New Meat Board Bill Talked Out in House

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1075, 12 September 1930, Page 1

New Meat Board Bill Talked Out in House

MR. LYSNAR ATTACKED HEATED EXCHANGES THE SUN’S Parliamentary Reporter PARLIAMENT BLDGS., Thurs. The spirited objections of the member for Gisborne. Mr. W. D. Lysnar, to the Meat Export Control Board, which this session have taken the form of an amending Bill, came before the House today when the report of the Stock Committee on the Bill was submitted. The main feature of the amending Bill was an attempt to change the system of electing the board, and this clause was not altered, although the Bill was changed in a number of minor details. Mr. A. Hamilton (Reform —Wallace) commented on the manner in which the Bill had been brought before the House, and Mr. D. Joiaes (Reform — Mid-Canterbury) attacked Mr. Lysnar for having introduced it for personal reasons. The Bill was “talked out.” After commending the committee for the way in which it had worked on the Bill, Mr. Hamilton said that he wanted to say something about the way in which it had been brought before the House. Usually, when a Bill affecting an industry was brought be-

fore Parliament, it was introduced by the industry concerned after it had been discussed and considered, but in this case the industry had had nothing to do with it. Mr. F. Lye (United —Waikato): They were invited to speak before tbo committee. Mr. Hamilton: Yes, but the Bill is not from them. It Is from a private person, and if there is anything dangerous it is to pass the Bill for the sake of the grievance of a private person. Mr. W. J. Poison (Independent— Stratford): That is a reflection on the committee. GRIEVANCE AGAINST BOARD Mr. Hamilton: No, I think the committee has done its work very well. The Bill comes from a person who has had a difference with some member of the board and has some grievance against the board. I don't know if he will get any good from it, but it is costing the country a lot of money. Mi'. H. G. Dickie (Reform —Patea)' So is the board. Mr. Hamilton: Maybe, but it is tenfold justified. If the proposals in the Bill are put into operation it will place the board in the same position as the Dairy Board. Mr. Poison: Didn't you say the committee did its work well? Mr. W. Lee Martin (Labour —Rag lan): There is no alteration in the Dairy Board election. Mr. Hamilton: Yes, there is, and il is affecting the smooth working of the Dairy Board. The whole trouble was, ho said, that there were some farmers in New Zealand who would help to set up an organisation and would then set out to criticise it and perhaps throw it over. The Meat Board was Working very well. Mr. Lysnar: Question! GROWERS BENEFITED Mr. Hamilton: T am convinced that since the board came into operation the growers have got all that is in their meat. Mr. C. A. Wilkinson (Independent— Egmont): Are you a paid member of the hoard? Mr. Hamilton: That's %ot nothing to do with it. Mr. Wilkinson: Yes, it has. Mr. Speaker: Order, order! Mr. Jones said that the question was one of very great importance. Mr. Lysnar: At £SOO a year it is. Mr. Jones: If it was not for the personal animosity of the member for Gisborne this Bill would never have been heard of. Mr. Speaker: Order! The honourable member must not make a reference to personal matters. Mr. Jones: Mr. Speaker, the evidence is conclusive. Mr. Speaker: Order! The honourable member must not imply any improper motive. Mr. Jones: The charges made by the member for Gisborne are without foundation. Mr. Lysnar: What charges? The committee had decided that as far as the sheepfarmers were concerned the charges of the member for Gisborne were without foundation, Mr. Jones contintied. He said he would like Mr. Speaker's ruling on clause 7 of the Bill. Mr. Speaker: I am afraid I have not. seen the Bill. The lion, member will have to wait until it comes back to the House. Mr. Jones: There’s very little to come back. (Laughter.) NEW FORM OF ELECTION The clauses which they were being asked to bring into the Bill had nothing to do with the control of the board, Mr. Jones continued. The position was that a. private member without the support of evidence wanted to alter the whole system of the election of the board’s members. That member had also said that if the present board were re-elected under his system he would be in favour of the abolition of the board. That showed the matter was a personal one. Mr. Speaker: Order: I am afi'aid the hon. member will have to withdraw that. Mr. Lysnar: I never said anything of the sort. The position as far as the board was concerned, Mr. Jones said, was that members were elected by the whole of New Zealand. If the Bill was passed members would he elected for local areas and there would be far more local feeling.