PARLIAMENTARY NOTES.

Colonist, Volume XLVII, Issue 11432, 11 September 1905, Page 1 (Supplement)

PARLIAMENTARY NOTES.

[By Telegraph. — Prom Our Own Correspondent. ] Wellington, August 24. NELSON HARBOR BILL. In th 6 House this afternoon, the Nelsoa Harbor Bill, which was in charge of Mr (iraham, was considered in Committee. At clause 4, the Leader of the Opposition said it proposed to endow the Board with certain Crown lands, and he thought an explanation was necessary ; also, he contended, that as the bill dealt with Crown lands it should have been brought in by Governor's Message. Mr Graham said the endowment was made under the Ast of 1900. The Leader of the Opposition was satisfied with the explanation, but again raised the point that the bill should have been brought down by Governor's Message. The Chairman of Committees ruled that there was' no necessity for such a course in the case of a consolidating bill. In regard to the question of a subsidy to the Board, Sir William Russell asked why one districi should be more favored than another. Mr Graham said that when the Act of 1900 was passed, the harbor Wd3 under the control of the Government. The Government would not do the necessary "works, and the Board was set up, the subsidy being paid as a set-off against the retention of the Railway wharf by the Railway Department. Mr Graham added that the necessary procedure had been gone through for letting the ratepayers know the alterations that were made by the bill in the Act of 1900. Sir W. Russell took exception to clause 12, which enables the Governor o prohibit works which, in his opinion, may injuriously affect the harbor. Mr Graham said he would liKe the clause to be struck out, but it was one of the conditions on which the original Act was passed. He did not know any special reason why the power should be given. The Colonial Secretary said the reason was that the Marine Department had the power to veto works, and the power was specifically set out in this bill. . , Sir Wm. Russell strongly objected to this centralising of power in Wellington, and thought it was a dangerous tiling that the Government should have power to veto work which had been done on the advice of experts. The clause passed on the voices. Mr Ell moved a new clause providing that in any election held under the Act, no voter be allowed to exercise more thau one vote. [Mr Graham : They have only one vote now. (Laughter)]. There had been, he added, four or five elections, and electors had only exercised one vote each. „ , ... After further discussion, the bill was reported with amendments. MOTUEKA HARBOR BILL. In the House this afternoon, the Motueka Harbor Bill passed through Committee with the amendments made by the Local Billß Committee. Clause 7 was further amended tc provide that electors shall only exer ciseone vote. The following new clause, which was brought dowr yesterday by Governor's Message was then submitted to the Commit tee-- (1) There shall be payable t( the Board, during each year ending the thirty-first day of March, t subsidy of five hundred pounds, diminished by one pound for ever: one pound by which the Board i revenue derived from all source! during the year exceeds the sumo one thousand pounds. Provided tba for the period lapsing between tni passing of this Act and the thirty first day of March next thereafter, i duly proportionate part of the yearl; subsidy shall be payable. (2) Th« subsidy for each year snail be pay able by such instalments during th( year as the Colonial Treasurer thinki fit (3) The subsidy shall be pa? able out of the Consolidated Func without further appropriation thai this Act. (4) The first mstnlmen of the subsidy shall not be pnyabli until the harbor dues payable in tn< MotueKa harbor have been nxed bj the Board in accordance with th< provisions of the said Act, and ap proved by the Minister of Manna (5) So long as any subsidy is payabli under this Act, it shall not be lawfu for the Board to reduce the harbo dues without the approval of th< said Minister. (6) The subsidy shal not continue to be payable after thi expiration of thirty years, after th< passing of this Act. Mr Massey pointed out that tnu clause committed the Colony to ai expenditure of £500 a year for thirt: years without any further appropria tion— (Mr R. McKenzie s . Oh! No. —and he did not think the clausi should be agreed to. „ .. , Mr R. McKenzie said the proba bilities were that in five years the Colony would not be required to paj anything to the Board. Mr Masaey suggested as a com promise that the proposed expendi ture should be limited to ten years. He strongly objected to one portior. of the Colony being specially favorec as compared with other districts. The Hon. Mr Hall- Jones supported the proposed clause as being hkelj to provide a saving all round. The debate on the clause was inter rupted by the dinner adjournment. On the House resuming at 7.30 i further lengthy discussion took place on the proposed new clause in the Motueka Harbor Bill. Mr Massey moved to amend the clause in the direction of providing for an annual appropriation, and this view of the question was stronglj supported by several members of the Opposition party, who dwelt on the favoritism shown in the clause tc the Motueka district, and who asked whether the Government was prepared to extend equal concessions to all parts of the Colony. Mr Taylor, took part in the discussion, and scathingly condemned the proposed grant. Sir Joseph Ward took up the cudgels on behalf of the Motueka people, and pointed out that the probabilities were that the increased trade resulting from the harbor improvements would have the effect of largely reducing the annual subsidy of £500, and would likely wipe it out altogether as time went on. Mr Graham expressed the opinion that in less than five years the subsidy would be wiped off by reason of the increased trade and revenue arising from the improved harbor conditions. , Eventually, at 9 p.m., Mr Massey's amendment was negatived iby 32 votes to 27. . ' ' Mr Harding then moved to add a proviso to the effect that tho annual subsidy should not be payable until a special rate of one penny in the £ had been struck in the harbor area, and three-quarters of it collected. After considerable discussion this was negatived by 35 votes to 28. The new clause was then agreed to without amendment. ~ On the motion of the Hon. C. H. Mills another clause was added, vesting the Motueka Wharf and another property of the Motueka Wharf Board in the Harbor Board, and transferring all liabilities of the Wharf Board to the Harbor Board. The bill, which had a stormy and protracted passage through commititee, was then reported with the amendments,