FAMILY ALLOWANCES

Taranaki Daily News, 12 September 1935, Page 7

FAMILY ALLOWANCES

REQUEST FOR OVERHAUL DESERTING HUSBAND PROBLEM. HARDSHIP UPON SOME WOMEN. BILL INTRODUCED IN HOUSE. By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. Moving for leave to introduce the Family Allowances Amendment Bill in the House of Representatives to-day, Mr. W. E. Barnard (Lab., Napier) said the question of family allowances was one that affected an increasingly large number of the poorest of the people. According to official figures in 1928 the number of allowances in force was 3006. In 1930 the number had risen to 3868 and in 1932 to 7332, and it was in that year that the basis of income upon which family allowance was paid was reduced from £4 to £3 ss, but that caused no diminution in the number of applications, and for the year ending March 31 last the total number of applications stood at 12,321. Four thousand children were affected. It was high time, he though;, that the existing provision, which dated back to 1926, was overhauled and improved. The object of the Bill was to enable a mother rather than a father to apply for a Pension. Under the law as it stood at present the only person who could make application was the father. In a number of cases unfortunate women had been deserted by their husbands and left often in an extremely difficult position. He hoped the Government would itself do something in the matter. The Bill was supported by several members, who said there were a number ot cases where women with children had been deserted by their husbands and were unable to secure assistance because they could not find their husbands to sign applications, or where the husband refused to sign an . application, perhaps through spite or some quarrel. WORK OF THE POLICE. The Rev. Clyde Carr (Lab., Timaru) and Mr. A. S. Richards (Lab., Roskill) referred to the fact that wnen the Minister of Finance was Leader of the Opposition he urged amendments to the Act, yet when he became a member of the Cabinet he took no steps on the lines hb had previously urged. Mr. Carr alleged that the police did not always do all they might do in locating defaulting husbands. The Hon. J. G. Cobbe said it was entirely contrary to fact to say that the police did not use every possible endeavour to ascertain the whereabouts of defaulting husbands. The police did thorn duty very carefully in cases of that kind. During the past two years the number of cases' where family allowances were paid increased by 2000, the cost being just more than £30,000. The total amount paid for the year on account of family allowances was £152,818. It could not be said that family allowances were not receiving the attention of the Government. There were cases where husbanffs avoided their responsibility, but it was not fair that the State should be called upon to bear what was the husband’s responsibility. He had discussed the matter with the commissioner of pensions and there were difficulties of which members of the House were not aware. The Government was doing everything it reasonably could regarding family .allowances. The Bill was read a first time. The Invalid Pensions Bill- (Mr. J. O’Brien) was also read a first time after the mover had replied to the debate which took place, on Friday morning. OTHER BILLS APPEAR. Other-Bills introduced and read a first time were the Rabbit Nuisance Amend* ment Bill (Sir Alfred Ransom), the Mental Defectives Amendment Bill (Sir Alexander Young), the Masseurs’ Registration Amendment Bill (Sir Alexander Young), the Urban' Farm Land Rating Amendment Bill (Sir Alexander Young) and the Rent Restriction Bill (the Hon. Adam Hamilton). The Law Practitioners’ Amendment Bill (the Rt. Hon. G. W. Forbes) was introduced and read a second time pro forma and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee. The Commercial Trusts Amendment Bill (Mr. Forbes) was also introduced and read a second time pro forma and referred to the Industries and Commerce Committee. Mr. Barnard asked the Minister of Employment if he had seen a notice issued to relief workers asking if they _ were prepared to accept full-time work in Vie country, probably necessitating their absence from their homes, and what would be the position of men who replied in the negative. The Hon. S G. Smith in reply said tr.e question was asked in order to ascertain what men would be available in the event of public works, which would probably be in the country, being arranged. Under the circumstances the board was not called on to make a decision regarding the second part of the question. The Shipping and Seamen Act Amendment Bill and the Regulation of Whaling Bill were introduced and read a first time. The Hauraki Plains County Eastern Water Supply Empowering Bill was read ■ a first time. The Judicature Act Amendment Bill was introduced, read a second time pro forma and referred to the Statutes Revision Committee.