PARLIAMENT.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18620, 16 July 1930, Page 10

PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. By Telegraph—Press Association WELLINGTON. July 15. After a. week’s adjournment in consequence of the death of Sir Joseph Ward, the House of Representatives . met at 2.30 p.m. to-day. Help for Flax-millers. Replying to Mr C. E. MacMillan, the j Hon. G. W. Forbes stated that the ; Government was prepared to provide j advances for the flax-milling industry, ’ to enable it to carry on over the winter months. Owing to the present financial situation, the Government was not in a position to make a free gift to the industry. Hydro Works. In reply, to Mr W. E. Barnard, the Hon. W. B. Taverner stated that there was no ground for rumours that the hydro-electric works and environs at Waikaremeana were unsafe. With regard to a further point raised by Mr Barnard, Mr Taverner stated that there was not sufficient power at the works, after local requirements were served, to enable any j power to be diverted to supply Auckland needs. Notice of New Bills. Notice was given of intention to introduce the following Bills:—Evid- : ence Amendment Bill (Mr H. G. Mason); Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Amendment Bill (Mr H. G. i 1 j Mason), Shipping and Steamer; 1 Amendment Bill (Mr H. G. Mason), ( Dunedin Waterworks Extension Bill | j (Mr J. W. Munro). Leave of Absence. Mr Tau Henare was granted ten ■ 'days’ leave of absence because of illness. ' ' Education Report. Mr W. A. Bodkin, on behalf of the 1 Education Committee, presented Part 1 I. of its report. 5 Replying to the Hon. J. G. Coates, 1 the Hon. G. W. Forbes said that if it 1 would meet the convenience of the 1 House, the report would probably be J submitted for discussion before the end of the week. J Address-in-Rcply. 1 Resuming his speech in the Address- 1 in-Reply debate, Mr W. E. Barnard * (Napier) said the greatest problem of J the day was to balance production and 1 distribution, and so get rid of unem- ( ployment. It was an international 1 question, and good work in this dir- * ection was being achieved by the t Labour Conference at Geneva. ' Mr F. Lye (Waikato) urged that the t whole question of Arapuni should be cleared up. He considered that during j t the last few months people in the , ( lower reaches of the Waikato had ; * undergone no inconsiderable risk as j ) a result of the state of the country, j c and no stone should be left unturned j ‘ in searching the whole circumstances. ’ c He had had a communication from a 1 man who had been employed at j | Arapuni, and who was prepared to j j give evidence that the foundations j c below the weir had been found to be , 1 unsuitable. Mr Lye asked why reports j 1 to this effect had not been submitted ' ( to the Department before the work of j I the scheme was continued. He ' 5 strongly criticised the action of postal j c officials in his constituency in refusing f the right to have a telephone to a:[ woman whose husband had been con- ; 1 victed on one occasion for bookmaking. j 1 The woman had never been in sym- j pathy with the husband’s bookmaking ! 1 operations, and it was not until they j <• had been forced to do so, “at the point ! t of the bayonet,” that the officials had I given way to representations for in- £ stallation of this telephone. Mr Lye £ alleged that he had in his possession 1 the numbers of certain unlisted tele- 1 phones, to which urgent racing in- i formation was communicated on race ( days. He protested at the Department 1 winking at such a breach of the 1 law, at the same time as it had dis- 1 missed six employees of the Auckland * Telegraph Office merely for discussing 1 prospects of the Takapuna races by £ telephone, and declared that it '<■ appeared that Ministers were being t dominated by departmental heads. i Mr C. E. MacMillan (Tauranga) 1 congratulated Mr Lye on his conscientiousness in attacking the adminis- < tration of his own party. He com- i plained that the Government had not 1 succeeded in promoting a drift back to 1 the land, and said that such a step i would be essential to the solution of £ the present economic difficulties. Mr i MacMillan protested against the at- £ tack by Mr Munns on the General 1 Manager of Railways, and declared that it was unfair and unwarranted, i In conclusion, he stated that he had t no confidence in the administration i of the present Government. 1

Mr F. Langstone (Waimarino) said there was a pronounced increase in the wealth of the country, as a result of the exertions of the people, but, owing to the inequitable system of distribution, the country was faced with the present economic problems. There was a golden opportunity for the Government to undertake comprehensive schemes to rectify the position, and unless it did so, it should not be allowed to remain in office. Mr Langstone contended that wealthy organisations had been paying huge dividends, and had not been called upon to contribute their fair share in taxation.

Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Egmont), after criticising the rearrangement of portfolios, said he wished the Government well, and unless its policy conflicted with any principles on which he had strong views, he would be pleased to give it his support. He expressed disapproval of the amendment before the House. He did not think it reasonable that it should have been moved before the new Government had been given an opportunity to place any of its legislation before the House. Mr Wilkinson complained strongly of the failure last session to

reduce the duty on wheat, stating that this heavy tax on the people’s food was a very serious matter, indeed, and he added that the operations of the Wheat Pool were effective in maintaining high prices in this country. Mr J. A. McPherson (Oamaru) defended the retention of the sliding scale of duties, stating that after hearing the views of men who had spent their lives in the wheat industry, the Select Committee of last session had come to a decision that it was necessary that protection should be continued. He trusted that the question |of distribution would be investigated. |He felt that when it was realised that it cost as much to deliver bread as the | farmer received for his wheat when he delivered it to the miller, it would be seen that it would be advisable to look in a new direction to secure cheaper bread. The House adjourned at 5.30. Evening Session. The House resumed at 7.30 p.m. Continuing the debate on the Address-in-Reply. Mr A. Harris (Waitarnata) said the Government had been weighed in the balance and found wanting. That was the opinion outside the House, and he was confident that if every member voted as he wished that would be found to be the opinion inside the House. Mr Harris condemned a statement by the Minister of Finance that the country was faced with a substantial deficit. He was satisfied that, although Mr Forbes had not meant such a thing, his statement had been interpreted in many quarters as meaning that there would actually be a deficit. It had created a wrong impression throughout the whole of the country, and had damaged New Zealand’s credit abroad. He contended that the only weakness in the present situation in New Zealand was the Government that was in office. Mr H. T. Armstrong I Christ church) said it was his opinion that if the Reform Party had thought a noconfidence amendment would be carried, it would never have been moved. If the Labour Party suddenly decided to support the motion, about twothirds of the Reform Pajty would scuttle out of the House when it came to a division. He suggested that this view was borne out by the fact that the Leader of the Opposition, in submitting the amendment, had put for-r ward in support only those reasons which he knew would make support from the Labour Party impossible. Mr Armstrong took exception to the views expressed by Mr Forbes in a recent review of the financial situation. He said the country had never, in its history, produced a greater abundance of the good things of life than at present. There was no justification for the drastic policy of retrenchment that had been initiated in the railways service, thereby giving a bad lead to private employers.

Mr W. 'J. Poison (Stratford) said that New Zealand had reached a critical stage in its history It was faced with world readjustment of values, and the Prixne Minister was quite right in warning the country that it had to face a drop in the value of exports, necessitating; a readjustment of expenditure. He believed that unemployment could be relieved, and industry stimulated, by cutting down costs. He did not advocate free trade, but he did object to increasing tariffs to such an extent that costs were increased. In seeking a solution of the present problem, New Zealand should study the systems adopted by other countries, and he recommended a scheme of reduction of taxation on necessities, and increasing taxation on luxuries. Among the spheres in which there could be increased taxation on luxuries, he mentioned amusements, liquor, the totalisator and foreign cinematograph films. In regard to the totalisator, he considered it would be preferable to permit hpts to be telegraphed, thereby diverting underground dealings with bookmakers, and also increasing the telegraphic revenue. Mr Poison also recommended an increased tax on foreign motorcars. He did not claim that this would increase the revenue, for if he had his way, the tax on these imports would be made so heavy that it would amount practically to an embargo. He suggested, further, that an increased petrol tax to meet maintenance costs of roads would be fair, in that it would place roading costs on users, and would tend to improve railway business.

Mr J. Bitchener (Waitaki) said he did not favour payment of standard wages on relief works, because such a policy was responsible for attracting labour from farms. He defended the retention of the sliding scale of wheat duties, and quoted figures to show that in all the great wheat-producing countries the price of bread was higher than it was in New Zealand.

Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch) vigorously replied to allegations that there was an alliance or understanding of some sort between the Labour Party and the Government. He insisted that on no occasion since it had severed its connection with the Liberal-Labour Party in 1908. had the Labour Party ever negotiated in any way with any other party. As a solution of the unemployment problem, Mr E. J. Howard advocated irrigation work in Central Otago, as well as utilisation of labour in forestry and the gum industry, and in other productive directions. He considered development of secondary industries would provide the most rapid means of absorbing unemployed. Mr J. S. Fletcher (Grey Lynn) said he wanted to know what was going to be done now for the men who were unemployed. It must be anticipated that by the time the Government’s .legislation had been referred to a Select Committee, and then put through all stages in the House, a considerable period of time would have elapsed. He complained that the Government was not giving secondary industries a chance to demonstrate that they were capable of absorbing men. He asked whether it was the policy of the Government to reduce railwaymen’s wages by eleven and a quarter per cent., and if so. was that policy going to be applied throughout all Government Departments? He declared that he was going to give the Government one more week to do something to relieve unemployment in all electorates, and if nothing was done he would take the most extreme measures possible to ascertain the reasons why, even if he had to move an adverse motion, of which he 'was the only supporter. He hoped, however, that the Government would come forward with some scheme. The debate was adjourned, on the motion of Mr W. P. Endean, and the House rose at 10.30 till 2.30 to-morrow