PARLIAMENT.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIV, Issue 18848, 10 April 1931, Page 5

PARLIAMENT.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. By Telegraph—Press Association WELLINGTON, April 9. The Legislative Council met at 2.30 to-day. Replying to the Hon. G. J. Carrington, the Leader of the Council (Sir T. K. Sidey) said the Government would consider the question of setting up a Consumers Committee in the main centres, to assist the Industries and Commerce Department to deal With the cost of living. Finance BilL Resuming the debate on the Finance Bill, the Hon. W. Earnshaw said the Government’s policy was a disastrous one. He thought it would be a gracious thing if the Supreme Court Judges followed the example of the Governor and agreed to a ten per cent, “cut” in salaries. Some limit should be placed on the judge of the Arbitration Court, so he could not make the reduction more than ten per cent. The Hon. R. A. Masters said the Government was trying to do its duty fearlessly and well, with no regard to political considerations. It was the desire of the Government to produce a balanced Budget, which was essential if New Zealand was to maintain the high name it enjoyed abroad. Public expenditure had to be reduced to the lowest possible ebb. Referring to the Economy Committee, Mr Masters said the Council would shortly have an opportunity of dealing with legislation arising out of tne report of the Committee. After a cursory examination of the Education Department, it was found that it would be possible to save a quarter of a million, but the Government was not satisfied with that, and it proposed to set up a non-political committee to further investigate the position. Out of the annual expenditure of £240,000,000, £17,000,000 was statutory, so it would be necessary to amend the law before economies could be effected in other Departments. When legislation came down, there would be provision for abolition of certain Departments, and amalgamation of others. The Government would also have to face a reduction of social services. It would also be necessary to reduce production costs. After Sir T. K. Sidey had briefly replied, the Council agreed to the second reading by 26 to 3, the opponents being the Hon. Messrs Earnshaw, Fagan and Mclntyre. The Council adjourned at 4.40 p.m. until to-morrow.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The House met at 2.30. Threshing Mills Award. Mr C. Carr (Timaru) asked whether instructions had been issued under the Otago and Southland threshing-mill workers award to the inspector of awards at Invercargill to prosecute farmers who had held meetings throughout Southland, and agreed to pay workers 1/6 an hour, instead of the award rate of 1/105, and who had dismissed those workers who had refused to accept the reduced rate. Mr Carr added that the reduction represented a 20 per cent, cut, but the saving to farmers averaged only £4 per annum.

The Hon. S. G. Smith replied that investigations showed that employers and employees had agreed to work at a lower rate than that provided in the award. It was admitted that this was a breach of award by both employers and workers. Farmers had told the men that they could not afford to pay award rates, and the employees themselves appeared to realise that unless an arrangement was made work in some cases would not be done, whilst in other instances farmers would have ; carried out threshing operations them- - selves, and the men would thereby have lost work. Mr Smith said it was not considered advisable or desirable to institute proceedings, as both parties had agreed to the arrangements made. Fruit Guarantee. Replying to Mr W. E. Barnard (Napier), the Hon. A. J. Murdoch said that a definite statement regarding final payments by the State under the guarantee in respect to fruit exported last season could not yet be made, owing to the fact that there was a claim pending by the Fruit Board against a shipping company, and until that had been decided no statement regarding the guarantee could be made. He would be pleased to look into individual cases where hardship resulted from the delay of payments. Relief Works. Mr J. O’Brien (Westland) asked whether it was not possible to find employment on relief works for young men under twenty years of age who had dependents. The Hon. S. G. Smith said that owing to the strain on the Unemployment Board’s funds, it was not possible to find work for single men as Mr O’Brien had requested. It was possible to find work for them only under Scheme 4a, which referred to farm work. Mr O’Brien also asked whether, in view of the hardship caused to men who had been out of work through illness and other causes, and who were prevented from obtaining work under the Board’s scheme through being unable to pay the levy, the Minister of Labour would take steps to enable them to sign declarations before local postmasters, the latter being given power to grant exemptions after the declarations were signed if they were satisfied that there were genuine cases of hardship. The Hon. S. G. Smith replied that the Board had gone to great pains to prevent hardship as far as possible in such cases. He would refer to the Board individual cases which were brought to his notice, in order to see whether something could be done Discussion on the Earthquake Bill was then resumed.