. Mr. Carr: I said that it was not true. . .

Mr. Contes: Then .why mention it? The Chuirman of Committees Order! Order!