PARLIAMENTARY.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 6258, 3 July 1890, Page 2

PARLIAMENTARY.

(By Telegraph.)

WELLINGTON, July 2, LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. A PROTEST.

On the Council meeting Sir F. Whitaker moved that the Council do now adjourn. Sir G. Whitmore protested, urging that there was plenty of work on the Order Paper

to go on with without touching policy Bills. It was absurd to pursue the timo'bonoured custom of adjourning when a no-confidence debate was going on elsewhere. Sir F. Whitaker agreed, but advised Sir George Whitmore to table a motion on the subject. Sir G. Whitmore gave notice to move tomorrow that on future similar occasions the council should still proceed with business. The Council then adjourned to next day. HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES.

The House met at 2.30 p.m. THE NO CONFIDENCE DEBATE. Mr Kerr resumed the debate on the Financial Statement. Dealing with the Premier’s absence he contended that if ho was unable to lead the House he should not retain the position of head of tho Government. His opinion was that if the Premier was well enough to take his seat on tho Treasury Benches the present no confidence motion would be easily carried. It was nothing but sympathy that induced members to support the Government at the present time. In the course of further remarks ho blamed the Government for the stagnation that existed in Nelson, that province never having participated in the spending of borrowed money. Mr Hobbs questioned whether Mr Ballance, if he carried his motion, would bo able to carry out its terms. From his experience of that gentleman he had no confidence whatever that he would be able to do anything of the kind. As to the primage duty there was no doubt that several of the Government supporters were averse to the continuance of that duty and he understood that the Government would not press it, but would leave it to the House. Beferring to the Property Tax his opinion was that any change in the system of taxation at present would be very injurious and members who talked about such a change without providing any substitute for it were adopting a very mischievous course. The Opposition did not want to carry the motion and it was only moved to harden up their supporters—to give them a cry to go to the country with. The motion that the House go into Committee of Supply was then put and carried by 38 to 32, Mr Ballanoo’s amendment being lost.

The following is the division list: — Ayes-33. Allen Moat Arthur Monk Bruce Newman Bryce O’Connor Cowan Peacock Dodson E hod os Fergus Boss Hall Bussell Darkness Samuel Hislop Saunders Hobbs Seymour Hodgkinson Stewart (Dunedin Humphries West) Izard Tanner Lawrey Thompson (MarsMcArthur den) McKenzie (Mount Thompson (Auck* Ida) land North) Merchant White McGregor Wilson Mitcheleon Withy Noes—32, Ballance Larnach Parron Loughrey Blake McKenzie (WaiBuxton hemo) Cadman Moss Duncan Perceval Fish Beeves (InangaFitchelt hua) Fitzherbert Bichardson (KaiaFraser poi) Goldie Smith Grey Steward Guinness Taylor Hutchison Turnbull Joyce \ Yerrall Kelly Walker Kerr Ward. Lance Pairs, For . Against. Andersen Fisher Beetham Feld wick Atkinson Seddon Fulton Jones Taipua Taiwhanga Carroll Brown Yalontino Beeves

Mr Fish said that it was quite possible that had the debate been continued the result might have been the same, bat he could not help remarking on the extraordinary management that had allowed the debate to collapse as it had done. He held that the strong impeachment of the Government made by the member for Wanganui required that the charges made against them should bo answered, and the Government had done themselves an injustice in not replying (o them. He spoke at groat length against the administration of tho Government, and said that he had been compelled to sever his connection with the Government and vote against them in consequence of the arrangement entered into owing to the state of the Premier’s health. Mr Peacock thought that the fact of the Treasurer being able to pay off some of,the liabilities of tho colony was a result that he should gain credit for, and should undoubtedly be regarded as a surplus. The House resumed at 7.30, THE ITNANCIAIi STATEMENT. Mr Bryce said that Mr Ballance’e amendment had placed him in considerable difficulty. 'He had intended and still intended to criticise the financial policy of the Government, but he thought it his duty to oppose any want of confidence motion brought forward by Mr Ballance, and supported by his party let the consequences be what they Kmight. Mr Ballance in his speech had not shown in any degree how further retrenchment could be effected j in fact he could not do so as it was altogether foreign to his nature. He had made a good deal of the fact that the Premier was outside the House, but he omitted to state that there was a leader of the Opposition also outside the House, and he (Mr Bryce) thought the amendment had been drafted by that loader. As to the Financial Statement, although ho agreed that it was so complete and excellent that he who knew how to road would be able to gather what was the condition of the colony from it, still he was not satisfied to look at tho policy and tho condition of the country in the light that it was sot forth in the Statement. He regretted that the Publie Works Statement was not brought down at the same time as tho Budget, as both were so interwoven that it was difficult to deal with them separately. It was stated in

