PARLIAMENT

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18628, 25 July 1930, Page 2

PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. By Telegraph—-Press Association. The House of Representatives met at 2.30 this afternoon. Notice To Introduce. Notice was given of i " t .® ntlo “ troduce the following Bills.— Gaming Act Amendment Bill (Mr R. S. Williams) Wellington City Empowering Bill 1930 (Mr R. A. Wright), Dunedin City Corporation Empowering Amendment Bill (Hon. W. B. Taverner), Du - edin City Drainage and Sewage Amendment Bill (Hon. W. B. Taver ner). _ Exemption From Tax. Replying to the Hon. J. O. Coates the Prime Minister stated that tne same exemptions from petrol tax as formerly would be granted, in cases oi certain marine engines, farm tractois, Bill To Proceed.

Mr W. J. Broadfoot (Waitomo), reporting on behalf of the Statutes Revision Committee, recommended that the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Amendment Bill (Mr G. H. Mason) be allowed to proceed, with amendments.

Unemployment Bill. The debate on the Unemployment Bill was resumed. Mr E. J. Howard (Christchurch) continuing, said the Government Statisti-, cian’s figures showed that employment in various industries had not increased during the last few years, while at the same time many immigrants from the Old Country had been brought here without work being available for them in the industries to which they had been accustomed. Mr C. A. Wilkinson (Egmont) stated that the present was the first occasion on which workers had been asked to bear direct taxation, and it gave them an example of what others had had to pay for many years. He contended that Arbitration Court awards were responsible for unemployment in some instances. Mr Wilkinson declared that the root causes of unemployment should be investigated. Hon. S. G. Smith: “The Board will do that.”

Mr Wilkinson: “The Minister apparently has unlimited faith in boards. I have not. This country is over-rid-den by boards. There are boards to right of us, boards to left of us, boards everywhere.” Mr H. T. Armstrong: “We’re board stiff.” (Laughter.) Mr A. Harris (Waitemata) denied that the Reform Party’s immigration policy had been responsible for unemployment, and said that since the immigration policy had ceased the unemployment situation had become worse. Mr H. E. Holland: “Does that mean that the position might have been better had the immigration policy been continued”

Mr Harris said he believed the position might not have been so bad. Mr J. O’Brien (Westland) declared his faith in New Zealand industries to absorb all. The -Unemployed Bill would be quite unnecessary if there were a proper development policy applied to all our industries. He referred particularly .to the timber industry, which he believed could employ a very large number more men. Land settlement also could be expanded greatly under suitable legislation. In Westland alone, over five hundred more men could be put on the land under advantageous conditions.

Mr H. G. Dickie (Patea) said land settlement was in his opinion the only permanent solution of unemployment. The greatest difficulty in the way of keeping people on the land was the standard of life which was forced upon the farmer.

Mr F. Lye (Waikato) said while he had always held that it was not the duty of the State to provide standard rates of pay for unemployed men. It was the duty of the community to provide them with sustenance. He agreed that harsh awards were a contributory factor towards unemployment. He thought that before calling on a man with a very small wage to pay 30/- a year towards an unemployment fund, the Government should look to other sources. He suggested that amusements and the totalisator could be taxed more than at present, also foreign films, and possibly income tax could be called on to contribute to the fund. People who were prepared to pay £5 to see a football match, and 30/- for a boxing match should not be unwilling to help the unemployed. Mr C. H. Chapman (Wellington) said unemployment existed in both low wage and high wage countries. It was not due to Arbitration Court awards, but to other factors altogether. The main cause was that those who could give employment would not do under present circumstances, because they feared they might not get as much profit as they desired. The debate was adjourned, and the House adjourned at 5.30. The Budget. When the House resumed at 7.30 p.m. the Minister of Finance (Hon. G. W. Forbes) delivered the Financial Statement, the reading of which occupied two hours and twenty minutes. Replying to the Hon. J. G. Coates, the Prime Minister intimated that the debate on the Financial Statement would be commenced on Tuesday evening. The House rose at 9.55 p.m., till 10.30 a.m. to-morrow.