HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Colonist, Volume LIV, Issue 13567, 7 November 1912, Page 2

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

In the House, after 2 a.m. the Railways Authorisation Bill was passed through the committee stage and read a third time, and also the Shearers' and Agricultural Labourers' Accommodation Amendment and Education Amendment Bills. The Premier intimated that ho intended to postpone the Shops and Offices Bill till next session. The House adjourned at 2.40 a.m., and met. again at 10.30 a.m. It was decided to disagree with the amendments made by the Council to the Taiori Land Drainage Bill. Messrs Parata, McKcnzie, Scott and G. M; Thomson were appointed managers to'draw up reasons. . The Napier Harbour Board amendment Bill was put through all stages. The Public Service Classification and Superannuation Amendment Bill was recommitted. On the Hon J. Allen's motion a clause was added bringing university professors within the scope of the Superannuation Act. A clause making special provision m cases of compulsory retirement of persons employed in the defence forces before becoming entitled to a retiring allowance was moved by the Minister. After discussion it was withdrawn and the Bill passed. The Hon Mr W. F. Massey moved the second reading of the Washing-Up Bill. The House adjourned till 2.30 p.m. The Hon A. M. Myers asked the Premier if the Defence Minister would be present at the proposed conference at Vancouver, mentioned in the morning papers. The Hon Mr Massey replied that it was impossible for him to state whether •Mr Allen could be present or not. Mr Allen would represent the Government on defence matters while in England, as well as other matters. It was quite impossible for him to make public the policy of the Government with regard to defence matters. „•■,, : The chairman of the Labour Bills Committee reported that the Committeehad recommended that the Shops and Offices Act Amendment Bill should be allowed to proceed. Mr H. G. Ell urged that the House should proceed with the Bill this session. Some 10,000 people wero affected by the proposed Bill, and these would look to the Prime Minister for an explanation. Mr W. A. Veitch appealed for consideration for the •workers. , Mr G. W. Russell spoke i na similar view. He knew the Premier was in sympathy with the proposals, and should put them through. It ■ would only take half an hour. - Mr H. J. H. Okey said the Committee had received telegrams from all over the country asking for an opportunity to give evidence in regard to the Bill. Mr H. Atmore declared that the Labour -Bills Committee was practically unanimously in favour of the Bill. Parliament should stand for the principle that every man and woman in New Zealand was entitled to one day's rest a week. Mr A. H. Hindmarsh moved that tho committal of the Bill should be made an order of the day for 5 p.m. The Hon F. M. B. Fisher said he first introduced the Bill in 1907, and it had been brought in during every session since, btit it had been kept under by the previous Administration. The Hon J. A. Millar had described it as a niece of class legislation. Tho Prime Minister had given his pledge to allow objectors sufficient time to'give evidence, and that, was a fair attitude. The Premier had promised to have the Bill passed next year. He asked if there was any possibility of getting the Bill through this session.

Mr Massey denied tliat he had ever given his pledge to pass the Bill this year, and had suggested to a deputation a doubt that he would be able to deal with it in any way this session. The Bill included private hotels and boarding houses. Next session he would bring down a comprehensive' Shops and Offices Bill, and full provision would be marie for the taking of evidence.

Sir J. G. Ward said as Mr Massey had given his pledge about the hearing of evidence, it would only bo honourable for the House to keep his "promise. The question was talked out, and the House adjourned till 7.30 p.m. The House went into committee on. the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and the Public Bodies Empowering Bill? which wore reported, and read the third timft.

The r.hairnip.n of the Public Accounts Committee brought up the report of the committee or inquiry into the workings of the .State Guaranteed Advances Department. Mr. Allen moved the second reading of the Now Zoehnd St^e Guaranteed Advances Amendment Bill, which .provided thf>t lcwn.s tf) lor.vil bodies would have to be paid for at the rate which the money cost to rmse. plu« administrative- expenses. The Department, he said, was in a bad state, having made

commitments for years ahead at 3? per cent; irrespective^ of what the money cost the country. When he assumed office ho found commitments' to 1914, at 3£ per cent. It had been said that the "Post, Office had promised a million and a half next year for loans to local bodies, but he could find no record of such a promise. Ho could not see where the money was coming from. The previous Administration had brought tho Department to a standstill by reckless methods, the cutting down of maximum loans to £5000 had been occasioned by tho wild commitments of his predecessors in office. They proposed next session to bring down a Local Government Bill which would provide for the proper classification of local bodies, according', to their needs, and requirements. They intended to do away with the roads and bridges vote. Sir. Joseph Ward contended that the Minister dare not attempt to administer the Act without making commitments two. or three years ahead. The Minister's proposals would mean a- loss of £375,000 in ten years on the consolidate- fund t* rnterest. Ho predicted; there never would be a Minister of Finance who would ask local bodies to take in a lump sum the moneys required for a period of years.

Mr. W. D. S. Mac Donald defended the administration of county council affairs, .and said' the whole of the criticism recently levelled at the Department was intended to discredit the party previously in, power. He claimed that every transaction ejtitered into by Sig .Deipaxtmcint had been absolutely satisfactory.

Air. J. B. Hine quoted from a return presented to the inquiry committee with a view to showing that the expenditure wiae abnormal'before the election, and that the £5000 limit was put on immediately after because of the plumping of the Ministry. Mr. Allen, in replying, said there had been no criticism on the Bill, but personal attacks on himself. He asked, was a man when he came into office, and found himself in a difficult position, to say nothing of the pervious .■wrongful administration. He maintained -that the administration of the Department had been thoroughly unsound. The previous Minister had never taken any steps to make provision for loss.

The second reading was agreed to on the voices.