the Statement that Government did not intend to borrow for opening up Crown lands, but he thought if borrowing was at nil justifiable it was for that very purpose. There was to be no borrowing so far as works went, but the policy of the country was leading them straighten to another loan or worse, and from that point of view it seemed to him highly unsatisfactory—as they were going to borrow in an indirect way, which was much more objectionable, from his point of view. The surplus was not a real one. He did not deny that it was a surplus so far as the present accounts went, but if they were to regard it as a matter of reality, taking the future os well as the present, he denied it. There was no concealment of position in the Statement 5 what he complained of was that the mode by which they were to arrive at sound finance was not stated, and .if there was any surplus at all it was because charges which ought to be borne by revenue were borne out of loan. He was as much against borrowing ns any man, but if he had to take his choice between the issue of defioieney bills and a direct loan, he would accept a loan. If the people insisted upon expenditure and not upon retrenchment, let the position be put fairly before them, so that they could face the consequences. He again wished to say that notwithstanding his adverse comments the present Government had gone further in the direction of good finance than any Government for many years past. Mr Hutchison pointed out that despite all boasting about retrenchment, there were no less that 113 extra officials in Government departments for the last twelve months. He characterised the surplus as a hollow sham from beginning to end,and said itnever existed. Referring to the Federation Conference atMelbourne he thought that the Government were wanting in courtesy to the leader of the Opposition in not consulting that gentleman as to the choice of delegates. Ho spoke at length on the raising of the lust loan by

which he asserted the colony had lost £IOO,OOO owing to tho manner in which it was raised, and he charged the Government with having instructed tho Agent General to enlarge on the posilion of the Bank of New Zealand in order that the loan might be floated. He strongly condemned the action of the Government iu having assisted the New Plymouth Harbour Bo rd during the recess to the extent of £4992, notwithstanding that the House had emphatically declared last session against any such assistance being given. During tho next. two years sums amounting to over five million had to be met and yet they were told that they wore to have no more borrowing. There, with the amounts thrown on the colony by the New Plymouth Harbour Board and other charges would nocessitato the borrowing in the London market within two years of no less than eight millions of money. He ventured t > assert that the present Ministry, although they had a majority in tho House, had not a majority outside, and that they would be condemned at the hustings for their illegal aoti-jns in administration.

Mr Fergus said that even allowing for Mr Ballanco’s figures there was a surplus left in the Treasury of £33,000, Mr Ballance had found fault with the Government for their large defence expenditure, but he would remind him that during a time of panic he him self had committed the colony to an expenditure of about £400,000 for defence purposes. He considered that tho Financial Statement was the ablest one that had ever been placed before the colony and one that had given the people outside the colony the fullest information as to its position and resources. He could not agree with Mr Bryce’s contention that the surplus was not a real one because it did not provide for tho future. The statement referred simply to the past year and clearly showed a surplus. He regretted that the debate could not be carried on without reference to certain financial institutions.

Major Steward compared Mr Fergus’ speech to that of an advocate rather than of a Minister of the Crown who had important matters to refer to. He had twitted Mr Ballance with expending £400,000 on defence but he wished to remind the House that the expenditure was undertaken with its full concurrence. He held that the circumstances of the time fully justified it. Mr Rhodes moved tho adjournment of the debate. The House rose at midnight. -