WAR LEGISLATION.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume IV, Issue 1160, 30 October 1917, Page 4

WAR LEGISLATION.

COUNCIL AND HOUSE DISAGREE [From Our Own Parliamentary Reporter.] _ WELLINGTON, October 29. the War Legislation Bill with amendments made by the Legislative Council was returned to the House ot representatives this afternoon. The Attorney-General (Hon. A. L. Herdman) explained the Council's amendments to Clause 16 dealing with relief to contractors, and to Clause 29 which provided for the retention of public servants after -reaching the retiring age. The first amendment extended relief to contractors whether the contract was entered into before or after the passing of this Act, and the second amendment provided that if a civil servant wilfully refused to continue the performance of his duties after his retention beyond the retiring age his superannuation rights shall not be preserved to him. The Minister moved that the council's amendments be agreed with. Mr Veitch (Wanganiii) said he was sorry the Council had not completely amended the clause out of the Bill. It was deplorably unjust, and represented IheX'onfiseaiion or'civil servants' rights. It was at once made clear that a number of members were opposed to the clause, although not against the principle of retaining valuable servants in the service during the war after the retiring age. They considered it unfair that a servant should be compelled to remain in the service at the salary he received at the age of retirement. It was pointed out that if a man were to retire on superannuation at £2 a week, but was compelled to resume at £3, he would be working really for £1 a week. The Hon. Mr Herdman said it was not an unjust sacrifice they were asking some public servants to make. As a matter of fact many servants preferred to continue in the service rather than to retire on superannuation. It really meant that a man with, say, £SOO a year would be asked to remain in the service and help the State instead of retiring on £2OO a year superannuation. Young men were being compelled to go to the front. Surely it was no unjust sacrifice to ask old and valuable servants to help the State while young men were fighting for them. (Hear, hear.) After further discussion, the Attor-ney-General said that as there seemed to be some misconception on the point he would ask leave to withdraw his motion. This was agreed to, and the Hon. A. L. Herdman, Hon. D. Buddo, C. J. Parr, and W. A. Veitch were appointed a committee to confer with the Council's managers. _^_______^_